4 minute read
What Separates the Best Crisis Teams from the Rest | Part 2
AN EXCLUSIVE 4-PART SERIES
PART 2
Following on from Part 1 of this series, where we looked at what crisis teams are for, who needs to be involved, and why deliberate preparation matters, this article moves to the second pillar: Roles, Responsibilities and Governance, that separate high‑performing crisis teams from the rest.
These are not theoretical. They are drawn directly from what we observe when teams are under pressure: the things that go right, and the things that go wrong. Repeatedly, predictably, and avoidably. We publish them here because we believe every crisis team deserves to know the standard they should be measured against.
PILLAR 02: Operating Rhythm and Speed of Response
A crisis is not the time to work out who does what. The best teams arrive already knowing their role, their lane, and where their authority starts and stops. The worst teams spend the first hour figuring out who should be in the room, and the second hour debating who’s in charge.
All CMT Roles Defined and Understood
Every CMT member knows their responsibilities before a crisis hits. No ambiguity or duplication across all defined roles.
Where teams trip up
Participants struggle to distinguish their crisis role from their BAU role. Overlapping or duplicated responsibilities across role cards. In multi-tiered responses, delineation between teams is unclear. Insufficient training means the first exposure to crisis management plans happens during the event itself.
Alternates Prepared Like Primaries
Alternate CMT members are exercised with equal rigour to primaries, demonstrating readiness to step in with cross-departmental flexibility and smooth handover.
Where teams trip up
Alternates are frequently untrained, unidentified, or untested. When primaries are unavailable due to absence or time zones, alternates lack the familiarity and confidence to step in effectively.
Crisis Leader and Coordinator Operating in Lock Step
The Crisis Leader provides executive chairmanship and key decision-making. The Crisis Coordinator ensures plan implementation, meeting structure, action tracking, and overall operational oversight. The two operate as a unit.
Where teams trip up
Absence of a coordinator role, or selecting the wrong person as coordinator, it’s a skill, not a title. Leaders drive meetings based on personal knowledge rather than structured agendas. Excessive pressure on a single leader without trained alternatives.
Board Engaged Effectively
The Board is engaged at the right time and involvement is calibrated to the appropriate tier; Informed, Support, or Decision. Board approval is obtained where appropriate.
Where teams trip up
Boards lack access to crisis playbooks or structured decision-making frameworks. The escalation boundary between Executive and Board is unclear. Decisions are made without full understanding of downstream communication or regulatory implications. Real-time communication channels to Board directors present access issues.
Third Parties and Advisers Brought in Where Needed
External parties and service providers are engaged in line with contracts, BCPs, and material service provider requirements. Advisers complement, rather than hinder, decision-making.
Where teams trip up
Over-reliance on external advisers. Inability to reference contractual terms under pressure. Unclear escalation pathways at key vendors. Expectations that vendors will behave consistent with non-crisis conditions.
The difference between organisations that handle a crisis well and those that stumble is not luck, not sector, and not size. It comes down to observable, practicable behaviours.
In the rest of this series, we unpack the remaining two pillars. If you want to know where your team really stands against these twenty behaviours, speak with the Battleground team about running a focussed crisis simulation or maturity review tailored to your threat profile and executive team.
Read the series
