It is amazing how many different people are exploring this concept of resilience, and from so many perspectives. My research has recently led me to the work of the New Zealand Resilience Trust. This group aims to help communities develop resilience. They offer some interesting reflections on the subject of resilience – but more importantly they also talk about the opposite of “resilient” as “vulnerable”.
They define resilience as “a property that emerges when something is exposed to adversity”. Which is a perspective that consultants would never embrace as there would be no way to monitor and measure the building of resilience prior to suffering adversity!
If you are intersted in the subject, I encourage you to read this, and please post a comment.
- We are all part of various communities – be they geographic, interest, practice or supply chain.
- Our organisations are made up of people.
- Agility, Flexibility, Adaptability – these are the soft skills that will ultimately define resilience even at an organisational level.
Ironically, while I was reading this in and thinking about this idea of defining resilience in terms of not being vulnerable, Jan Husdal (who I referenced yesterday also) has just published a really good post about Risk and Vulnerability.
There is constant stimulus in this world – while I am sleeping in Australia, Jan is in Norway writing a post that I will eagerly read and respond to while he is sleeping!
In that post Jan is reviewing a 1997 piece, that also explores this dynamic of vulnerability as the flip side of resilience.
Resilience is … not being vulnerable. Worth exploring further.