I’ve written it before.
I’m writing it again.
Know your neighbors.
Usually the admonishment comes with a suggestion to know what your neighbor does (is the product or service popular or not?), who your neighbor employs (popular or unpopular segments of the population), and how you neighbor treats its personnel (walkouts possible to probable?).
Turns out, according to an Associated Press article in the “PhillyBurbs.com” site titled
Salvation Army to be named in Philadelphia building collapse lawsuits
(see http://www.nbcnews.com/id/52764647/ns/local_news-delaware_valley_pa_nj/t/salvation-army-be-named-philadelphia-building-collapse-lawsuits/), that's not enough.
According to the brief article,
PHILADELPHIA (AP) — The Salvation Army will become the latest defendant in litigation over a deadly Philadelphia building collapse.
Six people died inside a Salvation Army thrift store when an adjacent building being demolished collapsed on them in June.
The suit contends that the Army ignored “known safety risks,” failed to implement protective measures and, due to the this, the Army thrift store customers died.
The army is the latest in the list of defendants.
Did the thrift store management know – have reason to believe – the adjacent building was to come down? Did the neighbors warn the store management? Was pre-demolition work obvious, giving the store management a “clue” of what was to transpire?
At the same time risk management practitioners are well advised to know what’s new with their neighbors, they also are equally well advised to be aware of any municipality activities that might interrupt business as usual.
Celebrations (that could close access roads)
Planned demolitions and construction.
Water line maintenance.
The difference between “business continuity” and “enterprise risk management” in an awareness of what is going on outside the facility and being prepared to avoid or mitigate any threats from outside the facility.
The suit that included the Army thrift store alleges there was something the thrift store management could have done to avoid or mitigate the damage but, the suit contends, management failed to take appropriate measures to avoid or mitigate the threat.
If I wrote it, you may quote it.