Behind the Ballot: Future of the Profession
Our members asked board election candidates: Do you believe AI will fundamentally change the role of business continuity professionals? If so, how should the BCI prepare its members for this shift? And how can the BCI maintain its relevance and leadership in a world where resilience increasingly depends on technology-driven solutions?
Matthew McDonough
Since joining the BCI and transitioning from another professional body (Chartered Member of the Institute of Occupational Safety and Health – CMIOSH) I’ve witnessed the strengthens of the BCI in areas of competency setting, professional development, training and guidelines. I would recommend leaning into the strengths to remain current as an institute. As AI and emerging technologies are developed and deployed, organizations will continue to need skilled professionals who are capable. The BCI could take the opportunity to collaborate with academia, other professional bodies and institutes to ensure its guidance reflects the emerging technologies and associated risks. The BCI is also presented with the opportunity to further evolve and digitally transform its own offerings to the members and industry. Areas of competency recording, developing guidelines and resources are all areas where the AI could be leveraged for the Institute.
There is a theme that is developing throughout my questionnaire answers, and that is to maintain relevance and leadership through the development of resilience professionals. AI and emerging technologies might change the way we perform our roles, but we will continue to see organizations who require professionals who are capable of applying governance and leadership during disruptions. As I have witnessed with the evolution of the BCI Good Practice Guidelines (GPG), the ability to continually review and update guidance is essential. The BCI should apply this approach to its competency frameworks, standards and certifications to ensure they are continually updated to reflect the emerging technologies, data analytics and digital resilience. As an advocate for resilience synergies, I would promote or increase engagement with other professional bodies, academia or regulators to develop co-authored guidance and share expertise.
Mikaiiro Laitinen
I do believe that AI will fundamentally change business continuity. We already see the impact of AI in some sectors. For example, routine tasks in financial institutes get automated, junior accountants find it increasingly difficult to land a job, and even artists are competing with AI for an audience. BC is still artisan work for the most part, but this may change as AI gradually takes over the more mundane tasks in the BC lifecycle. The members need to be aware of the areas where AI will have the most impact. Perhaps we do not exactly know what those areas will be. BCI’s research function is an important function to provide the member with insights into BC developments during the AI-era and glimpses into future trends that will help the members and other practitioners to adapt.
Staying relevant may not be difficult, since it is difficult to envision a scenario where BC and resilience would become obsolete concepts – regardless of the technological advances. Assuming that BC and resilience will transform into something fundamentally different from today, maintaining leadership in the field is likely to require significantly deeper technological understanding. The BCI might therefore seek to collaborate more closely with academia, research facilities, and technology companies to synthesize Resilience 2.0, consisting of technology know-how and the wealth of BC and resilience skills of the BCI and our members. Maintaining relevance and leadership will require that members have the sense of belonging to the community. Innovative technology-driven solutions are created everywhere, and the BCI might use, for example, regional chapters to tap into the variety of interesting sources for the benefit of the members
Rina Singh
I do not believe AI will replace business continuity professionals. It will change where they add value. Activities such as information gathering, drafting BIAs, developing plans and analysing information are likely to become faster and more efficient through automation. However, resilience is not created through documentation alone. Organizations are resilient because of their people, how they make decisions, communicate, adapt and respond under pressure. AI can support analysis, but it cannot fully understand organizational culture, leadership dynamics, historical context or the practical realities of how services operate. The BCI could help members prepare by creating opportunities for practitioners to share experiences, challenges and lessons learned as AI evolves. Given the pace of change, insights from organizations already applying these technologies may be more valuable than formal training alone. The BCI also has a role in helping organizations understand that generating plans and analysis is not the same as demonstrating resilience.
Technology will continue to change how organizations operate, but it does not change the fundamentals of resilience. The BCI can maintain its leadership by helping organizations distinguish between technology that supports resilience and technology that simply creates a perception of resilience. The Institute does not need to become a technology body. Its role is to help the profession understand the resilience implications of emerging technologies and ensure resilience remains part of wider industry discussions as organizations evolve. As critical services become increasingly digital, resilience professionals will need to engage earlier in the decisions that shape how services are designed, delivered and changed. The BCI can support this shift through its guidance, thought leadership and good practice, helping practitioners embed resilience considerations into technology and transformation activities from the outset. Leadership will come from ensuring resilience helps shape future decisions, rather than assessing their impact after they have already been made.
Sandra Bartley MBCI
BC professionals are using AI more and more in their roles, but I think they still need to have the BC knowledge. Also, AI needs to include the human in the loop to ensure the information it puts out is correct. AI learns about BC from the information BC professionals put in it and confirm is correct, so we need to ensure our BC professionals are trained.
Increase the number of younger BC professionals in BC, by developing / training them we infuse new the use of technology-driven solutions.
Russ Parramore
AI may change the way in which we approach BC management going forward, however I believe that the human brain will always be required to ensure the accuracy and context of what AI creates.
There will always be a need for people to govern and promote the BCI. Technology should be used to assist people in decision making by providing up to date information.
Atiq Bajwa
I believe AI will change the role, though it will not replace the practitioner. Much of the routine work, such as data gathering, BIA drafts, plan updates and horizon scanning, will be done faster by AI. The practitioner’s time will move to judgment: challenging AI outputs, advising leaders in a crisis, and linking continuity to business objectives. In my own work with the board and its committees, the value I add comes from interpretation and advice, and that is the part of the role that will grow. BCI should prepare members by updating competency frameworks and certifications to include AI literacy and data skills. It should offer practical training and case studies, and keep a clear message that professional judgment and ethics stay with the human. Chapters can support this with local workshops and peer learning.
BCI can stay relevant by being the preferred source of information for practitioners when technology changes how resilience works. It should keep its standards and Good Practice Guidelines current, with a fast update cycle for emerging topics such as AI, cloud dependency and cyber-physical risk, aligned with ISO. It should partner with technology providers and regulators, so members get early access to tools and research, and BCI has a voice when regulation is shaped. BCI should also use its global reach. As Chair of the Saudi Arabia Chapter, I see how regional evidence strengthens guidance for the whole membership.
Penny Killow
As I have outlined in educational sessions, guidance and thought leadership, it is the BCI’s responsibility to ensure our members are prepared for the inevitable changes to administrative work.
People are not going away just yet, they will be part of the decision-making processes that technology is fast tracking. Those people still require problem-solving skills and ability to make sensible decisions in response to unexpected events. Additionally, the regulatory requirement for resilience is cascading through to third party supply chains globally. Evidencing a resilience capability is and will remain a key requirement for at least a few more years.
Read our other Behind the Ballot articles
More on
