ABSTRACT
In this chapter, the authors present three approaches that have very different use cases for evaluating resilience efforts. The first, a maturity model approach, is best for tracking an organization’s success in addressing resilience programmatically. The second is the resilience value approach – a simple risk identification and avoidance metric that is best used to compare various resilience investment options. Finally, there is the customized metric approach. This method is complex and limited in application and represents the only way to quantify the impacts of a resilience program against a specific set of threats. When an organization is less interested in comparing sites against each other or against a plan and more interested in comparing the value of different investment options, the resilience value approach often makes more sense. Maturity models, while useful in highlighting a broad range of program elements, also have considerable shortcomings. These models are unhelpful when it comes to prioritizing investment options.
