The floor walk

ISO 22301, Clauses 4, 5 and 8.1: context, leadership, and operational planning.

Every continuity plan rests on knowing what the factory is. Before charting storms or building emergency systems, walk the floor: establish what the business continuity management system covers, who answers for it, and what is actually running out there. A plan scoped around an out-of-date picture of the factory protects the factory that used to exist.

Scope and leadership first

Clause 4 asks for context: which products, services, and sites the continuity system covers, which interested parties depend on them, and what the organisation has decided is in and out of scope. A scope statement that can be read aloud in one paragraph, without anyone in the room frowning, is a reasonable test.

Clause 5 places responsibility with top management: an approved continuity policy, roles and responsibilities assigned, and resources committed. Continuity that lives entirely inside the operations team, without board-level ownership, is a gap auditors notice early, and disruptions notice earlier.

The factory’s heartbeat

Assets are the essential cogs that make production run. From controllers to networks to supporting IT, each element has a direct impact on uptime, safety, and operational resilience. Any undocumented, mismanaged, or unsupported asset is a potential point of failure, slowing recovery and increasing risk during a disruption.

  1. Industrial controllers and PLCs

    • These devices orchestrate production processes. Failure or misconfiguration can halt operations instantly.

    • Checks: Redundancy in place? Lifecycle documentation complete? Replacement procedures defined? Maintenance schedules adhered to?

    • Typical gaps: Missing spare units, unclear ownership, incomplete update or patch records.

  2. SCADA servers and HMIs

    • Central monitoring and control; a single point of visibility for operators.

    • Checks: Backup routines tested? Failover procedures validated? Access controls documented?

    • Typical gaps: Outdated backup logs, undocumented failover steps, misaligned operator permissions.

  3. Networks and communications

    • Segmented and monitored networks prevent a single failure from cascading across production.

    • Checks: Network diagrams current? Redundant paths verified? Monitoring and alerting in place?

    • Typical gaps: Zones not clearly defined, undocumented network changes, monitoring gaps in critical paths.

  4. Field devices and sensors

    • They collect process data and trigger safety or automation functions. Faulty sensors or missing calibration can disrupt production or safety.

    • Checks: Spares available? Calibration documented and current? Monitoring of device health in place?

    • Typical gaps: Sensors missing in documentation, overdue calibration, unmonitored devices.

  5. Physical infrastructure

    • Power supplies, enclosures, and environmental controls support everything else. A failure here stops the factory even if devices are functional.

    • Checks: UPS and generators tested? Cooling and environmental controls operational? Access controlled?

    • Typical gaps: Outdated maintenance logs, untested backup power, unclear responsibility for environmental systems.

  6. Supporting IT systems

    • ERP, reporting, and logging systems tie OT processes into organisational operations. Their failure can prevent informed decision-making during incidents.

    • Checks: Backups tested? System dependencies documented? Logging and alerting operational?

    • Typical gaps: Disconnected IT-OT systems, incomplete logs, undocumented recovery steps.

Executive gap-spotting

  • Comprehensive documentation: Are all critical assets recorded and mapped to continuity priorities? Missing items are blind spots.

  • Ownership clarity: Does each asset have a responsible owner or custodian? Ambiguity means delayed response in disruption.

  • Lifecycle completeness: Are installation, maintenance, updates, and decommissioning steps fully documented and current?

  • Criticality ratings: Are assets rated by operational impact to prioritise recovery efforts? Without prioritisation, recovery wastes time and resources.

  • Redundancy and readiness: Are backups, spares, and failover mechanisms in place and tested?

Walk through the factory mentally: each asset wants to be visible, documented, and accounted for. Anything you cannot immediately point to or explain is a gap waiting to disrupt operations.

Asset documentation is a model of the factory’s operational state at a point in time. The model ages: assets are upgraded, replaced, moved, or taken offline without the documentation following. When the documented state and the actual state diverge, the gap is not primarily a record-keeping failure: it is evidence that the process maintaining alignment between documentation and reality has a mismatch. Recovery procedures that depend on stale asset documentation will fail at the moment they are most needed.

Output

By the end of this stage, the organisation has a scope statement for the continuity system, an approved policy with named roles and board-level ownership, and an asset register mapped to continuity priorities with owners, criticality ratings, and current lifecycle records. This is the map the storm charts are drawn on.

Last updated: 4 July 2026