To say that an individual or an organization is “resilient” is both positive and also inspiring in terms of tugging at emotions. The entire “Rocky” movie franchise was certainly based on a central story of a resilient fighter who can take punch after punch both in life and in the ring, and yet continue to stand up again and fight. In the business world, there are also ample examples of companies that seem to demonstrate resilience in terms of spanning decades of time and changes, or in terms of resilience in the face of huge market shifts or disruptive technologies. Is “resilience” the proper goal for any organization to seek? Is there some state of being that is even beyond resilient? What about organizations that are not resilient at all? What can you do to make sure your organization is indeed resilient and even beyond resilient?

Defining Resilience
Perhaps the place to begin is just to examine the meaning of “resilience.” Psychology Today defines resilience as:

” . . . that ineffable quality that allows some people to be knocked down by life and come back stronger than ever. Rather than letting failure overcome them and drain their resolve, they find a way to rise from the ashes.”

Resilience is, by definition, and individual or entity that is irrepressible, expansive, and that has the ability to bounce back (springy or supple). An individual or organization that is resilient finds a way to take the punches and the adversity presented, and rise up again to live and survive. There is no doubt that each of us aspires to be resilient in life and any leader of an organization would want to champion resilience for their organization. However, I would like to explore some of the subtleties of this proposition and also suggest a state that exists beyond resilience.

Resilience as Survival
What about companies that are not resilient? All organizations seek survival.  This is a basic instinct of course and quite necessary. However, organizations approaching resiliency as only survival are going to fall short. It’s not uncommon for an organization to view resiliency as the ability to survive but in the end, many organizations survive only as the same organization and thus, do not learn (e.g., understand and act differently) and grow to face cyclical challenges, disruptive technologies, or opportunities any differently. Whereas, rising from the ashes may conjure up the Greek mythological image and the story of the phoenix that miraculously rises from the ashes again, that phoenix is reborn a phoenix. Perhaps a new image and story to consider is another creature born in Greek mythology, the Hydra. When one head of a Hydra is cut off, two grow in its place creating a new more powerful creature.

Organizations do survive many things, but how many organizations, like the Hydra, have the ability to grow stronger, create new opportunities, to change direction and course of action when encountering threatening situations, market chaos, shifting competitive forces, or disruptive technologies or events?

Resiliency and the Ability to Thrive
Scanning the history of the corporate world, you can find examples of a type of behavior that goes beyond resilience to a level better defined as the ability to “thrive” despite difficulties or perceived obstacles. Apple found itself in a competitive computer hardware and software market, and survived not by just being the same company, but thrived by completely changing course, creating an entirely new, and not so obvious, market for that company with the iPod, and then the iPhone and iPad.

What about IBM? IBM is another example of a company entrenched in the hardware industry that answered the challenges of the commoditization of hardware and the competitive server market by successfully shifting focus to services and OEM products to find new growth. We could go down a list including GE and Ford Motor Company as well as others that have not only demonstrated resilience, but also demonstrated the ability to morph, to shift focus, to grow “new heads” so to speak. So, what can you do to create an organization that can not only be resilient, but also thrive?

Creating an Organization to Thrive
As I introduced the Corporate Life Cycle model, I suggested that when a company begins to age, the organization starts de-emphasizing the entrepreneurial spirit and activity within that organization. This is the primary driver of aging in an organization along with the growing dominance of the administrative and integration forces at work. The organization grows more and more “institutional,” with a tendency to grow more rigid, more committed to past methods, more zealous regarding their processes and systems, and thus, more brittle or fragile. This does not dismiss the need for the administrative or integration forces, but does suggest that those latter forces without the continued emphasis on encouraging entrepreneurial activity and thinking, will cause an organization to list to the side of rigidity, caution, protectionist thinking, financially driven decision making, and less investment of time, energy, and resources on entrepreneurial activity.

Those leanings may assist an organization in surviving through cost management, restructuring, pricing actions, and robust sales management; however, an organization in that situation will likely not have a clear vision of how to innovate and create new opportunities. Those organizations will likely lose highly entrepreneurial individuals as they better opportunities that that value and encourage their “E”. The result is predictable in that these organizations will ultimately lack the “E” (entrepreneurial thinking and activity) to change their course and create new markets or new market opportunities.

This is where core learning organization capabilities enter into the picture. Investing in a learning organization is investing in creating an environment that is an incubator for new ideas, innovation, creativity, and entrepreneurial thinking. A learning organization welcomes chaos, welcomes failure, welcomes experimentation, and fosters systems thinking that fully considers the forces at work within the external and internal environment.

If you want to invest in your organization’s ability to thrive and not just survive or be resilient, consider investing to create an organization that demonstrates some of the following characteristics:

  • Leadership encourages and clearly demonstrates (walks the talk) open, honest dialog, welcoming welcome the challenges of ideas to make them better, welcoming the destruction of “sacred cows” when appropriate, and welcoming new ideas from any level in the organization.
  • Everyone would say that his or her “voice” is heard.
  • Proper investment of resources is allocated to ensure that internal and external data is readily available and shared widely (market research, customer feedback, social data, market share, financial, etc.)
  • There is consistent cross-functional and cross-division interaction and discussion, and commitment to sharing best practices between business units, divisions, departments, etc.
  • Emphasis is given to “asking the right questions” over “giving the right answers.”
  • Leadership is well trained in facilitating and teaching holistic, systems-thinking when interpreting data, information, and experiences to ensure that both short-term and long-term forces and options are clearly visible and evaluated (if the organization truly relies on the thinking of a few, or intuition of a few, and then pushes decisions top-down, then creativity, “voice,” and certainly “E” will be stifled)
  • Coach/Mentor to encourage and develop new thinking and innovation and examine opportunities for professional growth regularly, and specifically not only in formal performance reviews.
  • Provide ample recognition to individuals, groups, divisions that develop new ideas, promote shared practices that prove helpful, or experiment with new processes or new solutions (whether successful or not).

Fundamental Shifts Must Occur
These are just starter ideas that cover the broad disciplines of a learning organization. Along with this will have to come a few fundamental shifts for many organizations. Top-down only thinking and managing must be limited to minimal use and the “norm” must be to more fully engage the organization in thinking and making decisions. Key talent decisions will have to be made in leadership positions since a learning organization cannot survive within groups or divisions where the leadership model leans toward the authoritarian “I am your chosen leader, listen to me and do what I say,” and where a leader or leaders don’t consider their employees as valuable voices and contributors and demonstrate a willingness to collaborate with their teams. Commitment and likely, actual investment dollars will have to be given to this process. Short-term needs must be honored and given focus; however, the long-term view of creating an innovative environment that creates change and creates a new future must continually be given a priority.

Are you looking to build an organization that can survive, be resilient, or actually thrive and create a new future? That is the question to answer and will certainly guide you in determining where to invest in training and developing your leadership and organizational capabilities.