Given the complexity of most facilities and the number of people with a stake in protecting facilities and occupants, it seems likely that mistakes and misconceptions will crop up during emergency preparedness planning. The challenge for managers and other team members is anticipating these mistakes and understanding how to avoid them, says Rajat Malhotra, global lead of engineering operations for data centers and critical environments management at JLL. Malhorta identifies several common mistakes likely to crop up.
Missing risks. The number of potential risks to facilities continues to grow, so identifying each one is critical for success.
“The one common mistake that we see is all relevant scenarios and emergency conditions may not be covered,” Malhotra says. “Each facility must list potential emergency scenarios based on a risk assessment and threat perception. For example, public unrest or disruptions are probable in locations where you have a political office or near a busy transport hub and node. Utility failure probabilities are higher in some states.
“A risk assessment must be carried out, and all emergency situations or scenarios listed. A good practice is to identify the probability and the consequences of that risk or that emergency. The product of this will give you a risk rating, and then you can prioritize what are the emergencies for which you need the emergency response procedures.”
Sticking to the usual. While the many risks to facilities are widely known and understood, managers and other team members often fail to pay adequate attention to non-traditional emergencies.
“When I say non-traditional, if you look at legacy plans, they focus always on fire and building evacuation,” he says. “Things that get ignored, which are very, very real world today, are cyber threats, building management system compromises, extreme weather events and pandemic level responses. They are either absent or just partially addressed despite post-COVID awareness. These are non-traditional emergencies that have to be in place, as well.”
Hiding plans. Malhotra says while emergency preparedness teams devote time and energy to developing comprehensive plans, they too often fail to give the plans enough visibility and accessibility.
“This is super important,” he says. “Plans are frequently stored in static forms. They are PDFs or SharePoint or in physical binders. There’s no dynamic, real-time access for occupants or first responders. The trend towards hybrid working has meant that many occupants have never been physically present in a building during a drill.
“Digitization of the plans with a method for easy recall is a great idea. A Teams channel would allow for the plans to be stored in the files or a digital vault, so to speak, so they’re easily accessible, as well. You need to have a more dynamic availability of the emergency response plan to the occupants or the users or the responders.”
Training troubles. Emergency preparedness plans are unlikely to deliver the intended benefits to facilities and organizations unless organizations follow through with adequate training and drills for all affected parties.
“One major failing that we observe is inadequate training frequency and quality tracking,” Malhotra says. “The best way to train is to conduct drills. But sites may still lack a closed-loop system confirming that training has been completed and the assessment also has been completed. That’s very important.”
Communication complications. Communication among departments, officials and other interested parties is a crucial component of effective emergency response, but too often when a crisis hits, traditional communication methods are not enough.
“Communication protocols are often siloed, so a phone call may not always be the best form of communication,” Malhotra says. “These days, you have Microsoft Teams, so creation of a Teams channel is a great best practice for certain categories of emergencies.
“There’s typically a gap between the documented procedure and how people actually communicate during an incident. You have a documented procedure of phone calls, but often, they use other communication methods to manage the emergency. Those have to be updated in the emergency response plan.”
Malhotra and Deonarine agree that perhaps the most common mistake facilities managers and other team members can make related to emergency preparedness is failing to update a plan once they have created it.
“Emergency plans need to be updated based on changes in site or environmental conditions, including team changes or contractor changes,” Malhotra says. “This is often not done, and we are seeing this across facilities. The review period that is recommended is annual, or if there’s a major change that is identified in environmental conditions or if there’s a change in team structure or the vendor base or the contractor base.”
Emergency plans also require updates to ensure the facility remains in compliance.
“Too often, emergency preparedness plans are completed and rarely revisited,” Deonarine says. “The result can be a plan that once offered protection for facilities, operations and occupants but now are outdated and flawed. Emergency evacuation plans and fire safety plans are likely required by the local fire code. These plans must be updated annually. The fire code may also identify the frequency and content of training programs for your staff.”
Dan Hounsell is senior editor for the facilities market. He has more than 30 years of experience writing about facilities maintenance, engineering and management.
Emergency Preparedness: Avoiding Common Planning Mistakes
5 Emergency Preparedness Mistakes Facilities Managers Must Avoid
