The improvisational approach to crisis documentation used by many organizations is virtually guaranteed to increase confusion, mistakes, delays, and stress. The best way to get through a crisis safely and effectively is to follow a standardized process based on a handful of simple forms.
Related: Thriving in the Hot Seat: Crisis Communication Do’s and Don’ts
Summary
- Improvised crisis documentation increases confusion, delays, duplicated work, and stress.
- Effective crisis documentation gathers information from the field, then distills it for decision makers.
- A small set of standardized documents can improve situational awareness, accountability, and recovery coordination.
The Cost of Making It Up as You Go
Most organizations hit with a crisis, whether it’s a cyberbreach, natural disaster, industrial accident, or something else, find that the incident produces a fair amount of chaos, confusion, disruption, and stress.
Still, curious as it may seem, many organizations appear intent on making any crises they face even more chaotic than they have to be.
They do this by making up their crisis documentation process on the fly.
However, while the improvisational approach might work for jazz, it is a recipe for disaster in crisis management.
I’ve seen it over and over at companies I’ve advised and in exercises I’ve run: during an emergency, organizations that take a slapdash approach to their crisis management documentation make their bad situation worse.
The consequences of being disorganized in this area can include widespread confusion about what’s going on, confusion about what needs to be done when and by whom, duplication of effort, delays, people doing trivial tasks and failing to do critical ones, heightened stress, and extended disruptions to the business. In the most serious situations, poor CM documentation can contribute to property damage, injury, and loss of life.
Two Principles of Effective Crisis Documentation
Organizations that want to protect themselves and their stakeholders should ensure they have a solid approach to CM documentation.
Fortunately, developing such an approach is fairly easy.
A discussion of the specifics follows, but in the meantime here are two key principles to keep in mind:
- The key process in CM documentation is gathering a large amount of information in the field and progressively distilling and concentrating it as it rises up through the organization to the decision makers.
- Every aspect of CM documentation should be standardized using simple forms that ensure key information is gathered, briefings are organized, tasks are logged, and action plans are clear.
Organizations that are cognizant of and adhere to these two principles will find they are well on their way to making their CM documentation process more rational and their overall CM response more effective.
The Core Documents of Effective Crisis Management
Fortunately, organizations do not need a complicated documentation system to manage a crisis effectively. A handful of standardized documents can provide the structure needed to gather information, brief leadership, coordinate activities, track decisions, and guide recovery efforts.
Versions of these forms are widely available online and can easily be adapted to an organization’s specific needs.
Here are the core documents of effective crisis management.
Business Unit Situation Reports
The foundation of the process is the business unit situation report. These SitReps, conducted at the level of the business unit, recovery team, or functional area, sketch out the who, what, when, where, and why of the crisis as it affects that unit or group. They state how the crisis is affecting the unit’s people, operations, and technology. (If the crisis is having no effect, the SitRep should report that also.) To a certain degree, quick and dirty is good enough in a business unit SitRep. Handwritten is fine. Short and sweet is a virtue. One page noting the key aspects is what you want. The responsibility for doing the SitRep lies with the unit’s recovery team leader though the task can be delegated. The timing is important. These SitReps need to be sent in sufficiently in advance of each scheduled crisis briefing so the situation intelligence team will have time to use them in preparing their master report.
Master Situation Report
This document, which is prepared by the situation intelligence team, consolidates the key information from the multiple business unit situation reports. It should also be short, around one or two pages. In the old days, the task of creating this report was regarded as a low-level, secretarial activity. Now we know better. This is one of the most vital tasks in CM, and the people doing it need to be sharp, knowledgeable, and wise. They need to know about the company and its processes and be able to swiftly sift through a mass of information and identify the critical elements. The importance of this report is hard to overstate. It gets passed up to senior management, shapes their view of the crisis, informs the briefing, and guides the company’s action plans.
Crisis Management Briefing Agenda
Standardization is your friend when it comes to CM. Every crisis management meeting should follow a standard agenda. It’s amazing how many CM meetings lack any sense of structure or urgency. Sometimes the execs just talk and talk. No company board meeting would be allowed to proceed this way. The CM briefing should not be like this either. An agenda should be prepared in advance based on the information in the Master SitRep. It should ensure that critical topics are reviewed in a consistent order. Life safety issues come first. Other topics to cover include personnel concerns, operational impacts, technology status, communications, external stakeholder issues, and key decisions requiring leadership attention. A solid agenda promotes efficient use of time and ensures nothing key is left out. It also calms people down.
Incident Action Plan
The Incident Action Plan (IAP) translates situational awareness into action. The IAP is based on information gathered in the Master SitRep and crisis briefing. It should be a simple one-page document setting out three to five key strategic objectives to be accomplished in the next operational period (of four, 24, or 48 hours or whatever it might be). The IAP should identify the key objectives to be achieved, who is responsible for each objective, target completion dates, and the timing of the next briefing cycle. It should provide clear direction while allowing teams flexibility in how they execute assigned tasks.
Incident Action Tracker
Organizations should maintain a centralized tracking document noting key decisions, assignments, and action items. The tracker provides visibility into what has been assigned, who owns it, its current status, and whether it has been completed. It reduces the risk of commitments being forgotten, duplicated, or misunderstood as the crisis evolves. It is also valuable in completing the next document, the after-action report.
After-Action Report
A crisis is a great learning opportunity, provided the organization is wise enough to take advantage of it. The way to do this is by drafting an after-action report after things are back to normal. Ten pages is a good length. But if the report is not going to be honest, there’s no point in writing it. It should also dispense with any heavy finger pointing. The point isn’t to blame; it’s to learn and plug gaps. The report should look at questions such as: What happened and why? What did the organization do well and where did it struggle? How well did you do at event mobilization and assessment? How did you continue to operate? How did you resume operations? What are the things you need to fix? Most importantly, the report should result in actionable recommendations that are tracked through completion.
Together, these documents create a structured flow of information that helps organizations maintain situational awareness, make better decisions, and coordinate their response throughout the lifecycle of a crisis.
From Information to Action
Crises are inherently stressful and disruptive, but organizations often make them more difficult than they need to be by relying on improvised documentation processes. When information is gathered inconsistently, meetings lack structure, and action items are not clearly tracked, confusion grows, decision-making suffers, and recovery efforts become less effective.
Fortunately, creating order during a crisis does not require a complex system. By standardizing the collection, distillation, and tracking of information through a small set of core documents including situation reports, briefing agendas, incident action plans, action trackers, and after-action reports, organizations can improve situational awareness, support better decision-making, and coordinate a more effective response.
MHA Consulting has extensive experience helping organizations develop and strengthen their crisis management capabilities. Contact MHA to learn how we can help your organization establish practical crisis documentation processes, improve leadership coordination, and build a more effective crisis management program.
Further Reading
- BCM Basics: The Strategic Side of Crisis Management
- Want to Get Better at Crisis Management? Start with Culture
- 5 Myths of Contemporary Crisis Management
- Don’t Give Up the Ship: Demonstrating the Benefits of Rigorous Crisis Management Training
- 4 Metrics to Help Your Organization Improve at Crisis Management
- Thriving in the Hot Seat: Crisis Communication Do’s and Don’ts
Frequently Asked Questions
What documentation does my company need to excel at crisis management?
A solid crisis documentation process typically includes business unit situation reports, a consolidated or master situation report, a standardized briefing agenda, an incident action plan, an incident action tracker, and an after-action report. These documents help organizations gather information, make decisions, coordinate activities, and capture lessons learned.
What are the disadvantages of not having a standardized approach to crisis management documentation?
Organizations that improvise their documentation process during a crisis often experience unnecessary confusion, delays, miscommunication, and duplication of effort. People may be unclear about what is happening, what actions are required, who is responsible for completing them, and what the organization’s priorities are. In severe situations, poor documentation can contribute to extended disruptions, property damage, injuries, and other serious consequences.
What are the most important principles in crisis management documentation?
First, organizations should establish a process for gathering large amounts of information in the field and progressively distilling it into concise summaries for decision makers. Second, the documentation process should be standardized through the use of simple forms that create consistency in reporting, briefings, action planning, and tracking.
Why is it beneficial to use standardized forms in crisis management documentation?
Standardized forms help ensure that important information is collected consistently and that key topics are not overlooked. They make briefings more efficient, improve communication, reduce confusion, and help organizations maintain a common operating picture throughout an incident. Standardization also reduces stress by giving people a familiar process to follow during a difficult and fast-moving situation.
What are the key documents organizations need for crisis management?
The core documents are business unit situation reports, a master situation report, a crisis management briefing agenda, an incident action plan, an incident action tracker, and an after-action report. Together, these documents create a structured flow of information that supports situational awareness, decision-making, coordination, accountability, and continuous improvement.
