Image Source: Unsplash

I have worked for over a dozen companies in almost as many different roles. I have also authored books, led charities, and raised children. My very broad experience has taught me to analyze the cultural traits of an organization as a means of improving its performance. This is the first in a series of articles that explores the impact of different cultural traits.

In recent years, we’ve heard the word ‘collapse’ again and again. Hospitals and healthcare systems are ‘on the verge of collapse.’ Regimes are ‘on the verge of collapse.’ And yet, in almost every case, we don’t actually witness a collapse. What we witness is a degradation – often a punishingly difficult degradation.

The Russian economy serves as a very recent example. After the imposition of sanctions, it was supposed to ‘collapse’. Although the official figures are almost certainly massive fabrications, it has objectively not collapsed. Because people will find a way to survive as best they can, economic collapse under sanctions is exceedingly rare. The Australian, UK, and US health systems – described at various times as being on the verge of collapse during the COVID emergency, never did so. On the other hand, the services they delivered declined and some of that decline has been enduring. According to the Wall Street Journal, ambulance deliveries to hospitals within the UK’s NHS system now take an average of one hour nineteen minutes from the initial call. There are estimates that systemic dysfunction may be contributing to as many as 1,000 deaths a week in the UK. Nonetheless, the NHS remains.

In each of these cases, the systems involved have demonstrated resilience. However, their resilience has been limited. They took serious hits and continued to function, but only in a degraded sense. A system’s ability to preserve functionality, while under pressure, is the key measure of resilience. Under this measure, it appears that neither the NHS nor the Russian economy have done all that well. Both have demonstrated absolute resilience (they survive). But both – like passport offices globally – have faced major functional setbacks.

These are extreme examples of resilience, but there are more routine situations as well. Economic growth might slow, employees may call in sick or computers may be hacked. Those who are affected have to maintain functionality through the setback.

Of course, resilience is not necessarily a good thing. Had the German or French governments been less resilient, World War I might have ended much more quickly and with far less pain (as in 1868). If the Russian government today were less resilient, or if Ukraine were, then that war would already be over. The USSR was incredibly resilient, it could survive that which overwhelmed the regime that came before it. The cost was extremely high, though – it led to the deaths of about twenty million of its own civilians in peacetime. In the world of aircraft, some parts (such as tow pins) are designed to fail so that a greater goal can be served. If these parts were more resilient, the results could be catastrophic. Even for a business, resilience can be a negative. Bernie Madoff survived for decades, which ultimately resulted in far greater losses.

To more fully grasp the nature of resilience, imagine owning your own tank. A tank is seriously resilient. It will easily survive most traffic accidents and won’t have any problem with your average pothole. However, that resilience comes at a cost. A tank is inefficient, uncomfortable, relatively slow, and quite cumbersome. In order to assess whether this is ‘good’ resilience or not, you have to ask what kind of resilience you need. If you need to preserve warfighting capability, then you can happily trade inefficiency, discomfort, clumsiness, and speed for extreme resilience. However, if you need a daily driver, then those tradeoffs almost certainly don’t make sense. There’s a reason few people use tanks for their morning commutes.

It is for this reason that assessing resilience must start with the why. If the purpose of the State is to deliver security, law, freedom, and well-being to its citizens, then the resilience of the current Russian government may be counterproductive (I say ‘may’ because in many cultures, the lack of a strongman can lead to a complete and violent breakdown). On the other hand, if the purpose of Russian resilience is to preserve Vladimir Putin, then it has functioned admirably. At least so far. It is the why that enables us to simultaneously laud British resilience in World War II while condemning that of the Nazis.

All of this is why, when I look at an organization, I start with the basic business function I’m assessing. For example, if the function is product/service delivery, then the purpose of resilience should be continuing to deliver products/services in the face of issues. With that target in mind, I can assess how it would react to issues small (e.g. internet down during a training session) or large (e.g. fundamental regulatory changes).

An assessment shouldn’t stop there. It should also look for negative resilience. Is too much capital tied up in rainy-day funds? Are uniquely talented people being limited by a fear of new and possibly risky opportunities? Is short-term resilience actually undermining organizational flexibility and increasing the brittleness of the institution? Are managers protecting themselves at the cost of the business itself?

Fundamentally, have you built a tank when you really needed a two-door hatchback?

Of course, assessment is only the first step. The natural next step is the mapping out of a process to calibrate an organization’s resilience. As with any cultural change, this process has to build on what already exists. Wholesale replacement of systems and culture almost never works. Instead, with the commitment of key actors, a combination of education, procedures, tools and incentives can be applied – step-by-step – to continually improve the nature and degree of an organization’s resilience.

This all may read like an introduction to the concept - and it is. But it is a concept that has far-reaching impacts. Whether you’re raising children, running a business, or voting for your next leader, resilience is like pudding: for the best outcomes, you have to get the ingredients just right.

I'd love to learn more and hear your stories of resilience done right - and wrong. Just post 'em in the comments!

More By This Author: