This paper uses Endsley’s three-level model of situational awareness to analyse the challenges faced by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) when coordinating the relief efforts in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria made landfall. Most obviously, obtaining data about the impacted area was highly challenging, making it much harder to comprehend the magnitude of the event. In turn, this made it difficult to know where to focus recovery efforts as the event unfolded. The situation was further exacerbated by Puerto Rico’s remote location with respect to the US mainland, and the fact that FEMA was not logistically prepared for Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria to spread its resources so thin. The paper concludes that for US disaster responses to be successful, all levels of government and the private sector should pool resources in a complementary manner in order to streamline supply chain and inventory management practices.This paper introduces the competing pressures paradigm (CPP) – a conceptual model to improve the emergency and continuity planning process through enhanced organisational and societal pressure management. The CPP is a theory, a learning tool and a planner’s aide-memoire. It is designed to encourage critical reflection and proactive strategising to address five competing pressures in order to engender greater planning efficacy. Whereas planners typically focus on three core pressures – legislative compliance, organisational alignment (internal and external) and managerial preference – the CPP also focuses on two covert pressures, namely, usability and the needs of humanity and society. Accordingly, this paper explores all five of these constituent pressures to present a learning tool with both theoretical and practical applications for emergency and continuity management.In a disaster, businesses face concurrent challenges of maintaining business continuity required to keep the business open, while reacting, responding and recovering from the chaos and impacts of the disaster. This article takes the reader through the conceptual and practical facets of the Incident Command System, the framework components, organisation structure, incident deployment methodology and common documentation. Each framework component is taken from its concept definition and drilled down into a description of high-level implementation. It is then sewn together to show how Incident Command interconnectivity and interoperability permits free-flowing communications between functions and empowers cooperative and collaborative relationships between layers and players. The author uses real-world experience and examples of disaster to transition Incident Command concepts to the practicality of implementation. In this way, the article demonstrates the importance of the Incident Command System in business continuity management.In the aftermath of a major disaster, whether natural or man-made, corporations cannot depend on the assistance of outside emergency services. Yet, while the case for corporate self-sufficiency has never been more apparent, most companies are ill-prepared for disaster. To address this problem, this article is designed to help senior executives ask the difficult questions in order to identify whether their company is truly ‘response ready’. To this end, the article describes the many aspects of self-sufficiency. While it gives specific examples of the various tasks that must be performed, such as ensuring the key personnel tasked with emergency response, crisis management and business continuity are properly trained and tested, it also stresses the need to understand the human impact. This factor is an essential consideration, as by failing to consider the emotional impact on personnel, executives are setting up their disaster response for failure. This paper will discuss the human factor, along with other differences between operational theory and operational reality. AT-877 HCl The key takeaway is the importance of managing corporate expectations during a major disaster.For businesses large and small, the world over, maintaining operational continuity is an economic imperative. This paper suggests that airports provide a good case study from which to learn, due to their emergency-oriented nature; their nonstop tango with disruptions of many origins; their experience in moving from crisis to normal operations as quickly as possible; and because of their multifaceted functions and stakeholders. With this in mind, the article illustrates how the various challenges faced by airport operators align with those faced by businesses more generally. The paper argues that the best way to respond to incidents in a quick and appropriate manner is by developing processes and procedures informed by best practices, innovations and accumulated expertise.Mindfulness is the daily practice of noticing our present moment experiences (thoughts, emotions and physical sensations) with curiosity, non-judgment and equanimity (accepting what is). Scientific research shows that the regular practice of mindfulness can help lower stress, boost the immune system and increase productivity. Recognising these benefits, companies such as Google, Nike and Goldman Sachs have incorporated mindfulness programmes into the workplace. Among the positive results reported, these companies have observed a reduction in sick leave, improved collaboration between employees, and projects being completed more effectively. But these are only some of the benefits that mindfulness can offer. Other advantages include improved emotional regulation and better decision-making during a crisis. This suggests that those C-level executives and recovery teams who play key roles in restoring mission-critical processes following business-disruptive events would benefit from mindfulness training. This paper will explore how and why mindfulness can help optimise incident management, the training tools required, and how to build mindfulness into a business continuity management training and exercise programme.Business continuity programmes frequently suffer from two core problems. First, many programmes fail to focus on what is critically important to the organisation and its stakeholders. Secondly, many programmes fail to engage programme participants to achieve preparedness goals. Both problems impact the programme’s strategic direction, scope and performance. The frame process described here provides a detailed method for business continuity practitioners to engage with top management and other key stakeholders to determine and then address what is most important to the organisation. This process was developed to address the lack of programme focus regardless of industry or organisation size and has been used to build high-performing programmes and improve focus for mature programmes. Beginning with answering the four questions described in this paper, programme management is equipped to effectively establish programme objectives and priorities, inform stakeholders of key business continuity concepts, and allow for issues resolution prior to the implementation of key programme activities.