ICIEOM2023_ABST_0035_37827
ON RESILIENCE AND MENTAL MODELS: A PROPOSED THEORETICAL ANALYSIS
ÁREA: 05.Human development and digital training for operation management in emergencies
RESUMO:
Abstract. Disruptive events – like the economic crisis and even the natural disaster - occur far more frequently than previously anticipated. The unpredictable and disruptive environmental changing circumstances have forced executives to adapt their business operations to new and unexpected challenges, threats, and opportunities. To succeed in this challenging environment, executives need to support the severe stress and perceive and understand the emerging drivers of change in the external environment to find new ways for surviving and prospering. In other words, they need resilience and a strategic mental model (SMM) needed for strategic competence. Research Problem and Objective: Resilience is a dynamic process that encompasses a positive adaptation in a turbulent environment. This positive adjustment requires the ability to perceive tenuous and anticipatory environmental signs of turbulence and crises. When faced with such a situation, many executives will have different perceptions and exhibit different patterns of resilience. How can these differences in resilience patterns be explained? The objective of this work is, through the analysis of the 10-item CD-RISC Scale, to establish the theoretical relationship between resilience patterns and MMs and to discuss the issue of developing an SMM. Theoretical Foundation: Mental models are the person's default neurocognitive functioning mode and provide data on how a person reacts in a turbulent environment. MM (Operational - OMM and Strategic - SMM) – make it possible to identify and explain differences in executives' resilience patterns. Resilience may be the maintenance of a positive adjustment under a dramatically evolving environment. APA defines resilience as the process and outcome of successfully adapting to difficult or challenging life experiences, especially through mental, emotional, and behavioral flexibility and adjustment to external and internal demands. This positive adjustment requires the capability to perceive weak and anticipatory environmental signs for the coming crisis and turbulences. In the literature, we find two ways of understanding resilience: reactive resilience - “the ability to bend and not to break” (Bridges, 1995: 5) or active resilience - which refers to a prospective strategy; to perceive the opportunities it brings and the competence to grow with the challenge. One can assess resilience by the 10-the CD-RISC scale. The scale analysis in the light of MMs makes it possible to establish a relationship between the OMM and reactive resilience and the SMM and proactive resilience. Methodology: This work aims to relate, theoretically, the MMs, as measured by the Personal Inclination Questionnaire (QIP) (Silva, 1992), and resilience as measured by the 10-the CD-RISC scale (Connor & Davidson 2003). The QIP provides a valid measure of the variables used to identify the MMs and has good content validity and adherence to the population. The CD-RISC scale measures the self-perceived ability to adapt to adversity. Items such as “I Can achieve goals despite obstacles” were rated on a 5-point scale from 0 (not true at all) to 4 (nearly always true). The scale has previously demonstrated good reliability with an internal consistency estimate of .85. Three judges participated in this study. They have pertinent training on MM variables and some knowledge of Resilience. The first stage consisted of familiarization with the concepts of resilience and MM. For familiarization, the judges answered the questionnaires and hold a debate on MM and Resilience. Then, judgers did the assessment of each of the items of the 10-item CD-RISC, carried out from the MMs' perspective. The defined hypothesis was: respondents with OMM would score below average – reactive resilience - and respondents with SMM would score above average – active resilience. The objective of this analysis was to establish what would characterize the probable score attributed by each MM to each test item. Discussion: The study shows us that it is possible to infer, at least theoretically, the executive's pattern of resilience. According to MMs, only professionals with SMM are able to present, by default, active resilience. Identifying the MM of the professionals makes it possible to estimate the persons’ resilience pattern. When analyzing the issue of resilience development, a question that arises concerns the development of the SMM and the ability of people to change themselves. A person is able to acquire not only new knowledge or skills but also new neurocognitive structures, through which new areas beyond his background of knowledge and skills are opened. This process is the modifiability of the human being (Feuerstein et al., 2014). Conclusion: Once establish the relationship between resilience and MM, it becomes easier to understand why some executives are resilient, and most are not: they have trouble dealing with the environment VUCA. One implication for the executive's resilience development may be that before intervening with programs and practices, it is necessary to focus on helping executives enhance their SMM. To face this task, the first thing to do is help executives to assess their MM. Once assessed their MM, it made possible to improve or change those MMs. By the way, developing executives’ strategic MM is among the most critical capabilities an organization needs to develop. This task is a big challenge because MM development may be the actual mean for people's development. To develop resilience, executives must attend development programs designed to enhance SMM. These investments in learning are meant for giving birth to new abilities required to improve organizational performance and results.
PALAVRAS-CHAVE:
executive resilience; mental models; resilience development
DOI: 10.14488/ijcieom2023_abst_0035_37827
RESUMO:
Abstract. Disruptive events – like the economic crisis and even the natural disaster - occur far more frequently than previously anticipated. The unpredictable and disruptive environmental changing circumstances have forced executives to adapt their business operations to new and unexpected challenges, threats, and opportunities. To succeed in this challenging environment, executives need to support the severe stress and perceive and understand the emerging drivers of change in the external environment to find new ways for surviving and prospering. In other words, they need resilience and a strategic mental model (SMM) needed for strategic competence. Research Problem and Objective: Resilience is a dynamic process that encompasses a positive adaptation in a turbulent environment. This positive adjustment requires the ability to perceive tenuous and anticipatory environmental signs of turbulence and crises. When faced with such a situation, many executives will have different perceptions and exhibit different patterns of resilience. How can these differences in resilience patterns be explained? The objective of this work is, through the analysis of the 10-item CD-RISC Scale, to establish the theoretical relationship between resilience patterns and MMs and to discuss the issue of developing an SMM. Theoretical Foundation: Mental models are the person's default neurocognitive functioning mode and provide data on how a person reacts in a turbulent environment. MM (Operational - OMM and Strategic - SMM) – make it possible to identify and explain differences in executives' resilience patterns. Resilience may be the maintenance of a positive adjustment under a dramatically evolving environment. APA defines resilience as the process and outcome of successfully adapting to difficult or challenging life experiences, especially through mental, emotional, and behavioral flexibility and adjustment to external and internal demands. This positive adjustment requires the capability to perceive weak and anticipatory environmental signs for the coming crisis and turbulences. In the literature, we find two ways of understanding resilience: reactive resilience - “the ability to bend and not to break” (Bridges, 1995: 5) or active resilience - which refers to a prospective strategy; to perceive the opportunities it brings and the competence to grow with the challenge. One can assess resilience by the 10-the CD-RISC scale. The scale analysis in the light of MMs makes it possible to establish a relationship between the OMM and reactive resilience and the SMM and proactive resilience. Methodology: This work aims to relate, theoretically, the MMs, as measured by the Personal Inclination Questionnaire (QIP) (Silva, 1992), and resilience as measured by the 10-the CD-RISC scale (Connor & Davidson 2003). The QIP provides a valid measure of the variables used to identify the MMs and has good content validity and adherence to the population. The CD-RISC scale measures the self-perceived ability to adapt to adversity. Items such as “I Can achieve goals despite obstacles” were rated on a 5-point scale from 0 (not true at all) to 4 (nearly always true). The scale has previously demonstrated good reliability with an internal consistency estimate of .85. Three judges participated in this study. They have pertinent training on MM variables and some knowledge of Resilience. The first stage consisted of familiarization with the concepts of resilience and MM. For familiarization, the judges answered the questionnaires and hold a debate on MM and Resilience. Then, judgers did the assessment of each of the items of the 10-item CD-RISC, carried out from the MMs' perspective. The defined hypothesis was: respondents with OMM would score below average – reactive resilience - and respondents with SMM would score above average – active resilience. The objective of this analysis was to establish what would characterize the probable score attributed by each MM to each test item. Discussion: The study shows us that it is possible to infer, at least theoretically, the executive's pattern of resilience. According to MMs, only professionals with SMM are able to present, by default, active resilience. Identifying the MM of the professionals makes it possible to estimate the persons’ resilience pattern. When analyzing the issue of resilience development, a question that arises concerns the development of the SMM and the ability of people to change themselves. A person is able to acquire not only new knowledge or skills but also new neurocognitive structures, through which new areas beyond his background of knowledge and skills are opened. This process is the modifiability of the human being (Feuerstein et al., 2014). Conclusion: Once establish the relationship between resilience and MM, it becomes easier to understand why some executives are resilient, and most are not: they have trouble dealing with the environment VUCA. One implication for the executive's resilience development may be that before intervening with programs and practices, it is necessary to focus on helping executives enhance their SMM. To face this task, the first thing to do is help executives to assess their MM. Once assessed their MM, it made possible to improve or change those MMs. By the way, developing executives’ strategic MM is among the most critical capabilities an organization needs to develop. This task is a big challenge because MM development may be the actual mean for people's development. To develop resilience, executives must attend development programs designed to enhance SMM. These investments in learning are meant for giving birth to new abilities required to improve organizational performance and results.
PALAVRAS-CHAVE:
executive resilience; mental models; resilience development
DOI: 10.14488/ijcieom2023_abst_0035_37827
AUTORES:
FLÁVIO BRESSAN
BREMAT INSTITUTE FOR STRATEGIC THINKING & LEADERSHIP
FLÁVIO BRESSAN
BREMAT INSTITUTE FOR STRATEGIC THINKING & LEADERSHIP
|