Discussion

Resilience, from the Latin resilire (to recoil or leap back), is a general concept related to positive adaptation in the context of challenge. In the physical sciences and engineering, resilience typically refers to the capacity to withstand stress or strain without breaking, or to recover original form, like a spring or rubber band. In the science of human development, resilience has broad and diverse meanings, including recovery from traumatic experiences, overcoming disadvantage to succeed in life and withstanding stress to function well in the tasks of life (Masten & Gewirtz, 2006).

Essentially, resilience refers to patterns of positive adaptation or development manifested in the context of adverse experiences. While people have been fascinated with stories of resilience for thousands of years, judging from the many ancient tales of individuals who triumph over adversity, the scientific study of resilience only began in the 1960s and 1970s, as previously mentioned. Nonetheless, great strides have been made in the first four decades of research and it is clear that early childhood is an important window of time for understanding and promoting resilience. It is during these years that previous research suggests resilience was manifested in an individual, based on the life experiences from as early as that age. The roots of competence are established and many of the most important protective systems for human development emerge (Masten & Gewirtz, 2006). Some children develop resilience through natural processes, while other children need help (the learned aspect of resilience). These early years have proclaimed to hold great promise for interventions to prevent and reduce risk, boost resources, promote competence and build a strong foundation for future development, not only through life, but in the working world as well.

Moreover, it can be said that the manifestations of resilience have a tendency of natural occurrence and that understanding naturally-occurring resilience provides important clues for policies and practices designed to promote healthier development in children

27

who are threatened by adversity or disadvantage and which evidently becomes apparent as they take on heavier and more challenging aspects in life, such as the world of work. It is also necessary to learn how to foster positive change in respect of the contributing factors of resilience which might explain how the odds of favourable development could be improved. Prevention and intervention studies are required to test the ideas emanating from resilience research, to learn the best goals, methods and developmental timing for interventions, and also to learn which approaches work best for whom, all of which once again points to the origins of resilience and how it is manifested in individuals.

Masten and Gewirtz (2006) profess that in order to study resilience; one must define and operationalize it. This has proven to be challenging for several key reasons. Firstly, resilience refers to a variety of phenomena, such as recovery after the loss of a parent, normalization of behaviour after a child has been adopted from an institution, school success among children growing up in poverty or in dangerous neighbourhoods and mental health in the children of mentally-ill parents. Secondly, resilience is an inferential construct that involves human judgments about desirable and undesirable outcomes as well as definitions of threat or risk and a clear definition of the criteria for “doing OK in life”. In addition, the standards and measures of adversity or risk confronting the individual should be completely comprehensible in order to establish the manifestation.

A child who develops well may be viewed as being adaptive or competent, but not necessarily as manifesting resilience, unless some explicit or implicit threshold of risk or adversity has been met. It is also clear that there are multiple criteria according to which success in life may be judged; adaptation (good or bad) is inherently multidimensional and multifaceted in nature. Thus, it is not surprising that definitions and measures have varied, greatly complicating comparisons across studies and the task of building a coherent body of knowledge about resilience in development (and hence the justification not only for the study but also for the vast array of definitions on resilience).

Thirdly, many processes at multiple levels of analysis are likely to be involved in human resilience. To understand resilience, one must understand the complex adaptation and

28

development of living systems in context over time, from “neurons to neighbourhoods”

and beyond. Nonetheless, findings from the first generation of resilience research have been remarkably consistent, suggesting the influence of powerful but common adaptive processes.

In light of specifics of the manifestations and stemming of resilience, Masten and Gewirtz (2006) explain that there is exciting convergence in developmental research on competence, resilience, behavioural and emotional problems, brain development and prevention science, all of which underscore the importance of early childhood for building protections into human development at multiple levels, within the child (individual), the family, the community (organisations) and their interactions. Problems in learning and self-control often begin in the pre-school years and are related to the quality of available parenting. Effective preventive intervention programs during infancy and pre-school years support parenting in multiple ways and provide enriched learning environments for children with the result that these children have proved to be more functional in resilience in their adult years, given the sound foundation. Early success in school – related to effective care, positive home-school connections and effective classroom practices – appears to be a key segue to resilience, particularly for very disadvantaged children. Systems of care that focus on building competence and strengths in young children and their families, along with reducing risk and addressing problems at an early age, are yielding promising successes as well as more competent social functioning and coping-mechanisms later in life.

Masten and Gewirtz (2006) also make reference to the ideal of neurobiology of resilience and how this notion is beginning to emerge. Indeed, new insights into brain development and plasticity (malleability), the way in which stress interacts with development, and the interplay of genes and experience in shaping development, promise to revolutionize the science of resilience and prevention. Essentially, an attempt at an explanation into the manifestation and cultivation of resilience can be motivated by research which indicates that, during the early childhood years, it is important for children to have a good quality of care and opportunities for learning,

29

adequate nutrition and community support for families in order to facilitate positive development of cognitive, social and self-regulation skills.

Young children with healthy attachment relationships and good internal adaptive resources are very likely to get off to a good start in life, well equipped with the human and social capital for success as they enter work and society. Such children typically manifest resilience in the face of adversity, as long as their fundamental protective skills and relationships continue to operate and develop. The greatest threats to young children occur when key protective systems for human development are harmed or disrupted. Ultimately resilience is manifested in early childhood: it is particularly important that children have the protections afforded by attachment bonds with competent and loving caregivers, the stimulation and nutrition required for healthy brain development, opportunities to learn and to experience the pleasure of mastering new skills and the limit-setting or structure needed to develop self-control in order to thrive as a resilient adult in life.

On the other hand, if one had to retract from the biological or developmental side of resilience by means of life stages and ages, the ideals or concepts that are considered or found to be instrumental in manifesting and fostering resilience can be determined by two factors: according to Bernard (1995), social competence and autonomy are key in affecting where or how resilience is manifested, especially later in life. Social competence includes qualities such as responsiveness, especially the ability to elicit positive responses from others; flexibility, including the ability to move between different cultures; empathy; communication skills and a sense of humour. Problem-solving skills encompass the ability to plan, to be resourceful in seeking help from others and to think critically, creatively, and reflectively. In the development of a critical consciousness, a reflective awareness of the structures of oppression (be it from an alcoholic parent, an insensitive school or a racist society) and creating strategies for overcoming them, has been instrumental.

Autonomy is having a sense of one's own identity, an ability to act independently and to exert some control over one's environment, including a sense of task mastery, internal

30

locus of control and self-efficacy. The development of resistance (refusing to accept negative messages about oneself), and of detachment (distancing oneself from dysfunction), serves as a powerful protector of autonomy. Lastly, resilience is manifested by exhibiting a sense of purpose and a belief in a bright future, including goal direction, educational aspirations, achievement motivation, persistence, hopefulness, optimism and spiritual connectedness.

Understanding what influences the ideology of the organisational cultural of these studies is vital for effective results. Understanding the cultural differences that erupt can certainly assist management, organisations as well as employees themselves, especially in adjustment to the changes which have occurred and the more recent changes in the future within organisations. Organisational commitment and resiliency in recent years have become important concepts in research as these aspects are key elements in defining employee’s behaviour at work and engineering that behaviour to a constructive use, especially in troubled times of uncertainty and despair. These elements clearly reflect the extent to which employees identify with their organisation and feel committed on the grounds of common goals, as well as the extent to which an employee has the gumption to continue to survive and even to thrive in unstable and insecure times and bounce back, sometimes stronger than before (resilience).

A notable finding from a study conducted by Fredrickson and Tugade (2004) is that the experience of positive emotions appeared to aid resilient individuals in achieving accelerated cardiovascular recovery from negative emotional arousal, compared with those with less resilience who experienced relatively less positive emotions. This not only indicates the necessity of helping individuals to learn a more resilient trait or competency, enabling them to survive amidst adversity and become stronger individuals, but collectively it creates a more resilient work force. This shows the velocity with which such research of resilience can enable organisations to build a more resilient and hence psychological and physiologically healthier workforce - which has strong ties with increased organisational well-being. This, in turn, can lead to lower levels of workplace dysfunctions, such as absenteeism and amplified turnover, as well as increased levels of production and may foster general employee well-being.

31

The broaden-and-build theory (Fredrickson & Levenson, 1998, 2001) predicts that positive emotions are useful in several ways. The present research expanded this theory into the realm of coping, suggesting that positive emotions guide present coping behaviour. By examining psychological resilience from subjective, cognitive, and physiological angles, the present investigation provides greater insight into the reasons why resilient individuals are able to cope effectively with stressful experiences, whereas others facing similar conditions do not fare as well. Resilient individuals may experience the benefits that positive emotions have on negative emotion regulation. As proposed by the broaden-and-build theory (Fredrickson, 1998, 2001), experiences of positive emotions during times of stress, prompt individuals to pursue novel and creative thoughts and actions. Thus, through exploration and experimentation, in time they may be able to build an arsenal of effective coping (resilience strategies) that help buffer (psychologically and physiologically) against negative emotional life experiences that ultimately promote a favourable organisational culture. Acquisitions that may arise to identify exactly what resilience is in the working community, and how and what people perceive resilience to be, especially within the confines of the different types of cultures that dictate today’s post-modern working environment.

Essentially the aim of the research is to identify exactly what resilience is, or means to, different people and where they think it stems from and ultimately to indicate the importance of possessing such ability. Moreover, another objective that necessitated such exploration of resilience is to ascertain if people working in these different organisations experience the constructs of resilience and commitment in any type of organisation and to what extent these constructs were experienced. Lastly, this research also makes reference to establishing what people feel makes a person resilient and if resilience is something that can be fostered within themselves through learned or chosen adaption and behaviour or if it is something with which one is born.

Essentially, it answers the nature versus nurture question with regards to the construct of resilience.

32 3.3 Resilience and its effects of organisations

Organisations today are affronted by the reality of resilience and are essentially expected to “adapt or die”. Resilience enables people to make this decision a favourable one and to use the challenge and impulse to create more vitality from it. This is the positive psychological construct that is imperative to creating a plethora of coping mechanisms and skills, designed to help people move forward, regardless of the situation or the problems. What enables people to build these skills? How do people use their experiences to prevail over a problem? More importantly, how do people affect their organisation or, in turn, how are they influenced by the cultures of the organisations in which they work, especially in today’s business environment with its volatile and ephemeral nature?

In a study conducted by Cameron, Ungar and Liebenberg (2007), the authors examine one of the precursors of positive development: attachment. Attachment and the positive growth it portends for populations of children under stress underpins positive developmental outcomes, now termed “resilience.” Resilience in this regard may be understood as a process of adaptation to adversity that is scaffolded by environmental, cultural, social, psychologic, and physiologic processes. In this research the authors focus on two methodologically-different approaches to studying attachments that contribute to resilient functioning at two different phases of development (toddlerhood and adolescence). The authors examine the cultural differences found in manifestations of resilience in different countries and cultures. Organized around this theme of attachment, the authors identify adaptive factors in resistance to risk from adverse circumstances. This research proves useful in that the authors strive to identify how the adaptation involved in attachment relations can protect against vulnerability. They then conclude with a description of the processes that might help one in understanding situational, experiential, and personal resources that intersect to protect the developing individual against assaults on normal growth and development which are influential in fostering resilience.

33

The concept of resilience has increasingly begun to be used in discussions of organisational efforts to address crises and disasters. These discussions revolve around the need for organisations to develop the ability to bounce back and self-correct following a crisis. A central component of the discussions concerns the impact on people individually as well as collectively (on an organisational level and on a team level). However, for issues related to human impact, resilience affects organisations in that it entails a shift from a reactive to a proactive approach for crisis management and disaster recovery (Meyer, Cogdal & James, 2011). A reactive approach to disaster recovery involves the development of plans to contain the human impact of crises and disasters that interfere with one’s ability to work. A shortcoming of reactive approaches is that oftentimes they do not provide persons with a framework to use in the case of future traumatic events; they merely "band-aid" the trauma effects. A proactive approach adds to this strategy by introducing an active process to create an environment that not only minimizes the effect of crises and disasters for people, but also works to prevent these from happening.

A proactive approach is more of an empowerment model, allowing the person some sense of manageability and control: a sense of "I will get through this". Creating such an environment means that an organisation is better able to avoid substantial disruptions in business, related to employees being unable to work. Thus it can be said that resilience, or resilient individuals, affect the organisation in a sense that, unless practical suggestions that can help organisations assess and build resilience particularly as the concept applies to the people, the organisation will not thrive collectively in the face of adversity. It can be noted that key aspects such as utilizing strengths, recognizing the layered effect of crisis, addressing psychological needs, communication and pride in one's organisation can be used to build such organisational resilience.

In respect of the effects resilience has on organisations, the utilization of strengths is vital in that it builds a collectively-resilient workforce. Utilization of strengths in many circumstances is the best and least costly strategy to mitigate vulnerabilities, thereby increasing organisational resilience collectively. Furthermore, resilience has been known to affect the productivity of an organisation in that organisations that are resilient

34

have crisis management and business continuity plans that attend to impact of crises on all stakeholders (Meyer et al, 2011). Obvious stakeholders include employees, customers, stockholders and vendors, but one group that is often overlooked is the families of employees. Organisations that do not plan for the impact of a crisis on employee families may encounter difficulty implementing a crisis management plan by demanding that employees make difficult choices between the organisation and their family. These situations result in everyone losing as there are no winners. In addition, resilience effects the organisation in terms of communication in the sense that resilience enables organisations to be more effective because of the development of multidimensional communication networks. These networks are a key element in the development of organisational resilience. The old adages of knowing “who, what, where and when” are extremely important to all parties involved.

3.4 Summary

Finally, as per Meyer et al., (2011), the factors which arguably represent the most significant effect resilience has on an organisation are those of employee loyalty, confidence and pride in the organisation. Given that there has been some argument for a relationship between organisational commitment and resilience, employees in this situation go beyond the immediate and obvious groups, such as employees and customers, to include families of employees, vendors, stockholders, people with whom the organisation has contracted services, and so forth. Low levels of such attitudes in any of these groups spell difficulty for organisations that must activate crisis management or business-continuity plans. If any of these qualities are reduced, no matter the reason, this situation can be a single point of failure. Regardless of the sophistication of the recovery plans, if stakeholders are unwilling to participate in the process, the plans will not succeed. Monitoring these attitudes and meaningful behaviour in light of fostering resilience and the effect resilience has on the organisation, is therefore a critical issue in the building and maintenance of resilience,

Finally, as per Meyer et al., (2011), the factors which arguably represent the most significant effect resilience has on an organisation are those of employee loyalty, confidence and pride in the organisation. Given that there has been some argument for a relationship between organisational commitment and resilience, employees in this situation go beyond the immediate and obvious groups, such as employees and customers, to include families of employees, vendors, stockholders, people with whom the organisation has contracted services, and so forth. Low levels of such attitudes in any of these groups spell difficulty for organisations that must activate crisis management or business-continuity plans. If any of these qualities are reduced, no matter the reason, this situation can be a single point of failure. Regardless of the sophistication of the recovery plans, if stakeholders are unwilling to participate in the process, the plans will not succeed. Monitoring these attitudes and meaningful behaviour in light of fostering resilience and the effect resilience has on the organisation, is therefore a critical issue in the building and maintenance of resilience,