Resilience: A Simple Model for Measurement and Comparison Across Risk, Continuity, Response & Safety or Security

While there is an abundance of resilience definitions and contexts (including the growing use of the expression), there is routinely a dearth of fast, simple and succinct models or measurements upon which to rate and compare 'resilience' narratives, systems, structures and practice(s). That is, it remains far easier to declare, state or utilise the word resilience, but few are able to adequately and expediently explain or demonstrate what they mean, particularly when it comes to known and/or unknown threats, stressors, hazards and perils.

"We cannot see resilience independently of the stressors (threats).?"

(Aven & Thekdi, 2022)

In other words, resilience requires analysis, readiness and resourcefulness for BOTH foreseeable and unforeseen circumstances or occurrence(s).

"If we allow for unknown and surprising types of stressors, we cannot conclude in the same way, as there is no basis for making the probability judgments.??"

(Aven & Thekdi, 2022)

What does 'good' look like? What is 'normal'? Well, firstly, it must be defined and maintained as a point of comparison. In other words, you can't bounce back or forward if you don't articulate what your 'usual' or desired state looks or feels like. Everything that deviates from that state is a resilience demand and response.

Hence, resilience business/service continuity, crisis management, security risk management and recovery all share and contribute to overall 'resilience'.

Moreover, a single event may evolve and transition to varying states of disruption.

Regardless, a simple, expedient definition and explanation are required for all stakeholders.

Here is one for consideration:

"?It is common to consider different aspects of resilience, which include responding to regular and irregular threats in a robust yet flexible (adaptive) manner, monitoring what is going on, anticipating risk events and learning from experience?"

(Aven & Thekdi, 2022)

Knowledge, learning from direct and comparative instances are significant aspects of the model. That is, setting up 'resilience' in isolation is not resilience if not validated or considered in broader context of government, community, industry or community/neighbourhood(s).

In sum, resilience may be an increasingly popular term and vary in both definition and context, but a simple model for measurement and comparison is possible. As a start point.

Moreover, a universal template can be used to compare states, duration, timings and efficacy across contexts.

This is but one, but it remains one of the most simple, useful, fast, succinct and easily adaptable models I've seen in some time. It may be helpful to calibrate your own assumptions, systems and models from this baseline construct.

In short, resilience will remain ever elusive and opaque if not defined and categorised within organisations and across contexts.

This services as a simple, ready reckoner for stakeholders, practitioners and professionals at all levels. Triggers, timelines, threat intelligence, scales of vulnerability, etc can all be added and interwoven to this practical, applied model.

Ridley Tony

Risk, Resilience, Safety, Security & Management Sciences

Reference:

Aven, T. & Thekdi, S. (2022). Risk Science: An Introduction, Routledge, p.115-117