campusreview . com . au
ON CAMPUS
Mundane menace
Cyber security isn ’ t the only threat to universities .
By Greg Duncan
There has been significant discussion
in recent months around the increasing cyber risk in Australia . In August , the federal government released its own cyber security strategy and announced plans to invest $ 1.67 billion in cyber security initiatives over the next decade .
In early September the government ’ s first cyber threat assessment revealed malicious cyber activity against Australia is “ increasing in frequency , scale and sophistication ” to become the “ most significant threat in terms of overall volume and impact to individuals and businesses ”.
It announced an expansion of infrastructure deemed critical to include banking , health , food and “ data and the cloud ” and education . Such operators will be subject to “ enhanced cyber security rules ”.
Staying abreast of these risks is important for universities , yet it ’ s important that this discussion does not distract higher education executives from more common , costly yet admittedly mundane risks that could also cause serious damage to research , reputation and revenue .
After all , there ’ s much at stake . Australian universities have consistently punched above their weight on the international scene when it comes to research rankings . This performance has been supported by the billions of dollars in fees that international students have pumped into Australian universities . In turn , research
rankings feed enrolment demand , in a virtuous cycle .
A FLUID SITUATION These less headline-grabbing risks include flood , storm damage , water leakage and fire – and decentralisation of risk management , which is one of the more unique challenges impeding university risk management as a whole .
While in a shopping mall , a facilities manager may have oversight of all facilities , universities operate a rather unique model closer to the Australian federation of states and territories than to a typical organisation . Risk managers tend to work independently across faculties and even schools , which while effective in addressing localised risks , can cloud the executive ’ s line of sight to the most critical business risks across the organisation , which are often the most mundane .
This decentralisation can create inefficiencies in prioritising risks and allocating resources across the entire university . To avoid this , universities must view risk at a higher level to understand , prioritise and then manage those risks that can result in the biggest losses to the university as a whole .
Water leaks can and do quickly cause dramatic damage , ruining vital equipment . Liquid damage causes 42 per cent of all losses across FM Global ’ s global client base , a fact which is reflected in the university sector where it also represents the largest cause of loss .
Even relatively small leaks can cause severe losses as liquid flows throughout buildings , damaging property but also critical equipment and information . It can lead to mould , and cause delays in business-critical activities such as research until costly and time-consuming cleanup and restoration are complete .
Fire , meanwhile , accounts for 16 per cent of losses across FM Global ’ s client base globally , and 17 per cent of losses in the university sector , and flood / surface water damage amounts to 33 per cent .
CRITICAL EXPOSURES To reduce the frequency and severity of water leakage-related loss , universities should develop a cohesive plan that takes the entire organisation and all of its campuses into account . Developing this should begin by keeping a regularly updated record of which rooms fall into the critical room category . Critical rooms are those which have high operational impact and house valuable contents that cannot be easily replaced , such as research labs .
The next step is to ensure that there are regular inspections undertaken of the building envelope around these critical rooms , to catch any potential leakages and take steps to reduce the likelihood of water entering the building . A robust maintenance program that tests water valves and drains , among other risk areas , should also be developed and followed .
Lastly , while preparation is proven time and time again to reduce the likelihood of loss , it can still happen . An effective response plan will allow the university to bounce back faster from liquid damage . Any plan should include having an emergency response team which is trained on a semi-annual basis on the key steps they need to carry out , a list of critical vendors for the building – including electrical , HVAC , elevator and plumbing – and identifying alternative spaces where critical work can be carried out , or room contents stored if a leak does occur .
In the case of fire , it ’ s critical to maintain smoke detection and fire alarm systems in accordance with the manufacturers ’ instructions and maintain automatic sprinkler systems by testing water flow alarms and conducting valve inspections . Emergency response plans should ideally be updated , communicated and conducted on a regular basis .
News headlines are certainly one way to stay on top of risk trends – but they rarely tell the whole story . In fact , they can distract from the bigger picture and the more mundane threats that data tells us come back to bite universities time and again .
By identifying , making preparations for and mitigating risks like water leakage and fire , universities will be taking priceless steps to protect research , reputation and revenue at a time when it ’ s never been more critical . ■
Greg Duncan is operations vice president at FM Global Australia .
25