- Intention to formulate a BCP tends to be high in areas where a large earthquake is predicted -
Companies are required to minimize the impact on management assets, continue business and recover early when emergency situations occur, such as a natural disaster, an epidemic of infectious disease, and an information security incident. Therefore, it is important not only for business continuity but also from a perspective of maintaining and improving a corporate value to assume the impact of various risks on corporate activities, and prepare response measures in normal times.
Teikoku Databank has conducted a survey on corporate attitudes towards Business Continuity Planning (BCP). This survey was conducted in conjunction with the May 2019 TDB Trends Research.
*Survey period: May 20 – May 31, 2019, Companies Surveyed: 23,169, Valid Responses: 9,555 (Response Rate: 41.2%). The survey for Business Continuity Planning (BCP) has been conducted every year since June 2016 and this is the 4th survey.
*Details of this survey can be found on the dedicated Economic Trend Survey HP (http://www.tdb-di.com).
Survey results (Summary)
1. With respect to company status in terms of formulating a BCP, companies that “have formulated” a BCP remained at 15.0% (y-o-y increase of 0.3 points). Even those that “have the intention to formulate” (total of those that “are currently formulating” and “are considering formulating”) stood at 45.5%, which was less than half the companies. It has become clear that companies have not yet made progress on formulating a BCP.
2. Among companies that “have the intention to formulate” a BCP, risks in which business continuity is assumed to be difficult were “Natural disaster,” such as earthquake, storm and flood damage, and eruption with the highest ratio (of 72.5%), followed by “Facility failure” (40.9%), “Fire and explosion accident,” and “Trouble and failure of in-house business management system” (both 34.5%). For matters that have been implemented/considered in preparation for business interruption risks, “Establishment of means to confirm employees’ safety” (72.2%), “Information system backup” (61.5%), and “Establishment of the chain of command for emergency situations” (47.2%) were highly ranked.
3. With respect to the effect of formulating a BCP, “Employees’ risk awareness has improved” was ranked the top (59.3%), responded by companies that have formulated a BCP, followed by “Standardized and manualized operations have advanced” (35.4%), and “Operational priority has become clear” (32.9%).
4. Reasons for not formulating a BCP were “Do not have the skills and know-how necessary to formulate” with the highest ratio (of 43.9%), followed by “Cannot secure human resources to formulate such a plan” (33.7%), and “Ends in document creation, and difficult to make a plan practical-to-use” (27.9%). The result also showed one in approximately 4 companies “does not feel the necessity” to formulate a BCP (24.0%).
1.Research Subjects(Companies researched: 23,169; Valid responses: 9,555; Response rate: 41.2%)
*Business Confidence (current, in 3 months, in 6 months, in 1 year)
*Business Conditions (sales, purchasing and selling unit price, inventory, capacity utilization ratio, number of employees, overtime work hours)
3.Research Period and Methodology
Internet-based survey conducted May 20 – 31 2019
The explanation of the Economic Diffusion Index
Research Purpose/Researched Terms
TDB Economic Trend Research (started from May 2002) is a monthly statistical survey conducted for over 20,000 nationwide corporations on their general business activities including the current condition and future outlook of the industry business performance and operating climate. The primary purpose of such a survey is to assess the current state of Japan’s economy.
Selection of the Subject Corporations
Companies of all sizes in all domestic industries are eligible to participate in the survey.
The DI（Diffusion Index） is calculated by multiplying the number of responses for each assessment category by the number given in parentheses in the table below, to a seven-level assessment rated by companies.
An economic DI of 50 is the point separating good and bad, so a DI over 50 means “good,” and below 50 means “bad.” (The numbers are rounded off to one decimal place.) No weight is given according to a company's size, and calculations are made on the basis of “one company, one vote.”