Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Rick Edgeman
 -- 2075 2023-09-08 15:21:23 |
2 layout
Camila Xu
 Meta information modification 2075 2023-09-11 03:05:58 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Hussain, T.; Edgeman, R.; Alnajem, M.N. Intellectual Structure of Research in Organizational Resilience. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/48969 (accessed on 03 July 2024).
Hussain T, Edgeman R, Alnajem MN. Intellectual Structure of Research in Organizational Resilience. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/48969. Accessed July 03, 2024.
Hussain, Tajammal, Rick Edgeman, Mohamad Najem Alnajem. "Intellectual Structure of Research in Organizational Resilience" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/48969 (accessed July 03, 2024).
Hussain, T., Edgeman, R., & Alnajem, M.N. (2023, September 08). Intellectual Structure of Research in Organizational Resilience. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/48969
Hussain, Tajammal, et al. "Intellectual Structure of Research in Organizational Resilience." Encyclopedia. Web. 08 September, 2023.
Intellectual Structure of Research in Organizational Resilience
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/su151712980

Organizations, businesses, and communities at large are exposed to unprecedented adversities, uncertainties, economic, social, and ecological shocks and disruptions caused by natural disasters, climate change, political turmoil, global recession, economic instability, fluctuations in energy-source prices, war and terrorism dilemmas, pandemics, and several other newly rising social turbulences.

organizational resilience social turbulence disruptions pandemic

1. Introduction

Organizational resilience (OR) is envisioned through the lenses of “Social Turbulence” and Big Challenges”, which envision communities as being exposed to vulnerability and uncertainty more frequently and are hence in need of well-thought-out responses to such turbulence and challenges. “Big Challenges” are predominantly caused by social, economic, and environmental factors, and their nonlinear nature, uncertainty, spontaneity, and speed pose an increased risk of transforming situations into crises [1].
In socially turbulent times, the environment becomes volatile, business norms shift to unstable paradigms, routine functions face unique disruptions, confusion reigns, it is more difficult to reach consensus, existing solutions are inadequate, and devastating events become crises. To deal with such vulnerabilities, social turbulence demands swift, comprehensive, and customized responses from societies, organizations, and individuals [2][3]. The perceived consequences of vulnerability create space for urgent responses. The pattern of urgency in response is determined by the organization’s level of preparation, ability to anticipate challenges, capacities, capabilities to bounce back, and ability to identify opportunities lurking in the murkiness of crises [4][5].
Sources of social turbulence include but are not limited to political, social, economic, geographic, and environmental factors. Equally, each such event has its own diverse dynamics, so a proven response in one situation might be ineffective and irrelevant in other situations.
The uniqueness of each turbulent event demands a versatile and local approach to tackle it effectively; for instance, political unrest might have an entirely unique set of contributing factors, and therefore a very targeted and situational response might be necessary for effective resolution. Conversely, social turbulence caused by a global pandemic of uncertain traits (for instance, COVID-19) posing high uncertainty, rapid spread, and severe disruptions makes the response more uncertain, escalates confusion, earns the least consensus, and ignites agitation [6][7][8].
A resilient organization prepares itself through a learning process to combat uncertain disruptions effectively in a social turbulence environment. The organizational learning process entails (I) scientific approaches to enhance organizational ability to predict and forecast the most unlikely future disruptions; (II) building organizational capabilities to absorb uncertain shocks to lessen damaging impacts on organizational processes; (III) creating and promoting a culture of adaptability and hence the ability to secure adaptive scenarios in vulnerable circumstances; and (IV) striving through the disruption with the aim of excelling in the post-disruption era rather than just struggling to survive. OR research aims to create valuable knowledge for organizations to attain greater vigilance, preparedness, and action plans for unexpected, uncertain, and devastating vulnerabilities.
Contrarily, a brittle organization attains the least resiliency, behaves haphazardly in crises, and finds it hard to absorb disruptions and bounce back. A brittle organization finds itself in a disastrous situation in times of social turbulence caused by uncertain vulnerability and sudden shocks; these organizations are characterized by an inability to forecast disruptions and failure to absorb shocks, resulting in reactive rather than adaptive behavior and an inability to perceive disruptions as opportunities and instead retreating into survival mode. A brittle organization always perceives social turbulence as a source of disastrous consequences, whereas a resilient organization takes social turbulence as an opportunity to test its capabilities and bounce back with more profound achievements [9][10][11].
Usually, organizations are well prepared for routine challenges; however, challenges posed by abrupt, unpredicted, and uncertain shocks are not those for which organizations are prepared. An organization’s ability to anticipate, absorb, and respond to such disastrous events is considered OR. The unprecedented emerging adversities and uncertainties facing organizations in the form of natural disasters, political turmoil, economic instability, ecological disorder, pandemics, and social dilemmas are demanding new organizational paradigms and proactive strategies to combat, absorb, rebuild, and ultimately sustain organizational performance [12][13]. Such shocks, disruptions, and adversities are inevitable for almost all organizations, and avoiding such situations becomes most likely impossible [14][15]. Exposure to such adversities causes huge economic, social, and psychological damage, and organizations are threatened, even for their survival [16][17]. To prepare for such unpredictable and unforeseen events, organizations need to build their ability to recover quickly and effectively and become resilient. Resilience is the ability of an organization to bounce back effectively, efficiently, and powerfully by absorbing unusual shocks and extraordinary disruptions [18][19][20][21].
Uncertainty associated with adversity may have damaging consequences due to the low ability to predict the occurrence of such events and their timing. This situation highlights the need for organizations to develop the ability to anticipate extraordinary disruptions well in advance of their occurrence. An organization can enhance its ability to forecast such events by incorporating both quantitative and qualitative approaches [22][23][24][25]. Making well-informed judgments based on the real-world database can minimize the level of uncertainty. The market expertise of experienced employees might also aid organizational anticipation of the potential occurrence of unusual events.
The concept of resilience evolved from an individual paradigm to combat highly depressive shocks in one’s personal, professional, or societal life: divorce, severe financial losses, death of dear ones, betrayal by close friends, job terminations, sustained long-term unemployment, losing respect or dignity in the community, and other disruptions [26][27][28][29][30]. The ability to recover from such miseries with minimum damage and bounce back to normal life is a huge challenge that requires a set of attributes that are either built-in or need to be learned [31][32][33][34].
The philosophy behind OR is similar in many ways to that behind individual resilience [35][36][37][38][39]. However, here the adversities are being collectively faced by organizations, and many internal and external stakeholders could be potential victims. The response in such situations is more likely to be collective than individual. The response mechanism is multidimensional, as adversity might have different degrees and consequences. Given this, defining the dynamics of OR becomes more challenging [40].
The recent unprecedented development in the field of network construction and pattern recognition for large datasets has attracted immense attention from researchers seeking to explore their field through a more scientific approach in an effective, quantitative, and reliable manner [41][42]. The bibliometric data is highly enriched with plenty of valuable observations, for example, publication title, authors’ details, publication year, outlet source of publication, main and sub-research domains, contributing institutions and countries, etc.
Bibliometric analysis has been made simpler and more powerful through the development of advanced computer-based bibliometric analysis programs. There is frequent evidence of published research that deploys bibliometric methods to synthesize a research concept and its evolution.
The development and progression of any research concept, theme, or theory is a scientific outcome of effective, authentic, valuable, and replicable published work in different kinds of outlets, for example, journals, conference proceedings, books, newsletters, etc. These published works create an impact on the landscape of any research field that reflects the intellectual structure, knowledge streams, and dynamics of both horizontal and vertical progression. Exploring the foundation, evolution, dissemination, clustering, and spread of the research field is characterized by several bibliometric attributes [43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50].

2. Organizational Resilience

The notion of resilience has been defined and discussed in several contexts, and therefore, it is hard to derive a common definition across all disciplines. However, some common grounds and overlapping themes can be identified from the available definitions of OR: (1) elasticity of a system to absorb a shock(s) and return to its pre-shock status; (2) capacity to combat unforeseen adversities, disruptions, and shutdowns; (3) a learned approach towards the process of efficient anticipation of any potential adversity; the ways to engage and channel organizational resources to cope with the adverse situation; and finally, raising the level of adaptability by smoothing the transformative process among the internal stakeholders [51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59].
A resilient organization is characterized not only by its ability to secure survival out of adversity but, in some instances, by its ability to perform even better. OR is an outcome of several organizational factors: human resources, technology, operations, a strategic plan, risk management, data-driven strategies, and organizational synergy. It is argued that resilience within these organizational factors would ultimately lead an organization down a resiliency path [60][61][62][63][64][65].
OR is attributed to many organizational factors: resources, capabilities, and structures. It is argued that an organization with abundant resources, a high level of capabilities, and efficient structures could achieve resilience against any type of severe adversity. Resource enrichment boosts an organization’s ability to combat unforeseen challenges and disruptions in times of crisis. Given the traditional approach to resilience as anticipation, coping, and adaptation, a resilient organization develops its ability to anticipate any sudden change that could escalate into a major threat and thereby proactively enhances its capabilities through available resources and infrastructure in multiple ways to prepare itself to combat adversity. Finally, resources acquired, increased capabilities, and an efficient structure facilitate an organization’s adaptation process. This approach of anticipation, coping, and adaptation is a continuous process and brings learned experience to an organization, which, through an effective knowledge management process, becomes an asset for future adverse events [66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74][75].
Several key areas have been identified by the researchers that provide a basic foundation for an organization to become well-versed in the three stages of resiliency: anticipation, coping, and adaptation. These factors include but are not limited to leadership, infrastructure, environment, culture, knowledge economy, business model, innovation, and resilience plans.
The advocacy behind the role of leadership in developing and promoting resiliency suggests that leaders are policymakers who provide a roadmap to their organizations. Leaders can comprehend the philosophy behind the mission of becoming a resilient organization; it is their understanding and ideology about the resiliency theme that can drive, lead, and promote the propagation of the value and vitality of this ever-needed characteristic [76][77][78][79].
Further, as resilience is not a one-time achievement but a permanent behavior and capability that might be challenged and tested under several different settings and circumstances over time, it should be realized and embedded within organizational culture as a permanent trait. Leadership is critical to the process of cultivating resilience in the workplace during all three stages of resilience. Leaders who can foresee and anticipate adversity ahead of its actual occurrence could lead and guide organizations in much more effective ways during and after a disruption. The real challenge during the adversity cycle is to absorb the social, economic, and psychological shocks with the least damage to the organization. Finally, leaders can promote positivity among internal stakeholders toward accepting and fighting back against unexpected interruptions and shocks [80][81].

3. Resilient Organization

A resilient organization considers continuous improvement and upgradation and never assumes a perfectionistic approach towards their processes and systems; it believes that preparation for unexpected shocks is much more complex than preparing for day-to-day business challenges. Resources required to tackle and respond to routine process disruptions can be managed in a well-planned manner; however, the nature of sudden and uncertain disruptions can hardly be thought of well ahead of their occurrence; therefore, practically, it is quite challenging to plan a response to an uncertain vulnerability [82][83][84].
A resilient organization learns from each disruption and builds their knowledge, experience, and other skills to accumulate resources as a means of combating the future. This learning becomes an integral part of organizational systems and, in future crises, helps an organization face, respond to, and emerge strongly from such disastrous events much more effectively than brittle organizations. A resilient organization develops a sense of system awareness and calibrates the system very minutely by paying deep attention to process deviations. This proactive approach to system behavior helps organizations cultivate the ability to foresee uncertain future vulnerability with confidence. Acting upon minute process details can nurture a culture that elevates a positive attitude towards such disruptions. An organization that creates a culture rooted in proactive behavior is likely to more effectively face uncertain and sudden disruption [85][86][87][88].
A resilient organization acts in a highly reliable manner in times of crisis and transforms apparent threats caused by sudden disruption into potential opportunities. In comparison to a brittle organization, a resilient organization has better chances of not only anticipating, absorbing, responding to, and bouncing back to its former state but also excelling much ahead of that prior state. This transformation is due to organizational structure, culture, and resources. A resilient organization believes in the continuous improvement of its systems and works to promote its capabilities. The essential capabilities to achieve OR are routinely addressed. The capabilities should be targeted to promote OR include competence, skills, and knowledge of uncertainty regarding organizational processes and systems [89][90][91].

References

  1. Sidorov, A.; Pokrovskaya, E.; Raitina, M. System “Person-State-Society” in Period of Social Turbulence and Big Challenges (Case Study: Tomsk City, the Russian Federation). Systems 2022, 10, 262.
  2. Ljungqvist, L. Squandering European labour: Social safety nets in times of economic turbulence. Scott. J. Politi. Econ. 1999, 46, 367–388.
  3. Burciu, A.; Kicsi, R.; Bostan, I. Social trust and dynamics of capitalist economies in the context of clashing managerial factors with risks and severe turbulence: A conceptual inquiry. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8794.
  4. Pickel, M.L., III.; Jhamb, S. A Strategic Management Framework Analysis and Research Agenda of Social Pressures, COVID-19 Pandemic, Russia-Ukraine War, and Global Sustainability of Organizational Responses-Implications, Insights, New Directions, and Challenges for Future. J. Strateg. Innov. Sustain. 2022, 17, 21–30.
  5. Singh, S. Thirteenth annual international conference on “global turbulence: Challenges and opportunities”. Delhi Bus. Rev. 2013, 14, 115.
  6. Lane, D.A.; Down, M. The art of managing for the future: Leadership of turbulence. Manag. Decis. 2010, 48, 512–527.
  7. Laforest, R.; Smith, S.R. Nonprofits in a time of turbulence: Challenges and opportunities. In Nonprofit Policy Forum; De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany, 2017.
  8. Thompson, M. Chinese hedonic values and the Chinese classical virtues: Managing the tension. J. Manag. Dev. 2011, 30, 709–723.
  9. Urick, A.; Carpenter, B.W.; Eckert, J. Confronting COVID: Crisis leadership, turbulence, and self-care. In Frontiers in Education; Frontiers Media SA: Lausanne, Switzerland, 2021.
  10. Smith, V. Enhancing employability: Human, cultural, and social capital in an era of turbulent unpredictability. Hum. Relat. 2010, 63, 279–300.
  11. Wilson, S.; Willis, C.H. Environmental turbulence and adaptive capacity: A review and research agenda. Acad. Manag. Proc. 2021, 2021, 13478.
  12. Alexiou, A. Taming the waves of adversity: Exploring the multidimensional construct of organizational resilience. In Managing Emerging Technologies for Socio-Economic Impact; Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.: Cheltenham, UK, 2014; pp. 340–353.
  13. Ancelovici, M. The origins and dynamics of organizational resilience: A comparative study of two French labor organizations. In Social Resilience in the Neoliberal Era; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009; pp. 346–375.
  14. Annarelli, A.; Battistella, C.; Nonino, F. A framework to evaluate the effects of organizational resilience on service quality. Sustainability 2020, 12, 958.
  15. Baghersad, M.; Zobel, C.W. Organizational Resilience to Disruption Risks: Developing Metrics and Testing Effectiveness of Operational Strategies. Risk Anal. 2022, 42, 561–579.
  16. Akpinar, H.; Özer-Çaylan, D. Achieving organizational resilience through complex adaptive systems approach: A conceptual framework. Manag. Res. 2022, 20, 289–309.
  17. Bechthold, L.; Lude, M.; Prügl, R. Crisis favors the prepared firm: How organizational ambidexterity relates to perceptions of organizational resilience. In Resiliency Models and Addressing Future Risks for Family Firms in the Tourism Industry; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2021; pp. 178–205.
  18. Boin, A.; van Eeten, M.J.G. The Resilient Organization. Public Manag. Rev. 2013, 15, 429–445.
  19. Bhamra, R. Organisational Resilience: Concepts, Integration, and Practice; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2015; pp. 1–222.
  20. Braes, B.M.; Brooks, D.J. Organisational Resilience: Understanding and identifying the essential concepts. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Safety and Security Engineering (SAFE 2011), Antwerp, Belgium, 4–6 July 2011.
  21. Butler, C. Five steps to organisational resilience: Being adaptive and flexible during both normal operations and times of disruption. J. Bus. Contin. Emerg. Plan. 2018, 12, 103–112.
  22. Carayannis, E.G.; Grigoroudis, E.; Stamati, D. Re-visiting BMI as an Enabler of Strategic Intent and Organizational Resilience, Robustness, and Remunerativeness. J. Knowl. Econ. 2017, 8, 407–436.
  23. Crick, R.; Bentley, J. Becoming a resilient organisation: Integrating people and practice in infrastructure services. Int. J. Sustain. Eng. 2020, 13, 423–440.
  24. Darkow, P.M. Beyond “bouncing back”: Towards an integral, capability-based understanding of organizational resilience. J. Contingencies Crisis Manag. 2019, 27, 145–156.
  25. De Moura, S.; Tomei, P.A. Strategic management of organizational resilience (SMOR): A framework proposition. Rev. Bras. Gest. Neg. 2021, 23, 536–556.
  26. Mallak, L.A. How to build a resilient organization. In Proceedings of the 1997 Industrial Engineering Solutions Conference, Miami Beach, FL, USA, 19–21 May 1997; IIE: New York, NY, USA, 1997.
  27. Mallak, L. Putting organizational resilience to work. Ind. Manag. 1998, 40, 8–13.
  28. Westphal, J.A. Resilient organizations: Matrix model and service line management. J. Nurs. Adm. 2005, 35, 414–419.
  29. Gittell, J.H.; Cameron, K.; Lim, S.; Rivas, V. Relationships, Layoffs, and organizational resilience: Airline industry responses to September 11. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 2006, 42, 300–329.
  30. Vogus, T.J.; Sutcliffe, K.M. Organizational resilience: Towards a theory and research agenda. In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC 2007), Montreal, QC, Canada, 7–10 October 2007.
  31. Jung, K. Sources of organizational resilience for sustainable communities: An institutional collective action perspective. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1141.
  32. Klockner, K. Developing organisational resilience: Organisational mindfulness and mindful organising. Aust. J. Emerg. Manag. 2017, 32, 47–51.
  33. Mils Hills, M. Full spectrum threats: Why organizational culture (and its micro-cultures) are critical to the success or failure of organizational resilience. In Security Risks: Assessment, Management and Current Challenges; Nova Science Publishers, Inc.: Hauppauge, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 149–162.
  34. Kutsch, E. The Art of Organisational Resilience: Revisiting the Fall of France in 1940; Taylor and Francis: Milton, UK, 2018; pp. 1–278.
  35. Fisher, R.; Maritz, A.; Lobo, A. Does individual resilience influence entrepreneurial success. Acad. Entrep. J. 2016, 22, 39–53.
  36. Chen, Y.; McCabe, B.; Hyatt, D. Relationship between Individual Resilience, Interpersonal Conflicts at Work, and Safety Outcomes of Construction Workers. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2017, 143, 04017042.
  37. Karolidis, D.; Vouzas, F.; Antonacopoulou, E. The effects of individual resilience on organizational citizenship behavior in contemporary public administration: A dual pathway model. In Research Handbook on Organizational Resilience; Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.: Cheltenham, UK, 2020; pp. 247–260.
  38. Johal, H.K.; Prout, R.; Birchley, G.; Huxtable, R. We should move away from a focus on individual resilience towards building resilient systems. BMJ 2021, 375, n2737.
  39. Mokline, B.; Ben Abdallah, M.A. Individual Resilience in the Organization in the Face of Crisis: Study of the Concept in the Context of COVID-19. Glob. J. Flex. Syst. Manag. 2021, 22, 219–231.
  40. Siddiqui, S. Building organizational and individual resilience in times of moral distress. J. Crit. Care 2022, 67, 184–185.
  41. Aboelmaged, M.; Mouakket, S. Influencing models and determinants in big data analytics research: A bibliometric analysis. Inf. Process. Manag. 2020, 57, 102234.
  42. Agbo, F.J.; Oyelere, S.S.; Suhonen, J.; Tukiainen, M. Scientific production and thematic breakthroughs in smart learning environments: A bibliometric analysis. Smart Learn. Environ. 2021, 8, 1.
  43. Mihalic, T.; Mohamadi, S.; Abbasi, A.; Dávid, L.D. Mapping a sustainable and responsible tourism paradigm: A bibliometric and citation network analysis. Sustainability 2021, 13, 853.
  44. Mumu, J.R.; Tahmid, T.; Azad, M.A.K. Job satisfaction and intention to quit: A bibliometric review of work-family conflict and research agenda. Appl. Nurs. Res. 2021, 59, 151334.
  45. Nichols, J.J.; Jones, L.; Morgan, P.B.; Efron, N. Bibliometric analysis of the orthokeratology literature. Contact Lens Anterior Eye 2021, 44, 101390.
  46. Palumbo, R.; Manesh, M.F. Travelling along the public service co-production road: A bibliometric analysis and interpretive review. Public Manag. Rev. 2021, 25, 1348–1384.
  47. Shah, S.M.; Ahmad, T.; Chen, S.; Yuting, G.; Liu, X.; Yuan, Y. A Bibliometric Analysis of the One Hundred Most Cited Studies in Psychosomatic Research. Psychother. Psychosom. 2021, 90, 425–430.
  48. Wei, R.; Lan, J.; Lian, L.; Huang, S.; Zhao, C.; Dong, Z.; Weng, J. A bibliometric study on research trends in hydrogen safety. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2022, 159, 1064–1081.
  49. Zainuldin, M.H.; Lui, T.K. A bibliometric analysis of CSR in the banking industry: A decade study based on Scopus scientific mapping. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2022, 40, 1–26.
  50. Zheng, Y.; Liu, S. Bibliometric analysis for talent identification by the subject–author–citation three-dimensional evaluation model in the discipline of physical education. Libr. Hi Tech 2022, 40, 62–79.
  51. Gibson, C.A.; Tarrant, M. A ‘conceptual models’ approach to organisational resilience: Gibson and tarrant discuss the range of inter-dependant factors needed to manage organisational resilience. Aust. J. Emerg. Manag. 2010, 25, 6–12.
  52. Burnard, K.; Bhamra, R. Organisational resilience: Development of a conceptual framework for organisational responses. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2011, 49, 5581–5599.
  53. Kantur, D.; Arzu, I.S. Organizational resilience: A conceptual integrative framework. J. Manag. Organ. 2012, 18, 762–773.
  54. Banahene, K.O.; Anvuur, A.; Dainty, A. Conceptualising organisational resilience: An investigation into project organising. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Association of Researchers in Construction Management Conference (ARCOM 2014), Portsmouth, UK, 1–3 September 2014; Association of Researchers in Construction Management: Reading, UK, 2014.
  55. Buliga, O.; Scheiner, C.W.; Voigt, K.I. Business model innovation and organizational resilience: Towards an integrated conceptual framework. J. Bus. Econ. 2016, 86, 647–670.
  56. Ciampi, F.; Marzi, G.; Rialti, R. Artificial intelligence, big data, strategic flexibility, agility, and organizational resilience: A conceptual framework based on existing literature. In Proceedings of the International Conferences on WWW/Internet (ICWI 2018) and Applied Computing, Budapest, Hungary, 21–23 October 2018; IADIS Press: Lisbon, Portugal, 2018.
  57. Duchek, S. Organizational resilience: A capability-based conceptualization. Bus. Res. 2020, 13, 215–246.
  58. Chen, R.; Xie, Y.; Liu, Y. Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring organizational resilience: A multiple case study. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2517.
  59. Singh, S.; Martins, A.; Tefera, O. Nonprofit organisational resilience: Proposing a conceptual adaptive capacity framework. Acta Commer. 2022, 22, 13.
  60. Hassall, M.E.; Sanderson, P.M.; Cameron, I.T. An organizational resilience-based human factors safety method: The development and testing of safer. In Proceedings of the 57th Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting—2013 (HFES 2013), San Diego, CA, USA, 30 September–4 October 2013.
  61. Mendonça, D.; Wallace, W.A. Factors underlying organizational resilience: The case of electric power restoration in New York City after 11 September 2001. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2015, 141, 83–91.
  62. Macuzić, I.; Tadić, D.; Aleksić, A.; Stefanović, M. A two-step fuzzy model for the assessment and ranking of organizational resilience factors in the process industry. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 2016, 40, 122–130.
  63. Liu, Y.; Chen, R.; Zhou, F.; Zhang, S.; Wang, J. Analysis of the influencing factors of organizational resilience in the ISM framework: An exploratory study based on multiple cases. Sustainability 2021, 13, 13492.
  64. Lee, S.; Kim, J.; Arigi, A.M.; Kim, J. Identification of Contributing Factors to Organizational Resilience in the Emergency Response Organization for Nuclear Power Plants. Energies 2022, 15, 7732.
  65. Wang, D.; Zhao, X.; Zhang, K. Factors affecting organizational resilience in megaprojects: A leader–employee perspective. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2022. ahead-of-print.
  66. Lengnick-Hall, C.A.; Beck, T.E.; Lengnick-Hall, M.L. Developing a capacity for organizational resilience through strategic human resource management. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2011, 21, 243–255.
  67. Bouaziz, F.; Smaoui Hachicha, Z. Strategic human resource management practices and organizational resilience. J. Manag. Dev. 2018, 37, 537–551.
  68. Al-Ayed, S.I. The impact of strategic human resource management on organizational resilience: An empirical study on hospitals. Bus. Theory Pract. 2019, 20, 179–186.
  69. Fathy El Dessouky, N.; Al-Ghareeb, A. Human Resource Management and Organizational Resilience in the Era of COVID-19: Theoretical Insights, Challenges and Implications. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Sustainability and Resilience Conference: Technology and Innovation in Building Designs (IEEECONF 2020), Sakheer, Bahrain, 11–12 November 2020; Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2020.
  70. Mitsakis, F.V. Human resource development (HRD) resilience: A new ‘success element’ of organizational resilience? Hum. Resour. Dev. Int. 2020, 23, 321–328.
  71. Al-Taweel, I.R. Impact of high-performance work practices in human resource management of health dispensaries in Qassim Region, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, towards organizational resilience and productivity. Bus. Process Manag. J. 2021, 27, 2088–2109.
  72. Ostadi, B.; Seifi, M.M.; Husseinzadeh Kashan, A. A multi-objective model for resource allocation in disaster situations to enhance the organizational resilience and maximize the value of business continuity with considering events interactions. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part O J. Risk Reliab. 2021, 235, 814–830.
  73. Do, H.; Budhwar, P.; Shipton, H.; Nguyen, H.D.; Nguyen, B. Building organizational resilience, innovation through resource-based management initiatives, organizational learning and environmental dynamism. J. Bus. Res. 2022, 141, 808–821.
  74. Wang, D.; Wu, Y.; Zhang, K. Interplay of Resources and Institutions in Improving Organizational Resilience of Construction Projects: A Dynamic Perspective. EMJ—Eng. Manag. J. 2022, 1–12.
  75. Yu, J.; Yuan, L.; Han, G.; Li, H.; Li, P. A Study of the Impact of Strategic Human Resource Management on Organizational Resilience. Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 508.
  76. Moran, B.; Tame, P. Organizational resilience: Uniting leadership and enhancing sustainability. Sustainability 2012, 5, 233–237.
  77. Pirotti, G.B.; Venzin, M. Resilient Organizations: Responsible Leadership in Times of Uncertainty; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2016; pp. 1–165.
  78. Grote, G. Leadership in resilient organizations. In Exploring Resilience; Springer Briefs in Applied Sciences and Technology; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 59–67.
  79. Levey, J.; Levey, M. Mindful leadership for personal and organisational resilience. Clin. Radiol. 2019, 74, 739–745.
  80. Suryaningtyas, D.; Sudiro, A.; Eka, A.T.; Dodi, W.I. Organizational resilience and organizational performance: Examining the mediating roles of resilient leadership and organizational culture. Acad. Strateg. Manag. J. 2019, 18, 1–7.
  81. Shalender, K. Leadership styles to aid building innovative, agile, and resilient organizations. In Organising Entrepreneurship and Msmes Across India; World Scientific Publishing Co.: Singapore, 2020; pp. 205–214.
  82. Abd-El Aliem, S.M.F.; Abou Hashish, E.A. The Relationship Between Transformational Leadership Practices of First-Line Nurse Managers and Nurses’ Organizational Resilience and Job Involvement: A Structural Equation Model. Worldviews Evid. -Based Nurs. 2021, 18, 273–282.
  83. Greenwood, L.L.; Stanitz, P.; LaMere, M. EHs leadership in the era of COVID-19: Implications for organizational resilience. In Proceedings of the AWMA 114th Annual Conference and Exhibition, Online, 14–17 June 2021; Air and Waste Management Association: Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2021.
  84. Hashish, E.A.; Farghaly, S. Exploring how nurse managers’ knowledge of succession planning affects their leadership and organisational resilience. Nurs. Manag. 2021, 28, 21–28.
  85. Madi Odeh, R.B.S.; Obeidat, B.Y.; Jaradat, M.O.; Masa’deh, R.; Alshurideh, M.T. The transformational leadership role in achieving organizational resilience through adaptive cultures: The case of Dubai service sector. Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag. 2021, 72, 440–468.
  86. Țiclău, T.; Hințea, C.; Trofin, C. Resilient leadership. qualitative study on factors influencing organizational resilience and adaptive response to adversity. Transylv. Rev. Adm. Sci. 2021, 2021, 127–143.
  87. Ho, G.K.S.; Lam, C.; Law, R. Conceptual framework of strategic leadership and organizational resilience for the hospitality and tourism industry for coping with environmental uncertainty. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights 2022, 6, 835–852.
  88. Lisdiono, P.; Said, J.; Yusoff, H.; Hermawan, A.A. Examining Leadership Capabilities, Risk Management Practices, and Organizational Resilience: The Case of State-Owned Enterprises in Indonesia. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6268.
  89. Mumford, S.W. Doing More with Less: Racial Diversity in Nonprofit Leadership and Organizational Resilience. J. Public Nonprofit Aff. 2022, 8, 29–57.
  90. Zahari, A.I.; Mohamed, N.; Said, J.; Yusof, F. Assessing the mediating effect of leadership capabilities on the relationship between organisational resilience and organisational performance. Int. J. Soc. Econ. 2022, 49, 280–295.
  91. Megele, C. Resilient organizations turning challenges into opportunities: HR occupies a central place in preparing companies for change. Hum. Resour. Manag. Int. Dig. 2014, 22, 1–4.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Management
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Tajammal Hussain
,
Rick Edgeman
,
Mohamad Najem AlNajem
View Times: 144
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 11 Sep 2023
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Video Production Service
    Feedback