Business Continuity Planning & Disaster
Recovery: Testing Processes
Testing is critical to disaster recovery (DR) and business continuity planning (BCP) to
ensure that systems and processes can effectively recover from disasters and
disruptions. Different types of testing provide distinct advantages and disadvantages,
and the choice of testing method depends on the organization's goals, resources, and
specific requirements. Here are some common types of testing and their pros and cons:
1. Tabletop Exercises:
Advantages: Tabletop exercises are low-cost and low-impact simulations where
stakeholders discuss hypothetical scenarios without actual system or infrastructure
testing. They promote collaboration and improve communication between different
teams.
Disadvantages: As they do not involve actual system tests, tabletop exercises might not
provide a complete picture of the effectiveness of the DR and BCP plans. They might
also lack the urgency and realism of other testing methods.
Appropriate Use: Tabletop exercises are suitable for initial planning stages, familiarizing
personnel with plans, validating documentation, and identifying gaps in communication
and coordination.
Preclusion: Tabletop exercises alone might not be sufficient to assess the technical
aspects and recovery capabilities of the systems. Organizations cannot solely rely on
tabletop exercises for validating their technical DR and BCP solutions.
2. Functional Testing:
Advantages: Functional testing involves testing individual components or systems to
verify that they work correctly during disaster recovery. It helps identify weaknesses and
ensure that critical functions are recoverable.
Disadvantages: This type of testing can be time-consuming and may not address end-to-
end recovery scenarios. It may not reveal how different components interact during a
disaster.
Appropriate Use: Functional testing is suitable for evaluating specific components or
systems' resilience and recovery capabilities. It allows the organization to focus on
individual recovery objectives.
Preclusion: Functional testing alone may not reveal how the entire ecosystem of systems,
applications, and infrastructure works together to achieve complete recovery.
3. Full-Scale Simulation (Parallel Testing):
Advantages: Full-scale simulations involve a complete replication of the production
environment, including data, applications, and infrastructure. This testing method
provides the most realistic assessment of DR and BCP plans.
Disadvantages: Full-scale simulations can be expensive, resource-intensive, and may
cause disruptions if not managed carefully.
Appropriate Use: Full-scale simulations are appropriate for organizations with critical
systems and applications that require a high level of assurance in their recovery
capabilities. It allows comprehensive testing of the entire recovery process.
Preclusion: For smaller organizations with limited resources or less critical systems, full-
scale simulations might be impractical due to the high costs and complexities involved.
4. Snapshots and Backups Testing:
Advantages: This testing involves regularly testing backup data and recovery snapshots
to ensure data integrity and validate the backup and recovery process.
Disadvantages: While important for data recovery, this testing may not fully address the
recovery of complex systems and applications.
Appropriate Use: Snapshots and backups testing are crucial for data-centric businesses,
as it ensures data recoverability.
Preclusion: This testing type alone cannot verify the recovery of applications, systems,
and infrastructure.
5. Unannounced Testing (Surprise Drills):
Advantages: Surprise drills provide a more realistic scenario as employees do not know
the exact timing. It evaluates real-time responses and decision-making capabilities.
Disadvantages: Surprise drills can cause temporary disruption and, if not well-managed,
can lead to confusion and panic among employees.
Appropriate Use: Surprise drills are suitable for assessing how well employees respond to
unexpected disruptions, test their knowledge of procedures, and identify areas for
improvement.
Preclusion: Surprise drills should be used judiciously and with proper communication to
avoid undue stress and negative impacts on employees and operations.
In conclusion, each type of testing has its own advantages and disadvantages, and the
appropriate testing method depends on the organization's specific needs, risk tolerance,
and resources. A comprehensive DR and BCP strategy may involve a combination of
different testing methods to ensure the effectiveness of the overall plan. It is important
to regularly review and update the testing approach to address changing business
requirements and potential new risks.
