One thing I've found helpful is evaluating the speed and effectiveness of the response. If the disruption is handled swiftly and operations resume with minimal loss, the contingency plan worked well. Actually, I disagree with relying solely on cost savings to measure success. Sometimes, a slightly more expensive but faster recovery is better. An example is when a supplier fails, and a backup supplier steps in quickly. If deadlines are met and customer satisfaction remains intact, the contingency plan can be considered successful.

If you were able to deploy your contingency plan, it means the disruption wasn't major. If the disruption was critical, you had to act differently from your contingency plan. Take note of what worked and adapt not your contingency plan, but your organisation.