Proceedings of the International scientific and practical conference ―Paris Science and Education Forum‖ (March 2-4, 2026) / Publisher website: www.naukainfo.com. – Paris, France, 2026. - 293 p.

9 and information security, highlighting the dependence of continuity outcomes on the recoverability of ICT services; the gap is that many organizations still treat ICT readiness as an IT problem, while crisis conditions require a strategy-level integration where ICT recovery objectives, cyber incident response, and business priorities are governed as one system. In work [4], Awang Ali et al. provide a systematic literature review of BCM practices in SMEs and propose an integrated perspective connecting planned and adaptive resilience with organizational performance; the limitation is that adoption patterns are mapped more strongly than the operational ―how,‖ especially regarding digitally enabled continuity (automation, cloud dependencies, third-party risk telemetry) and the governance mechanisms that turn BCM into a repeatable strategic capability rather than a documentation exercise. In work [5], Loyarte proposes a Continuity Governance model as an additional stage within BCM standards, explicitly addressing governance as a missing link between BCM processes and effective organizational decision-making; the remaining gap for crisis development is how governance should be instrumented with measurable triggers, resilience KPIs, and digital evidence so that continuity decisions become timely, auditable, and aligned with strategic priorities. In work [6], Goldstein reviews BCM lessons learned from COVID-19 and argues that established best practices must evolve across the BCM lifecycle to reflect changed risk landscapes and operating realities; the gap is that lifecycle improvements are discussed primarily in programmatic terms, while enterprises still lack a robust method to convert lessons learned into continuous control loops with explicit thresholds and portfolio-level choices under ongoing turbulence. In work [7], Russo proposes a structured BCM self-assessment system designed to unify BCM components into an adaptable, standards-aligned approach; the gap is that self-assessment improves diagnosis of readiness but does not by itself define how continuity maturity should drive development decisions (e.g., when to scale digital dependence, reshape supply networks, or change operating models) under crisis regimes. In work [8], Conz and Magnani conceptualize firm resilience as a dynamic process with a time dimension (absorption and adaptation) and provide a framework for future research; the gap is