What is Organisational Resilience? A Leaders Guide.

Organisational Resilience- a two-part equation. In this article I will demystify what we call resilience and how leaders and people practitioners build competitive differentiation through understanding and building organisational resilience.

Resilience and organisational performance are a well-known but fuzzy link. Resilience is a moderator of an organisation’s performance. Low levels of resilience lead at best lead to disengagement and loss of discretionary effort, at worst can lead to burn out, absence of key capabilities and neglect of a basic component for an organisation to protect its employees from harm. In this article for leaders and people practitioners I will clarify some of the definitions used and set out a model for practitioners to view, diagnose and develop an organisations resilience.

In my experience, Organisational Resilience, is often focussed on an individual’s ability to maintain performance within stressful environments. To help, organisations provide employees with tools, support and training to boost the aggregate level of employee resilience.Very little attention is played to the other side of the equation- the environment that an individual operates within. Organisations do surveys and will look to diagnose, but there is very little impactful follow through on those diagnosies.

Within very similar competitive environments, even within same companies we see disparate differences in work related mental health absence (one quantitative indicator of an organisations resilience). Is it more likely that these areas of high absence have less resilient individuals, or, is it more likely that the unique culture within that environment is producing more stressors?

Organisational resilience can be defined as “the mountainous of positive adjustment under challenging conditions such that the organization emerges from those conditions strengthened and more resourceful”(Fasey, 2020.) . Mustafar Sarkar in a podcast titled?Resilience in people and organisatons?talks about resilience being the “interaction between the person and the environment”. This is that resilience is context specific and can change over time or between situations. It is not a fixed over-arching trait where someone can be holistically described as ‘resilient’(Jackson & Sarkar, 2020). This is not to say that some people don’t have psychological characteristics that acts as mediators to resilience. This can be defined as where ‘resilience’ differs to other characteristics such as ‘Hardiness’ and ‘Mental Toughness’. These are more person specific traits where-as ‘Resilience’ is a contextual and varying relationship an individual experiences with an environment(Robertson et al., 2015).

This more valuable and holistic interpretation of resilience can be simplified as three variables into an organisations resilience- 1) the external market or “challenging conditions” an organisation operates within, 2) the organisations choices in meeting these “challenging conditions” and 3) the resilience of individuals that operate and service the challenges faced by the market viewed through the organisations choices.

Many companies have done a fair job at tackling number 3. In that creating various training, awareness, tools and support around mental health and individual resilience. This is both to be celebrated but only as a partial fix. With variance even within organisations and markets, the bigger variance in an organisations ability to emerge from challenging conditions may be the organisations choices as expressed and experienced through its culture and climate. The definition of culture “can be summerized as the commonly held and relatively stable beliefs and attitudes that exist within an organization”(Cheung-Judge, 2021) whereas climate is “the pervading feeling or emotions associated with the particular work environment” (Organizational Culture and Climate: What Are the Differences? - Glassdoor Career Guides. Accessed April 2021). Simply put Culture is the shared beliefs and narratives that drive decisions & behaviours, and climate is how people describe their experiences of that environment. In this piece I shall focus on culture as opposed to climate as the shared beliefs, values and narratives of an organisation drive its choice on how it reacts to external market forces.

Let’s look at the two sides of the simplified equation when market conditions are held as equal, organisational resilience= employee resilience + organisational culture.

First, the more researched is individual resilience. Resilience can be defined as “the kind of self-belief that enables a person to recover quickly from setbacks and to remain focused and positive in the face of difficult or potentially stressful circumstances”(Burke & Coppoer, 2016). Another commonly used term is ‘Mental Toughness’, this can be defined as “The quality which determines in large part how people deal effectively with challenge, stressors and pressure...irrespective of prevailing circumstances.”(Clough & Strycharczyk, 2012).

Clough & Strycharczyk (2012) go on to define 4 characteristics to both measure and develop an individual’s Mental Toughness using the MTQ48 assessment. The MTQ48 assessment was designed to answer 4 questions

• Why do some people handle stressors, pressures and challenge well and others don’t?
• Can we measure where people have strengths and weaknesses in these matters?
• Can we do something to improve ‘mental toughness’ in people to improve their performance?
• Can we evaluate the effectives of interventions that are all claimed to be effective?

All very useful questions that as a practitioner I have asked and been asked by leaders. Clough & Strycharczyk (2012) developed the 4 C model to measure individuals’ strengths and weaknesses in 4 key areas that influence an individual’s capacity to maintain their ability to perform at the higher end or their potential-

1.?Control- the extent to which a person feels they are in control of their life. This is similar to “Locus of Control” (Rotter, 1954), with a spectrum at one end where people feel their inputs matter and have an influence on the outcome, through to, their inputs are of little importance and have no influence on the outcome. Control is broken down in to two sub areas- Emotional Control, this is the control we have over displaying controlling our emotions and managing anxiety; and, Life Control which is a measure of self-worth and the belief we have in how much we shape what happens to us. Environments where people have continuous extreme low control can lead to learned helplessness. Where it doesn’t matter what I do, it always goes wrong. Why bother, it doesn’t make a difference. Emotional Control is also linked to one of the Big Five psychometric dimension of Neuroticism.

2. Commitment-?the persistence and focus an individual will give will towards achieving a goal or task.

3. Challenge- the ability to see challenge as an opportunity and not a threat. This is linked to concepts such as Carol Dwecks ‘Growth Mindset’. We will find in some situations individuals who thrive with challenges, excited to climb that hill, run the marathon or challenge the market with a new product. This could be underpinned by someone being curious or individual’s competitiveness.

4. Confidence- based on the same abilities individuals high in confidence will believe they can successfully complete tasks more than individuals with low confidence but equal ability. When faced with setbacks those higher in confidence will maintain their belief whereas those low in confidence may feel defeated and give up. Within Confidence there was also two subscales identified. Confidence (Abilities)- individuals high in this area believe they are a worthwhile person and rely less on external validation. Confidence (Interpersonal)- individuals high in this area are more assertive and will promote themselves. Areas such as self-efficacy are linked to this.

The four areas set out by Clough & Strycharczyk (2012)- Control, Commitment, Challenge and Confidence are trainable and recognisable in oneself as context specific. When looking to develop individual’s resilience then there are many tools and techniques in these areas available to help build individuals abilities to deal with short term environmental stressors.

The UK based Wellbeing Project has developed the Wraw (Wraw Technical Manual, 2018)another well validated assessment that expands on the 4 areas set out in the MTQ48.

1. Energy- “Sustaining and renewing physical energy to have the capacity to keep going through challenging times”. This is the holistic measure of a person’s lifestyle and how it contributes to an individual’s resilience, including eating habits, sleep and physical activity. A person with healthy eating habits, having good sleep patterns, maintains work boundaries and who undertakes physical activities are all linked with levels of resilience.
2. Future Focus- “Having a clear sense or purpose and direction to help move forwards without getting stuck or feeling held back”. The two subscales are “Purpose” and “Personal Control”. Personal Control specifically overlapping with the 4C’s “Life Control” subscale.
3. Inner Drive- “Sustaining self-belief when times get tough, displaying confidence, motivation and perseverance”. Here it is broken into 2 subscales of “Motivation” and “Self-belief”. This overlaps with the 4C’s “Confidence”. Areas such as self-efficacy are shown that people with high self-efficacy are more likely to maintain effort in the face of challenges. Self-efficacy can be developed through the careful exposure to ever more challenging environments. Maintaining individuals in the optimal challenge zone (Mandigo & Holt, 2002) is the perfect location to balance challenge and capabilities. Only by supparsing their optimal zone where challenge outstrips capabilities, self- efficacy will reduce.
4. Flexible Thinking- “Having an open and optimistic mindset, enabling a positive and adaptive response to changes and challenges”. This is then broken down into two subscales “Open Minded” and Positive Framing”. Here again Carol Dweck’s ‘Growth Mindset’ explores how individuals can frame challenges more positively. Coaching techniques and behavioural therapy all being tools to help individuals develop in the space (Wraw Technical Manual, 2018) .
5. Strong Relationships- “Building open and trusting relationships and being willing to call on these for help and support if facing a challenge”. This is then broken down into two subscales “Building Trust” and “Accessing Support”. Strong Relationships was also picked up as “Perceived Social Support” (Sarkar & Fletcher, 2014) in high achievers. This like the first area “Energy” expands on individual characteristics and more on the environment the person finds themselves in and more dynamic characteristics. In life our health and social circumstances change as we move roles, organisations or even countries. Our health changes as we age, gain injuries or lifestyle changes that disrupt patterns all affecting our resilience.

No individual no matter how much control they have, commitment to the goal, enjoyment of challenge, confidence in their ability, healthy habits and vast support networks can weather sustained stress. The dynamic and variable nature of these individuals circumstances that support an individual’s resilience will mean for large complex organisations that require multiple individuals to perform at high standards, leaving the ability for people to perform consistently at the peak of their performance to a lottery is not a route to sustained competitive advantage. This is where measuring and acting on organisational stress is needed. What are the characteristics that create the broadest performance window for individuals to thrive within?

The first thing to consider is that organisational resilience is also dynamic and context specific. In that even within the same team individuals will experience that local culture differently based on their individual differences, external stressors from home life and their values and belief systems. But there may be certain hygiene factors much like Herzberg’s motivational theory that need to be in place. The first place to look for these could be where organisations create barriers for the individual characteristics set out above to be achieved.

Energy- are organisations allowing and creating positive incentives for individuals to lead healthy lifestyles. Aside from gym memberships & healthy canteen options are people given and encouraged to take time away from work to creating healthy eating, activity and sleeping habits. The always on culture is already creating the average worker to be doing an additional 7.5hrs of un-paid work (THE RIGHT TO DISCONNECT, 2021), with more meetings and the multiple digital communication platforms making it difficult to disconnect.

Future Focus- do individuals and teams have clear understanding of their responsibilities, the desired outcomes of those responsibilities, the means and tools to deliver them. These are basic organisational responsibilities but although simple to understand, are hard to execute in environments that are less predictable or under resourced. We see annually low completion on objective management, little thought put into how to organise organisations outside of printing 2 dimensional structures. With too much work, too little resources everything becomes urgent, overwhelming and leads to people losing their feeling of control and focus.

Inner Drive- in high stress environments where people are at the edge of their edges of their performance, are we also providing high support. Only in a high challenge environment that is supported by a high support environment will people thrive. This requires the correct selection of individuals, matching capabilities to demands whilst providing coaching and mentoring to provide the scaffolding around new learning experiences.

Flexible Thinking- do we create psychologically safe environments that allow for the exploration of new views or different accounts. Do organisations allow themselves to be wrong? There is a paradox that organisations need to manage- the more specialised and adapted to an environment they become the harder it is to adapt to new or emerging changes.

Strong Relationships-?The requirement to have perceived support for individuals is driven both by the organisational culture around teams vs individuals as well as leadership values. Here areas such as narcissistic leadership traits can be especially toxic. In a research piece it was found that in the group of CEO’s surveyed, 18% displayed behaviours that would be experienced as narcissistic vs in the general population around 5% (Tayan, 2021). Organisational culture and traditional held beliefs over what leaders look like often cross over with Narcissistic behaviours. People mistake confidence for competence (Chamorro- Premuzic, 2013) allowing those with inflated confidence to flourish. Narcissists have an unrelentless desire to succeed, sacrifice all things in their lives in the pursuit of success, can charm and acquire resources in the pursuit of these goals. The downside and often self- resulting destruction of these attributes is the psychological stress it causes on those around them and the behaviours in leadership it encourages around them (Lubit, 2016).

In industries where resources demand out strips supply (most knowledge based industries) then creating a culture where people can not only survive but thrive is a route to competitive differentiation. In each of our decisions and choices we make in building & leading teams or organisations. How are our decisions creating a

???

References

Burke, R. J., & Coppoer, C. L. (2016).?The Fulfilling Workplace- The Organizations Role in Achieving Individual and Organizational Health. Routledge.

Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2013).?Why Do So Many Incompetent Men Become Leaders??Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2013/08/why-do-so-many-incompetent-men

Cheung-Judge, M.-Y. H. L. (2021).?Organization Development: A Practioner’s guide for OD and HR?(3rd ed.). Kogan Page.

Clough, P., & Strycharczyk, D. (2012).?Developing Mental Toughness. Kogan Page. Fasey, K. (2020). ORGANIZATIONAL RESILIENCE IN ELITE SPORT.?Psychology of Sport & Exercise.

Jackson, P., & Sarkar, M. (2020, April 6).?Resilience in people and organisations- Dr Mustafa Sarkar. https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/resilience-in-people-and-organisations-dr-mustafa-sarkar/id1506560750?i=1000470629088

Lubit, R. (2016). The Emotional Intelligence Response to Coping with Narcissim. In R. J. Burke & C. L. Cooper (Eds.),?The Fulfilling Workplace?(pp. 151–161). Routledge. Mandigo, J. L., & Holt, N. L. (2002).?Putting theory into practice : Enhancing motivation through OPTIMAL strategies?(Vol. 8, Issue 3).

Organizational Culture and Climate: What are the Differences? - Glassdoor Career Guides.(2021). https://www.glassdoor.com/blog/guide/climate-vs-culture/

Robertson, I. T., Cooper, C. L., Sarkar, M., & Curran, T. (2015). Resilience training in the workplace from 2003 to 2014: A systematic review.?Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology,?88(3), 533–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12120 Sarkar, M., & Fletcher, D. (2014). Supplemental Material for Ordinary Magic, Extraordinary Performance: Psychological Resilience and Thriving in High Achievers.?Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/spy0000003.supp

Tayan, B. (2021, October 25).?Are Narcissistic CEOs All That Bad??Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2021/10/25/are-narcissistic-ceos-all-that-bad/

THE RIGHT TO DISCONNECT. (2021).

Wraw Technical manual. (2018). https://wrawindex.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Technical-Manual.FINAL_.pdf