In the world of words, there are sets of everyday syllables that reveal, by the order and composition of the sounds, their meaning directly when listening. However, there are curious words that hide meanings that go beyond what they might indicate in the first place.
The word resilience is one of those words in the Spanish language that does not show its meaning when they are heard for the first time. Instead, it is a complex word that contains within itself multiple ideas that can be adapted depending on the context treated.
According to the RAE (2014) the word resilience is an anglicism defined as: "The adaptability of a living being in the face of a disturbing agent or an adverse state or situation". For its second definition, the RAE also mentions that its acceptable meaning can also be: "The ability of a material, mechanism or system to recover its initial state when the disturbance to which it had been subjected has ceased."
Resilience refers to the ability of an entity to adapt to external events. However, we must bear in mind that the second meaning of the word contemplates the concept of recovering the initial state while in the first concept it is considered that the agent must adapt to the situation generated by external forces.
Interestingly, the official acceptance of the meaning harbors two relatively different conditions. On the one hand, it is indicated that the object that presents resilience is capable of adapting to external forces, but also the same condition implies that after such a disturbance, the analyzed object must return to its original condition.
In the context in which we are immersed on this occasion, resilience is involved in the world of organizations. What should we expect from an organization that has resilience? In the first instance we could expect an organization adaptable to external agents, but we could also expect an organization that returns to its original state after the original influence.
To further delve into the questions that the concept can raise , is it possible for an organization to return to its original state after an external force had an effect on its composition? It is difficult to imagine an organization that returns to its original state, since organizations are in constant transformation.
The resilience process within the organization
As individuals we tend to find ourselves in constant stages of transformation. As the result of organizations is a direct reflection of the behaviors of its members, it is possible to expect that no organization will return to a primitive state.
According to Sampedro (2009) we can define human resilience as: “The capacity of an individual or a social system to live well and develop positively, despite difficult living conditions and even more so, to emerge strengthened and be transformed by them".
The issue to be discussed then is How is the resilience process carried out in the organization? The definition given by Sampedro shows that resilience in the field of organizations refers to the fact that, despite the changes generated in the environment, the same organization can benefit from these changes.
According to Hoffman (2013) who cites Sambrano, the resilience process has seven characteristics that are vital for the organization to successfully overcome adversity. These are: introspection, morality, creativity, humor, independence, relationship and initiative.
Introspection
Introspection is defined as "the self-critical capacity possessed by certain individuals, to observe themselves and the environment, make deep questions, giving honest answers" (Hoffman, 2013) .
Morality
Morality is defined as “the transcendent meaning given to certain actions, wishing others their own good. It is one that encompasses the different values internalized by each person through vital development, which makes them capable of discriminating between good and bad ” (Hoffman, 2013)
The creativity
Creativity is defined as “a state of consciousness that generates a network of relationships to identify, pose, produce and solve problems both in a relevant and original way. It is the ability to create beauty, order, or goals out of chaos or disorder. It is about producing something out of nothing, giving life to simple elements or modifying what already exists ” (Hoffman, 2013)
The humor
We can define humor as “the ability to face situations in a playful or fun way, using the crisis as a source of inspiration. It is the predisposition of the spirit to joy, which allows to move away the focus of tension, relativize and positivize, it is about finding the comic side of adverse situations. It is a state of mind, considered persistent, that allows training to critically relativize emotional experiences ”. (Hoffman, 2013)
The independence
The author (Hoffman, 2013) defines independence as “the ability to objectively view problems, establishing limits without being passionate or influenced by their own maps. It is the ability to maintain physical and emotional distance from problems without falling into isolation, helping to establish limits with adverse environments ”.
The relationship:
We can define the relationship as “the ability to provide, sustain and establish strong long-term relationships, both of trust and solidarity with other people. It is the ability to establish intimate, satisfactory ties with other people, allowing to offer oneself to others and accept them in one's life, it is possible to define it as the ability to have a marked social ability, knowing human nature and taking an interest in others. (Hoffman, 2013)
The initiative:
The author defines the concept as “the ability to demand oneself, to appear to one's own responsibilities, the decisions made and the consequences generated, the initiative is also defined as proactivity, an attitude of responsibility oriented towards change”. (Hoffman, 2013)
With the set of these seven concepts, it is possible to generate environments that have organizational resilience as an objective and as a business philosophy. By establishing these practices within the organization, it is possible to generate a continuous commitment to market demand.
However, the innovation process can take different directions. Some of them promote revolutionary ideas that transform the lives of millions of individuals around the world, while other organizations take the innovation process as a vicious cycle that does not bring long-term social benefits.
The process of innovation and planned obsolescence
Organizations need not fear innovation. In fact, they must be constantly subject to change, seeking that being in that situation leads to a state of continuous improvement. As Tushman & Reilly (1997) mention, technology evolves in innovation channels that have different elements to compete.
Tushman & Reilly (1997) mention that:
Technological cycles are characteristic of the consumer society. The cycle begins when a research and development pioneer creates a product and it is successful in the marketplace. Later, when noticing that there is a great potential market, competition arises. While the designs must be distinguishable enough to be identifiable by the public, the design trends are clear.
An example of this is the development of the touch screen on a wide range of mobile devices. Although there are multiple brands that have products with a differentiated quality and price, they all follow the same design trend which establishes that the device must have a touch screen. A device that lacked a touch screen would be regarded by the public as obsolete.
If an organization's product is to survive, it must adapt to market design trends. In fact, there are even organizations whose products are a reinvention of their previous product range. Again it is necessary to take up the example of mobile devices. 10 years ago the technology applied to these designs was a revolution. However, the companies that started the revolution today are just adding new features.
These organizations have mastered a concept commonly called planned obsolescence. According to Dannoritzer (2011), planned obsolescence is “ a commercial strategy that consists of planning the end of the useful life of a product or service, in such a way that, after a period of time, calculated by the manufacturer or by the company becomes obsolete or unusable ”.
Consumers tend to enter their own worldview, which is influenced by the organizations that participate in the market. The modern consumer has the desire to remain at the forefront of technology, with industrial design strategies focused on reducing the durability of the product or marketing focused on discrediting past models, the consumer wants to purchase a new product.
An organization that wishes to remain current must have high sales rates. However, you must also maintain a constantly moving market. Therefore, you must consciously seek that individuals wish to discard their obsolete products and constantly acquire new products, even when their characteristics are not for the most part different.
Is this system fundamental to our market economy? This problem of planned obsolescence is a case that affects consumers and the environment alike. However, without this system the industry would not be able to provide employment to individuals because the products would be demanded in longer periods of time. It is time to reflect on our own market economy and the purpose of our companies.
What is the purpose of producing a large quantity of products, if they do not satisfy the needs of individuals? A solution to this problem would be to reduce production and increase prices. However, in a market economy, competitors could take advantage of this situation to generate cheaper products and replace the competition. It seems that market competition is a system in which the effects on the environment are not taken as the primary variable.
As Senge (1980) mentions "There are times when subjects do not make individual mistakes. Systems can cause their own crises". In a system where business organizations do not observe the effect they cause on the macro environment, in the long term these organizations and consumers will be the cause of problems that humanity will not be able to solve without sacrificing much of what makes them human.
Does resilience favor planned obsolescence? In the first instance, it would seem that organizations that want to remain in force should favor this commercial strategy. However, there is a concept that goes beyond resilience and this not only encourages organizations to stay on course, but also that they can be part of the process of creative trends. These trends favor the development of new products, which compete within the market and bring benefits to the consumer.
Resilience and strategic ingenuity
Taking into account that resilience is a fundamental factor within the organization, it must be established that beyond the simple ability to continue operations despite market changes, it is necessary for the organization to maintain constant innovation.
For Sampedro (2009), for resilience to take place within an organization, a process of creative impulse is necessary. This concept of creative drive is the foundation for strategic ingenuity. Only by mastering the mechanics of impulse will the organization continue in the line of ingenuity and adaptation.
However, what is this strategic ingenuity about? The author (Sampedro, 2009) defines it as "The competence that allows generating creative - productive impulses for organizational sustainability during periods of crisis". An organization that cannot stay ahead is incapable of staying current.
To develop a creative impulse, the combination of 3 fundamental factors is necessary, which are: preparation, perspective and collaboration. These three elements together are the basis for building an organization capable of staying within the system.
preparation:
Preparation is a fundamental element for organizations to remain current. An organization that wants to be successful needs to prepare for such a situation. According to Sampedro, it is mentioned that "If a leader or organization is prepared, but is not ready, then it will not be able to react in time and therefore it will somehow become organizational lethargy" (2009)
An organization must remain attentive to constant change, so it must have specific plans for each situation. Although there is talk of a creative impulse, it is often advisable to have emergency plans and ideas saved for times of precariousness.
Perspective:
In modern times, the demand for characteristics of a leader demands a wide range of elements that allow him to respond to constant change. A leader is obliged to be able to analyze situations from a totally different point of view. The worldview of a leader must remain open to conceive time and the future within a range of possibilities.
According to Sampedro, "The disposition and ability to think differently, be ambidextrous and stay alert to the genuine needs of customers are in short key ingredients to develop strategic criteria that favor ingenuity" (2009)
The ability to think differently from the rest of the individuals that exist within the scope of the competence gives the leader the ability to guide the elements of the organization to the desired goal. Only with the right perspective is it possible to enter the innovation process.
Having a good idea is not the only element necessary to succeed in the competitive market, without the necessary perspective, it is impossible for organizations to observe market opportunities. What may seem like a good thing at first may ultimately lead to failure.
Collaboration:
If a sports team has an Olympic award as the main gear, but the rest of the machine is made up of amateurs, it is impossible that together they have enough performance to compete in the big leagues. In the same way an organization works.
Even with excellent preparation and an open perspective, it will be impossible for the organization to create a culture of innovation without the ability to collaborate. Sampedro (2009) mentions that we must incorporate the concept of knowledge empowerment in order to create knowledge.
According to the author, "This empowerment involves facilitating relationships and conversations, as well as the exchange of knowledge within and outside the organization, in order to enable a creative environment and a response to the challenges of the environment" (2009)
If within an organization there is constant and efficient communication, it is to be expected that the ideas of the different members enter a process of exchange and among the thousands of thoughts that are gestated within individuals, it is possible to begin a process of innovation.
Reflection: Towards a world of flexible companies
When speaking of a world in which the free market is a reality, organizations are in a situation of constant change. It is impossible to imagine a static situation in modern times, when every day hundreds of competitors emerge fighting within the market.
Can organizations use the organizational resilience process to face the problems of the future? The answer to this question goes beyond the very concept of resilience. It is necessary for organizations much further away from simple adaptation, organizations must see changes as opportunities.
These opportunities are disguised as challenges and problems. The market has constant demands that many times tend to follow cycles and systems, but that at other times are surprising revolutions that take many existing organizations by surprise.
It is the duty of the organization to be the engine of transformation and innovation. While the ultimate goal of each individual is to maximize their utility, individual efforts can in fact lead to the common good. Talking about a world where all individuals benefit from the process of capitalism is a possible reality, only if the conditions of constant innovation are present.
When products do not fall into the context of programmed obsolescence, but are actually products that generate social transformations, we are cooperating to reach a social level higher than the previous step. Only with a high process of innovation and transformation will humanity succeed in transcending.
References
- Dannoritzer, C. (Address). (2011). Buy, throw, buy. Hoffman, H. (August 12, 2013). Resilience as an organizational strategy. Obtained from http://publicaciones.urbe.edu/index.php/forumhumanes/article/viewArticle/2745/39 89Real Academia Española. (2014). Royal Spanish Academy. Obtained from http://dle.rae.es/?id=WA5onlwReal Academia Española. (2014). Royal Spanish Academy. Obtained from http://dle.rae.es/?id=B5j9BD8Sampedro, J. (February 2009). GL Consulting. Obtained from http://www.glcconsulting.com.ve/articulos/Articulo_Ingenio%20Estrategico_Jesus% 20Sampedro.pdfSenge, P. (1980). The fifth discipline. Tushman, M., & Reilly, C. (1997). Winning though innovation: A practical guide to leading organizational change and renewal. Retrieved from http://crawl.prod.proquest.com.s3.amazonaws.com/fpcache/b6f2b36520ddfa0180f28f63898c6f07.pdf? AWSAccessKeyId = AKIAJF7V7KNV2KKY2NUQ & Expires = 1456817956 & Signature = 00% 2FYQ4xt1Qy7tAUJqbaznhbv2YY% 3D
According to the RAE (Real Academia Española, 2014), worldview refers to the global vision or conception of the universe.
Download the original file
