Explore the vast range of titles available.

In light of the unprecedented global crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, resilient businesses are those more likely to make the transition to the post-COVID era. Our study draws on the concept of psychological resilience and focusses on individual owner-managers to the end of examining business resilience in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We conduct a longitudinal qualitative study, collecting data from 35 small business owner-managers between April and December 2020. Our findings—which provide insights into the micro-underpinnings of the resilience exhibited by small business in response to the COVID-19 pandemic—illustrate the responses and resilient qualities of owner-managers at both the personal and leadership levels, which facilitate resilient actions at the small business level. By drawing on a psychological perspective, our study provides a novel conceptualization of small business resilience at the person-role-organization nexus. Plain English SummaryThe psychological resilience of owner-managers provides novel insights towards a better understanding of small business resilience during exogenous shocks, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological resilience involves an individual’s ability to adapt or thrive in the face of life’s adversities and uncertainties. We conduct a longitudinal qualitative study, collecting data from 35 small business owner-managers between April and December 2020. We reveal a sequential process centred on owner-managers and on their abilities to build-up or strengthen any personal and leadership resilient capacities, which appear to be prerequisites for the establishment of resilient actions at the level of the small business. We contribute theoretically by conceptualizing the links and path dependencies between personal, leadership (role), and organizational resilience in small businesses. In conclusion, our study provides practical implications on essential personal-level responses that can guide the leadership role of owner-managers in the midst of the continuing COVID-19 pandemic.

Background The coronavirus pandemic has had a profound impact on organization and delivery of care. The challenges faced by healthcare organizations in dealing with the pandemic have intensified interest in the concept of resilience. While effort has gone into conceptualising resilience, there has been relatively little work on how to evaluate organizational resilience. This paper reports on an extensive review of approaches to resilience measurement and assessment in empirical healthcare studies, and examines their usefulness for researchers, policymakers and healthcare managers. Methods Various databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL (EBSCO host), Cochrane CENTRAL (Wiley), CDSR, Science Citation Index, and Social Science Citation Index) were searched from January 2000 to September 2021. We included quantitative, qualitative and modelling studies that focused on measuring or qualitatively assessing organizational resilience in a healthcare context. All studies were screened based on titles, abstracts and full text. For each approach, information on the format of measurement or assessment, method of data collection and analysis, and other relevant information were extracted. We classified the approaches to organizational resilience into five thematic areas of contrast: (1) type of shock; (2) stage of resilience; (3) included characteristics or indicators; (4) nature of output; and (5) purpose. The approaches were summarised narratively within these thematic areas. Results Thirty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. We identified a lack of consensus on how to evaluate organizational resilience in healthcare, what should be measured or assessed and when, and using what resilience characteristic and indicators. The measurement and assessment approaches varied in scope, format, content and purpose. Approaches varied in terms of whether they were prospective (resilience pre-shock) or retrospective (during or post-shock), and the extent to which they addressed a pre-defined and shock-specific set of characteristics and indicators. Conclusion A range of approaches with differing characteristics and indicators has been developed to evaluate organizational resilience in healthcare, and may be of value to researchers, policymakers and healthcare managers. The choice of an approach to use in practice should be determined by the type of shock, the purpose of the evaluation, the intended use of results, and the availability of data and resources.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to review existing literature at the intersection of resilience and entrepreneurship. It identifies six scholarly conversations, each of which draws on distinct notions of resilience and entrepreneurship. Based on those conversations, shortcomings in the existing literature are discussed and avenues for future research are outlined. Design/methodology/approach A systematic multi-disciplinary review of 144 papers that are categorized into six scholarly conversations to build the foundation for a critical discussion of each line of inquiry. Findings This paper identifies six conversations or research streams at the intersection of entrepreneurship and resilience: resilience as traits or characteristics of entrepreneurial firms or individuals, resilience as a trigger for entrepreneurial intentions, entrepreneurial behavior as enhancing organizational resilience, entrepreneurial firms fostering macro-level (regions, communities, economies) resilience, resilience in the context of entrepreneurial failure, and resilience as a process of recovery and transformation. The review revealed these publications imprecisely define constructs and use a limited amount of the extant scholarship on both entrepreneurship and resilience. Future research should take a more holistic approach to explore entrepreneurship and resilience from a multi-level and longitudinal perspective, especially in the context of socio-ecological sustainability. Originality/value This paper incorporates insights on resilience and entrepreneurship across academic disciplines to show how future contributions could benefit by incorporating research from other fields. In doing so, it provides a starting point for more nuanced discussions around the interrelationships between the different conversations and the role entrepreneurs can play in promoting a positive, long-term trajectory for a socio-ecological system.

Resilience as a concept is multi-faceted with complex dimensions. In a disaster context, there is lack of consistency in conceptualizing social resilience. This results in ambiguity of its definition, properties, and pathways for assessment. A number of key research gaps exist for critically reviewing social resilience conceptualization, projecting resilience properties in a disaster-development continuum, and delineating a resilience trajectory in a multiple disaster timeline. This review addressed these research gaps by critically reviewing social resilience definitions, properties, and pathways. The review found four variations in social resilience definitions, which recognize the importance of abilities of social systems and processes in disaster phases at different levels. A review of resilience properties and pathways in the disaster resilience literature suggested new resilience properties—“risk-sensitivity” and “regenerative” in the timeline of two consecutive disasters. This review highlights a causal pathway for social resilience to better understand the resilience status in a multi-shock scenario by depicting inherent and adaptive resilience for consecutive disaster scenarios and a historical case study for a resilience trajectory in a multiple disaster timeline. The review findings will assist disaster management policymakers and practitioners to formulate appropriate resilience enhancement strategies within a holistic framework in a multi-disaster timeline.

In highly volatile and uncertain times, organizations need to develop a resilience capacity which enables them to cope effectively with unexpected events, bounce back from crises, and even foster future success. Although academic interest in organizational resilience has steadily grown in recent years, there is little consensus about what resilience actually means and how it is composed. More knowledge is particularly needed about organizational capabilities that constitute resilience, as well as conditions for their development. This paper aims to make a contribution to this heterogeneous research field by deepening the understanding of the complex and embedded construct of organizational resilience. We conceptualize resilience as a meta-capability and decompose the construct into its individual parts. Inspired by process-based studies, we suggest three successive resilience stages (anticipation, coping, and adaptation) and give an overview of underlying capabilities that together form organizational resilience. Based on this outline, we discuss relationships and interactions of the different resilience stages as well as main antecedents and drivers. We formulate propositions that can act as a foundation for future empirical work.

PurposeWhile various supply chain (SC) sustainability investigations exist, their connection to supply chain resilience (SCRes) remains largely unexplored. To fill this gap, the authors answer the question: “How do firms' sustainability actions affect their SCs' resilience and sustainability trajectories in turbulent environments?\" by exploring the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.Design/methodology/approachThe authors conducted 10 case studies in five industries located in six European countries. A total of 19 semi-structured interviews and relevant secondary data were collected and analyzed in reference to SC sustainability learning and the literature on SCRes approaches (i.e. engineering, ecological and social-ecological).Findings31 SC actions referring to different sustainability dimensions were identified to map SCRes learning through a temporal, spatial and functional scale analysis. While five cases are related to an engineering approach focused on “bouncing back” to pre-pandemic goals, three cases were focused on “bouncing forward” as part of an ecological approach. Moreover, the authors identified the existence of two social-ecological resilience cases which developed long-term actions, updating functional set-ups transcending the SC level. The results furthermore illustrate an influence of the SCRes approaches on SC sustainability learning, generating three different paths: flat, flat ascending and ascending SC sustainability trajectories.Research limitations/implicationsThe study develops an overview of the adoption of SCRes approaches due to temporal, spatial and functional scales, and their effect on SC sustainability trajectories through exploitation and exploration capabilities. Future research should elaborate on potential moderators in the proposed relationships.Practical implicationsA better understanding of the link between SC sustainability actions and SCRes will help practitioners to make better informed decisions in turbulent environments.Originality/valueUnlike previous research, this paper provides empirical evidence on engineering, ecological and social-ecological SCRes approaches, as well as SC sustainability trajectories.

In sub-Saharan countries, like South Africa, there is scant understanding of adolescent resilience to depression over time; the multisystemic resource combinations that support such resilience; and whether more diverse resource combinations yield better mental health dividends. In response, we conducted a longitudinal concurrent nested mixed methods study with 223 South African adolescents (mean age: 17.16 years, SD = 1.73; 64.60% girls; 81.60% Black). Using longitudinal mixture modeling, the quantitative study identified trajectories of depression and associations between trajectory membership and resource diversity. Using a draw-and-write methodology and reflexive thematic analyses, the qualitative study explored the resource diversity associated with each trajectory. Taken together, these studies identified four depression trajectories (Stable Low; Declining; Worsening; Chronic High) with varying resource diversity at baseline and over time. Resource diversity was inclusive of personal, relational, contextual, and culturally valued resources in both the Stable Low and Declining trajectories, with emphasis on relational supports. Personal resources were emphasized in the Worsening and Chronic High trajectories, and culturally valued and contextual resources de-emphasized. In summary, resource constellations characterized by within and across system diversity and cultural responsiveness are more protective and will be key to advancing sub-Saharan adolescent mental health.

Background Psychological distress is common in maintenance hemodialysis patients, and high psychological resilience can promote psychological well-being. The current research focuses on psychological resilience protective factors such as family resilience and social support. However, the trajectories of psychological resilience, family resilience, and social support over time and their longitudinal relationships in maintenance hemodialysis patients have not been fully explored yet. Therefore, this study aims to explore the longitudinal relationship between these factors. Methods Patients who received regular hemodialysis treatment for more than three months at dialysis centers of three tertiary hospitals in Zhejiang, China, were recruited from September to December 2020. A total of 252 patients who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria completed three follow-up surveys, including social support, family resilience, and psychological resilience assessments. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to explore differences in their respective scores at different time points. The cross-lagged analysis was performed in AMOS using the maximum likelihood method to examine the the reciprocal predictive relationships between these factors. Results Social support and psychological resilience remained relatively stable over time, whereas family resilience indicated a little increasing trend. According to the cross-lagged analysis, higher T1 social support predicted higher family resilience at T2 [β = 0.123, 95% CI (0.026–0.244)]. Further, the effects of T2 social support to T3 family resilience [β = 0.194, 95%CI (0.039–0.335)] and psychological resilience [β = 0.205, 95%CI (0.049–0.354)] were significant. Finally, the effects of T2 family resilience to T3 social support [β = 0.122, 95%CI (0.010–0.225)] and psychological resilience [β = 0.244, 95%CI (0.119–0.359)] were also significant. Conclusions The study showed that the directionality of the relationship appears to be from social support or family resilience to patients’ psychological resilience but not vice versa. This finding reminds healthcare professionals to emphasize the vital role of social and family resources in providing appropriate support and interventions for maintenance hemodialysis patients to promote psychological resilience and mental health development.

The provisioning of ecosystem services to society is increasingly under pressure from global change. Changing disturbance regimes are of particular concern in this context due to their high potential impact on ecosystem structure, function and composition. Resilience‐based stewardship is advocated to address these changes in ecosystem management, but its operational implementation has remained challenging. We review observed and expected changes in disturbance regimes and their potential impacts on provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting ecosystem services, concentrating on temperate and boreal forests. Subsequently, we focus on resilience as a powerful concept to quantify and address these changes and their impacts, and present an approach towards its operational application using established methods from disturbance ecology. We suggest using the range of variability concept – characterizing and bounding the long‐term behaviour of ecosystems – to locate and delineate the basins of attraction of a system. System recovery in relation to its range of variability can be used to measure resilience of ecosystems, allowing inferences on both engineering resilience (recovery rate) and monitoring for regime shifts (directionality of recovery trajectory). It is important to consider the dynamic nature of these properties in ecosystem analysis and management decision‐making, as both disturbance processes and mechanisms of resilience will be subject to changes in the future. Furthermore, because ecosystem services are at the interface between natural and human systems, the social dimension of resilience (social adaptive capacity and range of variability) requires consideration in responding to changing disturbance regimes in forests. Synthesis and applications. Based on examples from temperate and boreal forests we synthesize principles and pathways for fostering resilience to changing disturbance regimes in ecosystem management. We conclude that future work should focus on testing and implementing these pathways in different contexts to make ecosystem services provisioning more robust to changing disturbance regimes and advance our understanding of how to cope with change and uncertainty in ecosystem management.

PurposeSince the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, most organizations have experienced a sudden and unprecedented drop in revenue and productivity. However, the pandemic did not exclusively negatively impact organizations; rather, it resulted in both negative and positive effects. To delve into the multi-level process through which organizational outcomes change from negative to positive indicators, this study focuses on organizational resilience as a theoretical concept to overcome pandemic-related turmoil.Design/methodology/approachThe authors conducted a multi-level analysis based on grounded theory with a sample of 30 healthcare employees who worked in hospitals and were simultaneously enrolled in a part-time master of business administration (MBA) program at a university in the Midwest. Of the 30 participants, 21 were from a single university hospital (UH), and the remaining 9 participants were from other hospitals (non-UH).FindingsThe authors analyzed the data and incorporated three existing perspectives of organizational resilience (attribute, process and multi-level views) into an integrated model. The authors identified 25 first-order concepts and 8 second-order themes and categorized them into 4 aggregate dimensions at different unit levels: organizational field, leadership, operation and individual units.Practical implicationsA resilient hospital operates as a cohesive system, with entities at various levels – from individuals and teams to the broader organization – collaborating seamlessly to foster resilience. Top management team (TMT) should persistently communicate with employees to provide information about the current crisis and clear strategic directions to reduce employees' fear and prevent anomie stemming from future uncertainty. Managers should not only be concerned about employees' physical safety from infection and psychological safety from isolation but also encourage employees to elicit meaningfulness from their work. Furthermore, TMT and human resource (HR) teams should adapt human resource management (HRM) practices to allow for flexibility and optimism in employee roles.Originality/valueIn this study, the authors utilized a qualitative methodology with grounded theory in order to develop a comprehensive model that holds theoretical, methodological and practical significance. Theoretically, the authors' novelty lies in the synthesis of three distinct perspectives: attribute, process and multi-level. The authors merged these approaches into a unified model, identifying precursors of resilience at different levels. Methodologically, the authors focused on hospitals as target samples, which were the foremost and representative organizations severely confronting the crisis and turmoil brought by the pandemic. The authors documented organizations' experiences amidst the crisis as they unfolded in real time rather than in hindsight. This approach highlights the immediacy and significance of the authors' research in the realm of crisis management. Practically, the authors' findings illuminate that organizational resilience can be developed through a collaborative effort. It emerges from coordinated interactions across various organizational actors, from employees and middle managers to the TMT.