Search results

Interest in psychological resilience has grown rapidly in the last couple of decades (Britt, Sinclair, & McFadden, 2016; King & Rothstein, 2010; Youssef & Luthans, 2007). Psychological resilience occurs when a person can “recover, re-bound, bounce-back, adjust or even thrive” in the face of adversity (Garcia-Dia, DiNapoli, Garcia-Ona, Jakubowski, & O’flaherty, 2013, p. 264). As such, resilience can be conceptualized as a state-like and malleable construct that can be enhanced in response to stressful events (Kossek & Perrigino, 2016). It incorporates a dynamic process by which individuals use protective factors (internal and external) to positively adapt to stress over time (Luthar, Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000; Rutter, 1987). Building on the dual-pathway model of resilience, we integrate adaptive and proactive coping to the resilience development process and add a heretofore unexamined perspective to the ways in which resilience changes over time. We propose that resilience development trajectories differ depending on the type of adversity or stress experienced in combination with the use of adaptive and proactive coping. We outline the need for future longitudinal studies to examine these relationships and the implications for developing resilience interventions in the workplace.

In this chapter, the authors present a conceptual perspective on resilience that is grounded in self-regulation theory, to help address theoretical, empirical, and practical concerns in this domain. Despite the growing popularity of resilience research (see Linnenluecke, 2017), scholars have noted ongoing concerns about conceptual confusion and resulting, paradoxical, stigmatization associated with the label “resilience” (e.g., Adler, 2013; Britt, Shen, Sinclair, Grossman, & Klieger, 2016; Luthar, Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000). The authors seek to advance this domain via presenting a clarified, theoretically grounded conceptualization that can facilitate unified theoretical advancements, aligned operationalization, research model development, and intervention improvements. Resilience is defined here as continued, self-regulated goal striving (e.g., behavioral and/or psychological) despite adversity (i.e., after goal frustration). This self-regulatory conceptualization of resilience offers theoretically based definitions for the necessary conditions (i.e., adversity and overcoming) and outlines specific characteristics (i.e., unit-centered and dynamic) of resilience, distinguishes resilience from other persistence-related concepts (e.g., grit and hardiness), and provides a framework for understanding the connections (and distinctions) between resilience, performance, and well-being. After presenting this self-regulatory resilience perspective, the authors outline additional paths forward for the domain.

In the aviation sector adversity faced by female pilots stemming from stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination are well documented. Such adversity in the workplace can cause occupational stress, which may be greater for female pilots, and this influences individual resiliency, impacting job performance and wellbeing. Resilience may be a mitigating factor for coping with occupational stress and individual resilience can be factored into an organisation’s resilience as a whole. When organisations face challenges, there is a need for resilience in order to survive and adapt during disruption and adversity. Resilience with respect to employee and workplace contexts includes both personal resources among the employees as well as workplace resources that are connected to the workplace and organisational environment. As resilience continues to emerge as part of a human capital management strategy, the need to understand the role of the workplace is magnified. For aviation, understanding resilience can potentially inform organisational interventions to address the known occupational stressors and workplace adversity to increase employee performance and well-being. The role of workplace adversity and perceptions of workplace resource availability including supportive environments are discussed in relation to how they influence employee resilience specifically in the aviation industry. The aim of this chapter is to define resilience specific to employee and workplace contexts, introduce personal and workplace resources to influence employee resilience, and discuss the role of occupational stressors specifically for women in male-dominated career fields such as aviation.

Shane and Venkataraman (2000) and Venkataraman (1997) suggest that the field of entrepreneurship seeks to understand how opportunities are discovered, created, and exploited, by whom, and with what consequences (italic added). Surprisingly and despite the fact that the person – the entrepreneur – is central to the creation of new ventures, entrepreneurship scholars are reluctant to explicitly include individual differences in formal models of new venture formation. For example, notwithstanding the important role that entrepreneurs play in forging new wealth and creating new jobs, research to identify cognitive processes, attitudes, behaviors, traits, or other characteristics that distinguish entrepreneurs from others who opt to work as employees remains somewhat marginal. Indeed, only very few studies on individual differences have been published in leading management journals. One possible explanation for this reluctance is that in the past researchers might have classified most individual differences as traits research and thus criticism spilled over to include all individual difference research, regardless of whether the focus was trait, cognitions, emotions, attitudes, behaviors, or other characteristics.

The higher education industry is experiencing fiscal, organizational, and competitive stress in today's competitive environment (Bowen, 2018; McCaferty, 2018). As educators and higher education leaders, we believe that our role in society is essential ecause our collective work inherently concerns student learning, research and service to our university and the broader society. Yet, with today's competitive higher education market, universities and colleges ask more and more of faculty, staff and administrators to ‘get the work done’, creating mental, physical, emotional and spiritual stress. This chapter shares insights, practices and research designed to help university and college workers become resilient in the face of this set of extreme challenges In particular, the focus of this chapter is resilience and its four dimensions including physical, emotional, spiritual and mental resilience. It is argued that by investing in our own resilience as leaders, we foster the resilience of our colleagues, peers, teams, and institutions such that we can thrive in today's higher education environment despite its ongoing challenges.

Given the uncertain and often disruptive business environment, understanding how employees, teams, and organizations can recover from stress, build long-lasting resilience, and exploit failures as learning opportunities is key for employees’ well-being and organizational success. The book has been organized in three sections, each representing a major domain of inquiry: recovery, resilience, and learning. The chapters within each section elaborate on these domains, and each provides novel ideas and insights. The goal of this chapter is to summarize and integrate some themes and insights offered by the chapters in this book. Based on this summary and integration, the author will illuminate some exciting paths opened up by these chapters, which might be worth exploring further by other scholars in the future. Specifically, future research could benefit from (1) stronger integration of research on recovery, resilience, and learning from failure, (2) better understanding of the role of setbacks, failure, and adversity for recovery, resilience, and learning, and (3) investigations of the role of context for recovery, resilience, and learning from failure.

Academics around the world continue to demonstrate strength to overcome the initial hurdles of COVID-19. But resilient academics show sustained engagement despite the continuing changes and uncertainties during these ongoing challenging times. In this concluding chapter, we synthesise the key takeaways from each chapter – narratives that may support academics at every career stage to feel energised, motivated and inspired in times of adversity. We share critical insights and strategies that may assist academics forge ahead in a post-pandemic world. In doing so, we advance the Academic Resilience Model that may help academics – and institutions – thrive in times of adversity.

Aboriginal students experience disproportionate academic disadvantage at school. It may be that a capacity to effectively deal with academic setback and challenge (academic buoyancy) can reduce the incidence of academic adversity. To the extent that this is the case, academic buoyancy may also be associated with positive educational intentions. This study explores the role of academic buoyancy in Aboriginal students’ post-school educational intentions.

The survey-based study comprises Aboriginal (N = 350) and non-Aboriginal (N = 592) high school students in Australia.

Academic buoyancy yielded larger effect sizes for Aboriginal than non-Aboriginal students’ educational intentions – particularly in senior high school when educational intentions are most likely to translate into post-school educational behaviour.

Post-school education is one pathway providing access to social opportunity. Any thorough consideration of students’ passage into and through post-school education must first consider the bases of students’ academic plans and, by implication, their decision to pursue further study. Identifying factors such as academic buoyancy in this process provides some specific direction for practice and policy aimed at optimizing Aboriginal students’ academic and non-academic development.

Academic buoyancy is a recently proposed construct in the psycho-educational literature and has not been investigated among Aboriginal student populations. Its role in relation to post-school educational intentions is also a novel empirical contribution for both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal students alike.

In feminist criminology, there is a growing body of research exploring gendered pathways into prison. However, to date, this scholarship has not considered how age and gender may intersect to impact women’s criminalization experiences. In this chapter, the authors have consequently chosen to explore older women’s (aged 50+ years) narratives of their journeys to prison in Thailand using a feminist pathways approach. Results show several common threads in the stories of these women. Most were criminalized for the first time in later adulthood, had lived with various childhood and adulthood adversities, including, but not limited, to victimization and financial precarity, and had familial caretaking responsibilities. Many also recounted problems with substance misuse. Additionally, two relatively distinct pathways to prison emerged from the narratives: (1) economically motivated, (2) adversity, emotional distress, and addiction. A third pathway – intersectional, diffuse and unique – was also identified. It included themes from the first two pathways and the story of one woman that could not be categorized elsewhere. While the imprisonment pathways found mirrored those from previous pathways scholarship points of difference are noted.