ISO 22392:2020 pdf free.Security and resilience一Community resilience一Guidelines for conducting
peer reviews.
4 Plan the peer review
4.1 General
It is important that the host plans effectively for the peer review so that its delivery (see Clause 5) is
successful. Planning the peer review will put in place the arrangements so that the reviewers have a
maximum clarity of purpose from the host, and vice versa. This clause describes planning for the peer review, including to: decide the level of administration to be peer reviewed (see 4.2); agree the expected benefits of the peer review (see 4.3); agree the objectives of the peer review (see 4.4); agree the high-level timeline for the peer review (see 4.5); decide whether a self-assessment will be completed before the peer review (see 4.6); consider the cost/ benefit of hosting the peer review (see 4.7); identify parties who are interested in the peer review (see 4.8); select the analysis areas to be peer reviewed (see 4.9); appoint an organization to coordinate the peer review (see 4.10);agree the terms of the peer review (see 4.11);select personnel from the host to provide information to the reviewers (see 4.12) appoint reviewers (4.13).
4.2 Decide the level of administration to be peer reviewed
Peer reviews can be an effective approach to reflect on the activities being conducted at any level of administration. The host should decide whether the peer review should focus on the national, regional, local or organizational levels.
More than one level of administration maybe the focus of the peer review, in which case, the amount of time available for the peer review should be increased to reflect the added complexity.
4.3 Agree the expected benefits of the peer review
The peer review should have expected benefits for the host and for reviewers and these should be agreed before organizing the peer review to provide clear expected impacts from the outcomes of the review.
There should be expected benefits for each selected analysis area (see 49) to ensure clarity of the measurable improvement being sought.
The host and reviewers should define each of their expected benefits. This should:
— agree with their interested parties the benefits they expect from participating in the review (e.g. benefits to their performance, analysis areas, or other benefits such as learning or networking);
— describe each benefit and identify the benefit owner who is responsible for it (i.e. who will: plan the timing of changes to deliver the benefit; prepare the context for the changes; implement the changes; manage the changes to avoid negative side-effects);
— define the objectives (see 4A) that support each benefit;
— identify a measure of each benefit, including a current value for the measure and a target change in the value as a result of the peer review; if a benefit is not measurable directly, then a proxy measure should be identified;
— communicate information on benefits to each other (i.e. the reviewers should communicate their expectations to the host, and vice versa);
— consider these expectations when planning the peer review process (see 53) to ensure all expectations are addressed.
4.4 Agree the objectives of the peer review
The host should agree clear objectives for the peer review in terms of how it will deliver the benefits (see 43) and strengthen its performance in selected analysis areas (see 4.9). Objectives should include how the peer review should enhance analysis areas in terms of:
— strategy, vision and leadership; this should include developing the culture and strategies;
— collection and use of information; this should include developing the analyses of external and internal data and information, building strategic collaborations, exploring the wider environment, and foreseeing future risks;
— management of systems, processes, planning and audits; this should include developing the management structure, planning processes, sustainable resource management, analysing corporate risks, functions that support operational delivery, business continuity, performance measurement, external audits, and learning from itself and others;
— coordination of, and communication with, operations; this should include developingthe coordination of resources and partners, sharing information effectively internally and externally, and notifying senior leaders when situations change with significant implications;
— delivery of operations; this should include developing the structure of delivering operations, managing effective and efficient on-site delivery, autonomy of delivery units, and adapting to feedback from beneficiaries and other interested parties during operational delivery.
These elements are the five analysis systems, which are used in 5.5.1 to review the performance of each analysis area.ISO 22392 pdf download.