“We’ll Figure It Out…” Why That Assumption Fails During an Incident

Click here to view/listen to our blogcast.

Most organizations do not believe they are unprepared for an incident. They believe they are flexible. There is an unspoken assumption that if something serious happens, smart people will step in, ask the right questions, and figure out what to do. In theory, this sounds reasonable. In practice, it is one of the most dangerous assumptions an organization can make. Incident response efforts rarely fail because people are careless – they fail because pressure, ambiguity, and urgency collide at the same time.

Incident Response Plans vs. SOPs: A Critical Distinction

Before discussing why “we’ll figure it out” fails during an incident, it is important to clarify a common and costly misunderstanding: Incident Response Plans (IRPs) and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) serve very different purposes.

• SOPs describe how routine work is performed under normal conditions. SOPs assume systems are available, approvals can be obtained, and communication channels function as expected. They guide staff through known, repeatable tasks.
• IRPs define when normal work stops and formal response begins. An IRP is activated when assumptions break down, information is incomplete, or time pressure makes independent decision-making risky. It does not attempt to prescribe every action. Instead, it establishes triggers, escalation paths, and coordination rules so the organization can respond deliberately rather than reactively.

In short, SOPs guide execution, while IRPs govern escalation and control. Confusing the two leads organizations to believe they are prepared because procedures exist, while in reality no one knows when to stop following procedures and raise the alarm. That gap is where “we’ll figure it out” quietly becomes the default response.

Why “We’ll Figure It Out” Breaks Down in Practice

During an incident, several things happen simultaneously:

• Information is incomplete or contradictory.
• Messages arrive quickly from multiple directions.
• Normal communication channels may be unreliable.
• Authority and accountability become unclear.
• People hesitate, fearing they might overreact.

In these conditions, even experienced staff revert to instinct, habit, or silence. The result is not malicious behavior. It is delay, confusion, and inconsistent actions. Organizations that rely on “we’ll figure it out” are not unprepared technically. They are unprepared psychologically and procedurally.

What Defines an Incident Response Plan

A well-designed incident response plan answers a narrow and critical question: When does individual judgment give way to coordinated response? An IRP defines:

• When staff must stop acting independently.
• Who must be notified and in what order.
• When leadership, IT, finance, or legal must be involved.
• How communication is coordinated internally and externally.

The IRP does not replace SOPs. It governs when SOPs are no longer sufficient.

The Role of Triggers in Incident Response

Triggers are the most important and most frequently missing element in incident response planning. Without clear triggers, staff are forced to guess whether something is “serious enough” to escalate. That hesitation is where incidents grow. Effective IRPs define objective escalation triggers such as:

• Suspected credential compromise.
• Requests involving sensitive data under unusual timing or pressure.
• Security alerts that cannot be confidently explained.
• Any event where verification steps fail or are unavailable.
• Unusual or urgent requests originating from internal email accounts that fall outside normal patterns or approvals.

Once a trigger is met, escalation is automatic. No debate. No second-guessing.

Why Triggers Matter More Than Procedures

SOPs assume normal conditions. Incidents, by definition, are abnormal. During an incident:

• Verification systems may be unavailable.
• Approvers may be unreachable.
• Security tools may produce incomplete data.
• Staff may be pressured to act quickly “just this once.”

Triggers remove isolated personal judgment from the equation. They allow staff to say: “This meets the criteria. I escalate.” That clarity protects both the organization and the individual.

The Cost of Ambiguity

When escalation criteria are unclear, organizations experience predictable failures:

• Staff delay escalation to avoid bothering leadership.
• Multiple teams act independently without coordination.
• Finance, IT, and operations work from different assumptions.
• Leadership learns about incidents after damage occurs.
• Post-incident reviews reveal that warning signs were noticed but not acted on.

These failures are not caused by incompetence. They are caused by systems that expect improvisation under pressure.

What Effective Incident Response Looks Like

Organizations with mature incident response planning behave differently:

• Staff escalate early without fear of blame.
• Leadership engagement happens sooner, not later.
• Communication follows predefined paths.
• Decisions are documented as they occur.
• Containment begins even when facts are incomplete.

Most importantly, escalation is treated as responsible behavior, not disruption.

How CDML Can Help

Incident response planning is not just an IT exercise – it’s an organizational agreement about how uncertainty is handled. CDML Computer Services helps organizations:

• Define clear, realistic incident response triggers.
• Separate SOPs from escalation and response governance.
• Align IT, finance, and leadership expectations.
• Assist in documenting roles, responsibilities, and communication paths.
• Test plans against realistic scenarios.
• Train staff to recognize when escalation is required.

Our goal is to prevent incidents wherever possible through technology, strong controls, governance, and procedures, while recognizing that no organization can guarantee 100% prevention. Incident response plans exist to ensure that when prevention fails, hesitation, confusion, and silent failure do not make the outcome worse.

Final Thoughts

“We’ll figure it out” sounds flexible, but during an incident it often means that no one is quite sure what to do. Incident response planning is not about predicting every possible scenario. It is about removing uncertainty when pressure is highest and giving people permission to pause, verify, and escalate without fear of blame or disruption. If you are not confident that your organization has clear guidance for handling suspicious requests, payment changes, or impersonation attempts, that uncertainty itself is a risk.

CDML Computer Services works with organizations to assess incident response readiness, improve staff awareness, align response plans with cyber insurance requirements, and build practical processes that hold up under real-world pressure. If you would like help evaluating your current readiness or strengthening your incident response plan, we encourage you to reach out and start the conversation before an incident forces the issue.

Stay safe. Stay informed. Stay compliant.

📞 Contact us here: https://cdml.com/contact/
📚 Read more on our blog: https://cdml.com/blog-2
📺 Listen to our blogcasts: https://www.youtube.com/@CDMLComputerServices