What I’ll Probably Do is… Nothing

As Hurricane Irene approached the East Coast last August, threatening businesses from the Carolinas all the way through to Maine, workplaces were filled with chatter about what – if anything – people were doing to get ready. While some shared concerns with coworkers and discussed the best ways to prepare, others blew off the impending storm or ignored evacuation orders entirely. Although the choice to disregard preparedness advice is generally unfathomable to business continuity and disaster recovery professionals, the response to recent events proved that many others in the workplace would respond in this way.

The fact that Hurricane Irene didn’t hit certain evacuated regions with the fury anticipated led many to question the warnings and decisions of public figures all along the Eastern Seaboard. This doubt shifted attention, however, from examining an issue that is critical to understanding how well prepared companies are to cope with disaster – the actions of their employees.

Pay attention to the way your company’s employees respond to calls for evacuation and preparedness. Not only do employees who do nothing when called to action put your company at greater risk for loss of personnel, but their lack of response can also indicate underlying attitudes that may have a deeper meaning for the role these individuals play in your workplace.

Someone who ignores evacuation orders and avoids taking precautions exhibits the following behaviors or attitudes:

Prefers risk over effort

Taking risks is often a positive trait in employees when that risk offers potential for reward. But all risks are not equal, and some should never be taken. When it comes to preparing for a known incoming threat, those who ignore preparation advice aren’t balancing risk with reward, but rather with effort. There is little to be gained from refusing to prepare for a disaster other than saving oneself the trouble of stocking up on supplies, securing the home, or evacuating. Someone who is reluctant to prepare for and thereby reduce the impact of a disaster may well be more likely to choose risk over effort in the workplace as well. Keep in mind the decision to do nothing isn’t neutral. As in the case of those areas that were hit harder by Hurricane Irene, the choice to do nothing can have severe consequences.

Ignores advice from authorities

Still, against the drumbeat of plans and announcements from officials on the Thursday before the storm, some all but disregarded the hurricane talk. According to the New York Times, Dave Merklin of Freeport, N.Y., said he was doing “practically nothing, because I’ve been through so many of these storms.”

“I’ve lived in this house for 40 years,” he said. “I wait until the storm is gone, and then I clean up the mess. I don’t do much in the way of preparation except make sure the doors are closed.”

In the case of Hurricane Irene, there was nothing ambiguous about what the authorities thought citizens should do. The much-aired order by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie couldn’t have been any clearer: “Get the hell off the beach.” Governors, mayors, meteorologists, scientists, FEMA, the Red Cross, and Offices of Emergency Management all agreed – those who lived in the path of the storm should get ready by stocking up on supplies, preparing the home, and evacuating if located in a flood-threatened area. This advice, taking over TV and radio programming, Twitter, and Facebook, was virtually impossible to miss. Yet, not everyone listened. Ignoring guidance from authorities is a sign of believing oneself to be as effective a judge of what should be done as the experts themselves. What other recommendations or advice from the experts might this person be overlooking at work?

Denies the severity of a situation

Like other human qualities such as kindness, humility, or bravery, people fall along a continuum of how ready they are to deny or accept the possibility of danger. It is natural for us to struggle with acknowledging the occurrence of an abnormal, unusual event – one that threatens to disrupt the relative stability in our lives. In most circumstances, this type of reflex denial is beneficial for our survival. A healthy dose of denial is what enables us to cope with daily matters and live our lives, instead of being paralyzed by overwhelming fear or grief. But denial can be dangerous when it interferes with our ability to accurately understand the situation and the potential risks we face. Those who consistently ignore the negative consequences at stake may not have a clear vision of reality and are far less likely in a position to be proactive about dealing with future events.

Waits until problems escalate before dealing with them

Those who don’t heed calls to preparedness often give the excuse of, “Well, if it looks like it’s going to get really bad, then I’ll get prepared. But I don’t want to waste my time if it turns out to be nothing.” It’s true that many disasters turn out to be less damaging than predicted. Waiting to take action until the problem is severe, however, can be as problematic with disaster preparation as with anything else in life. For instance, in Manhattan, those who waited until the day before the hurricane to purchase flashlights and batteries found themselves out of luck. This particular breed of procrastination causes problems that were once easily solvable to grow into nasty issues where resolution is much more difficult or even impossible.

Is willing to make their choices the problems of others

Mayor Bloomberg of New York City expressed his anger at this phenomenon in a press conference given the night before the storm reached Manhattan.

“At about 7 p.m. this evening, NYPD received a 9/11 call reporting that two kayakers who had entered the surf off of Staten Island and capsized were floundering in high seas,” said Bloomberg. “Why they were out there in spite of all the warnings, I don’t know, but the fact of the matter is they were there, and the NYPD harbor officers had to put their lives on the line to save these people. This is clearly one of those reckless acts that also have diverted badly needed NYPD resources … you’re putting your own lives in danger, you’re also putting lives in danger of the first responders.”

There is a certain level of personal and societal responsibility we all have in preparing for disasters. Consequently, refusing to take preparatory action can have a significant impact on the work of emergency officials. Perhaps best exemplified by surfers or sunbathers who placed their own desire for fun and adventure above the lives of emergency responders, those who ignore evacuation orders show that they are okay with making choices that could cause huge problems for other people. In subscribing to the belief they will be saved when the situation gets “really bad,” they shirk responsibility for their own safety, and place the onus onto authorities or others “in charge” who may or may not actually be able to save them. Consider how this type of person will respond to problems at work. Might they believe that any negative repercussions resulting from their own choices fall into the responsibility of their supervisors or managers?

Doesn’t see their actions as part of the bigger picture

“You may not see this again in your lifetime,” said Teddy Ferris, 55, an East Village resident who had refused to evacuate and had taken a seat along the East River on the morning before the storm. “This is beautiful,” he quoted to a New York Times reporter. “This is nature at its best.”’

The outcome of a disaster is not determined purely by the intensity and path of the disaster itself, but also by its interaction with the people it affects. American culture tends to prize independence and self-reliance, but these values can work against our advantage in situations like disasters where the cumulative response of individuals can heavily sway the outcome of the disaster. Those who elected not to evacuate for Hurricane Katrina, for example, contributed to it becoming one of the deadliest hurricanes on record. We should take responsibility for our own safety, and that means supporting the safety of others. Similarly, those who consider their actions as only pertaining to themselves are probably less likely to make decisions that may benefit the company but generate additional effort or difficulties for the person making the choice.

In contrast, what do you see in someone who does pay attention to disaster preparation advice? Those who responded to the threat of Hurricane Irene loaded up on water and non-perishables; stocked the home with flashlights, batteries and candles; secured windows, cars, and outdoor furniture; and heeded the advice of authorities and evacuated where recommended. Those with social media savvy leveraged the power of their networks to quickly share information during the storm and, afterward, organize grassroots relief efforts, do-it-yourself movements, and local fundraisers.

This type of behavior demonstrates a choice to be proactive about responding to problems, a sense of personal ownership over circumstances, and a desire to be a responsible and helpful member of the community. It is the sum of these individual efforts toward preparedness that makes cities, and thereby families, offices, and neighborhoods, better able to face the event and aftermath of disaster. While many may view such preparatory efforts as wasted time and money due to the lack of widespread damage from Hurricane Irene, these actions indicate one’s capacity to successfully manage many more problems to come – in the home and in the workplace.

Alison Kashin is the chief creative and technology officer for Lootok, a specialized business continuity practice based in New York City, with support from consultants around the world. Lootok’s team, an integrated force of seasoned business continuity experts and specialists in related fields, offers a cross-industry approach to engage people in ways that traditionally the world of risk doesn’t consider.