What We Get Wrong About Resilience
There is a lot that has been written about resilience in the last while. For many, it is seen as not just a desirable quality, but a necessary one. While this is arguably true in limited instances, it isn’t for the reasons many think—and it doesn’t actually look like what often gets described.
The growing emphasis on the need for resilience is in response to the expansive uncertainty, change and upheaval that we face—societally, organizationally and personally. At each of these levels, it is contended that resilience is a necessary capability. Nations need to be economically resilient. Communities need to be resilient in the face of climate change, service delivery expectations and growth (or, alternatively, decline). Organizations need to be resilient to maintain strategic advantage and compete successfully. Individuals need to be resilient in the face of technical change, employment uncertainty, societal expectations and personal stresses.
That’s a lot. It is true whether you think the world is more or less challenging, the pace of change is more or less rapid, and technological change is more or less extensive. Change has always been a constant, and those changes have been perceived as disruptive by every generation experiencing them.
Someone who is 80 today was born at the end of the last world war, has seen economic booms and busts,
Please log in or sign up below to read the rest of the article.