Close Menu
  • Home
  • Managing resilience
    • AI resilience
    • Business continuity
    • Business resilience
    • Climate resilience
    • C-suite and the board
    • DORA – the EU Digital Operational Resilience Act
    • Operational resilience
    • Organizational resilience
    • Supply chain resilience
    • Technology
  • Risk
    • Enterprise risk management
    • Operational risk
    • Threatscape
  • Cyber resilience
    • Cyber resilience updates
    • DORA – the EU Digital Operational Resilience Act
    • Product updates
More items
  • All News
  • Research
  • Jobs in Resilience
  • Resilience Resources
  • About Resilience Forward
X (Twitter) LinkedIn
  • Home
  • Managing resilience
    • AI resilience
    • Business continuity
    • Business resilience
    • Climate resilience
    • C-suite and the board
    • DORA – the EU Digital Operational Resilience Act
    • Operational resilience
    • Organizational resilience
    • Supply chain resilience
    • Technology
  • Risk
    • Enterprise risk management
    • Operational risk
    • Threatscape
  • Cyber resilience
    • Cyber resilience updates
    • DORA – the EU Digital Operational Resilience Act
    • Product updates
Login
LinkedIn Bluesky
Resilience Forward
Subscribe Now
  • All News
  • Research
  • Jobs in Resilience
  • Resilience Resources
  • About Resilience Forward
Resilience Forward
You are at:Home»Managing resilience»Business continuity»Microsoft outage demonstrates the realities of concentration risks (Page 24)
Business continuity

Microsoft outage demonstrates the realities of concentration risks

November 13, 20265 Mins Read
Error page: 'This site can't be reached' message from a browser, indicating connection closed and suggesting checks (reload button visible).

Business continuity and resilience professionals need little introduction to concentration risk. The prolonged Microsoft 365 outage, which is still ongoing at the time of writing, nevertheless brings home what the term means in practice: organizations around the world depending on the same supplier’s ubiquitous services, with very limited control over recovery when shared infrastructure fails.

By Microsoft’s 07:29 UTC update on 13 November, disruption was continuing into a second day, more than 15 hours after the recorded start of the Exchange Online incident. Microsoft reported encouraging results from a patch, but restoration remained incomplete. A multi-region incident lasting this long is an exceptional disruption that challenges the usual assumptions that an organization of Microsoft’s strength will be able to achieve rapid recovery from downtime.

The breadth of the impact brings home the reality of concentration risk. Dependencies on Exchange Online affected functions across collaboration, security, compliance, and AI services. Core Teams calls and chats, and direct access to SharePoint files, remained available. Nevertheless, the incident demonstrates how apparently separate applications can share dependencies that allow one failure to disrupt multiple business activities.

Immediate resilience options are limited. An organization cannot simply transfer its integrated Microsoft environment to another provider during an outage. Where alternative arrangements have not been prepared, the practical response is to use surviving functions, invoke manual workarounds, and wait.

Some organizations have a different exposure. Smaller businesses using independently hosted IMAP email can retain mailbox access, while organizations using Google Workspace can continue activities supported by that platform, provided access does not depend on affected Microsoft services. The protection comes from independent infrastructure, rather than IMAP itself: IMAP can also connect to Microsoft-hosted mailboxes. Neither group is insulated from delays involving affected customers, suppliers, or other partners.

Crises within a crisis

The outage also highlights a lesson about ‘crises within a crisis’. An organization managing a separate incident during the outage could have found its response hampered if it relied on Outlook for crisis communications. Organizations hosting business continuity plans in SharePoint seem to have been lucky, this time, with direct access to SharePoint files apparently remaining available in this incident, but the wider question still applies: how would incident managers cope if the platform holding their business continuity plans became inaccessible?

Business continuity plans therefore need their own continuity arrangements. Independent communication and storage channels, current offline copies of plans and contact lists, and exercises that assume the usual response tools are unavailable should be considered. A plan that depends on the same services that it is intended to help the organization cope without has an obvious flaw!

Future resilience for concentration risk

The more difficult question will come after the Microsoft restoration. Will organizations consider backup platforms for future failover, or will they place prolonged cloud outages in the ‘too difficult’ box and accept the consequences?

For many, the latter will be the likely decision. Maintaining alternative platforms brings costs, administrative demands, and complexity, including complications around data, security, and staff familiarity. Integration delivers substantial everyday benefits, while the value of an alternative will remain largely invisible until it is needed.

But the choice need not be between duplicating the entire technology estate and accepting complete dependence. A proportionate fallback might preserve independent crisis communications, access to essential information, and a limited set of critical activities. It must be prepared and exercised: another subscription alone is not a usable business continuity capability.

The responsibility of business continuity and resilience professionals is to make that decision explicit. Which activities can stop, for how long, and with what consequences? What would a workable fallback cost, and who has authority to accept the remaining exposure?

For many organizations, the answer may still be the ‘too difficult’ box. That should follow an informed assessment and an accountable decision. When a supplier’s services become integral to everyday operations, accepting its recovery timetable is itself a resilience choice.

The author

David Honour is editor of Resilience Forward.

Industry comments on the Microsoft outage

Comments sent to Resilience Forward include:

Simon Azzopardi, CEO of CoreView

“The delay in tracing the Microsoft outage to a configuration change is noteworthy. Early on, Microsoft said that no recent change correlated with the impact. Several hours later, however, it reported that a network configuration change did correlate with the outage. If an organization with Microsoft’s resources and telemetry needs that long to connect a change to its impact, most businesses will struggle to understand what changed in their tenant and when. 

“Businesses can’t control Microsoft’s infrastructure. But they can control their own tenant. That means knowing exactly how it is configured, tracking every change made to it, and being able to restore it to a known good state quickly.

“As services recover, IT teams should do three things. Confirm that security and compliance controls such as data loss prevention, sensitivity labelling, and Intune compliance policies are working as intended. Review every emergency change made during the outage, because workarounds made under pressure tend to become permanent gaps. And treat delayed email with extra caution: Microsoft warned that Safe Links might not be able to check URLs during the disruption, and attackers routinely use outages as cover.”

“Our sympathy goes out to every IT team that has spent their time keeping their organization running without email, calendars and, in many cases, their security and compliance tools.”


Aiden Sinnott, Principal Threat Researcher at Sophos Counter Threat Unit

“Although the Microsoft outage is not a cyber security issue, bad actors will be looking to take advantage of concerned individuals, offering a resolution or assurances. At this time, even more so than usual, people should exercise caution when receiving emails, texts or calls purporting to be from Microsoft or other affected businesses, particularly banks or shops. Be aware of requests for urgent action, sharing of personal information and avoid clicking on links sent via message or email.”

Africa Asia Asia Pacific Australasia Europe Middle East North America UK
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email WhatsApp
Previous ArticleFrom hype to control: AI security, risk management, and governance in 2027
Next Article Organizations are being forced to rethink resilience strategies, finds State of IT Infrastructure Resilience study

Related Posts

A group of rabbits happily graze while a wolf watches, hidden in the bushes behind them.

Confidence in resilience is outpacing reality, according to new report

November 13, 2026
An upward trending arrow.

Organizations are being forced to rethink resilience strategies, finds State of IT Infrastructure Resilience study

November 13, 2026
The numbers 2027 with the 0 replaced with an AI symbol.

From hype to control: AI security, risk management, and governance in 2027

November 13, 2026
Geopolitical risks

Geopolitical conflict is increasingly reshaping how organizations manage people, operations, and risk

November 9, 2026
Abstract network of interconnected nodes and lines in blue.

Everbridge publishes its 2027 Global Risk & Resilience Outlook

November 9, 2026
AI agent in action concept.

Lack of clear activity baselines makes it harder to manage AI agent resilience and security

November 9, 2026
Advertisement
Resilience First
This week's most read articles
AI agent in action concept.

Lack of clear activity baselines makes it harder to manage AI agent resilience and security

November 9, 2026
Two different jigsaw pieces.

KPMG Risk & Resilience Survey finds that half of organizations have yet to integrate risk and resilience management

March 12, 2025
Error page: 'This site can't be reached' message from a browser, indicating connection closed and suggesting checks (reload button visible).

Microsoft outage demonstrates the realities of concentration risks

November 13, 2026
Latest resources
An exploding digital padlock illustrates the requirement for post-quantum cryptography.

Board briefing: preparing for the post-quantum era

November 27, 2025
Load More

Subscribe to Updates

Get our Resilience Updates newsletter.

Most Popular Feature Articles
Five stage crisis management framework

A five stage framework for a crisis management process

Three dark coloured light bulbs on a black background illustrate the concept of The Dark Triad in Crisis Management.

The Dark Triad in crisis management

Blue interconnected gears and network nodes symbolizing automation and complex machinery.

Agent zero – the 2028 digital pandemic

Latest Reports
An AI agent icon lying on its side with eyes shut showing the concept of a deactivated agent.

New report reveals major operational resilience gaps in agentic AI adoption

Two hands form a rectangular frame around the sun in a bright sky over distant mountains.

BCI Future of Resilience Report points to a more strategic future for resilience

Global risks concept

UN report warns that the global risk landscape is being redrawn

A promo box for an article about resilience governance.
© 2026 Resilience Forward
  • About Resilience Forward
  • Newsletter
  • Newsfeed
  • Advertise
  • Call for Papers
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Cookie Use
  • AI Use Policy

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}
Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}
Ad Blocker Enabled!
Ad Blocker Enabled!
Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please support us by disabling your Ad Blocker.

Sign In or Register

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below.

Lost password?