Disaster Recovery Tests Too Costly?

With the recently announced cancellation of theneed for business continuity plans and related
Business Continuity Expo 2009 by Reedinsurance strategies. In reality, during such times,
Exhibitions, it is clear that service providersthe organisation may be able to recover from the
expect UK businesses to scale back their budgetsimpact of a couple of days IT downtime. Sure,
for disaster recovery and business continuitysome customers will switch to your competitors,
provision. It seems that while some firms havesome of those will never come back, but your
decided to take the risk of not having a plan at all,order book, and cashflow will be strong enough to
others are trying to find shortcuts to reduce theircarry the business through. In contrast, during a
spending. By far the most obvious piece of therecession, when order books are small, and
jigsaw to remove, for most businesses, are thecashflow is tight, the same period of IT
test invocations.downtime, and resultant loss of business, could be
Test invocations form a crucial part of all disasterenough to break the camel's back. Hence,
recovery plans, but often it is the mosteconomic recession makes a working business
expensive component of the solution. Testcontinuity plan even more crucial.
invocations are frequently overlooked at theSome service providers have engaged with their
outset of a business continuity plan, as servicecustomers to find a solution to this dichotomy. It
providers and manufacturers proclaim 'ease ofis possible, given the right approach, to leave the
recovery'. Only when the first test is carried outinvocation process to the service provider. The
does the extent of the hidden costs becomeservice provider maintains a detailed
apparent. Even simple tape restore testing can bedocumentation process, and provides both the
time consuming and therefore expensive (andequipment and the manpower to invoke the
often outside the desired Recovery Timesolution independently, with no impact on the
Objective or RTO). Worse still, if the test fails,client's live running IT operation, or the team
further staff time must be dedicated tosupporting it. Once the solution is fully invoked, the
investigation and documentation updates. Whenbusiness can carry out specific application tests,
job losses are on the horizon, and teams arebefore leaving the service provider to dismantle
running on empty, just sparing the staff to fulfilthe invocation test again, and update the
the project may not be an option.documentation.
Some DR processes have an even higher costThis sounds like a shift to wholly outsourcing the
due to bad design, and can only be carried out atdisaster recovery solution to a service provider,
the expense of uptime. Physical serversand it is. It also sounds very expensive, but it isn't.
sometimes need to be moved, or shutdown toRecovery teams at managed service providers,
carry out all the environment or application testing.perform test invocations every day of the year.
Some business continuity advisors get it right andFortunately live invocations are rare, but test
ask service providers to 'bundle' test invocationsinvocations happen on a regular basis. Because the
into the service contract. That is fine as far as ittest invocation is a routine action, and often highly
goes, but it generally does not account for theautomated, the costs are kept small, and more
hidden costs like resource, transport, andimportantly, included in the contract. With
documentation updates.contracts available in the market for around
It seems fair then to reduce or postpone test£50/week for a server with 60GB of data,
invocations as part of a budget cutting directive,and an achievable Recovery Point Objective
but at what cost? When times are good, and(RPO) of near zero, why would you do it
business is booming, cashflow is rarely a problem.yourself?
IT budgets increase as stakeholders recognise the