How Leaders Can Build Both Resilience and Adaptability to Create a Future Ready Workforce

Developing Organizational Capabilities for Resilience and Adaptability

Leaders face an unprecedented challenge: developing organizational capabilities for both resilience and adaptability in an environment of constant disruption. According to recent McKinsey research, only 23 percent of employees demonstrate high levels of both qualities, despite their crucial importance for business performance and innovation.

The Critical Need for Resilience and Adaptability

The article 'Developing a Resilient, Adaptable Workforce for an Uncertain Future' by Jacqueline Brassey, Aaron De Smet, and Dana Maor presents compelling evidence for why organizations must prioritize these dual capabilities. Their research reveals that employees who score high on both resilience and adaptability are over three times more likely to report high engagement and almost four times more likely to demonstrate innovative behaviors compared to their peers.

The Difference Between Resilience and Adaptability

The authors' main argument centers on the critical distinction between resilience and adaptability—and why organizations need both. They use the analogy of NBA player Stephen Curry to illustrate this difference: When Curry misses important shots but keeps shooting because he's mastered the skill, that's resilience. But if game rules changed to limit three-point shots, requiring him to fundamentally alter his approach, that would demand adaptability.

Key Research Findings

• Underinvestment in Capabilities: Most organizations significantly underinvest in these capabilities. McKinsey's Talent Trends survey found only 16 percent of global employers invest in adaptability and continuous learning programs, despite 26 percent of employees identifying it as a top skill need.
• The Role of Psychological Safety: The research shows that combining psychological safety with resilience and adaptability leads to six times higher engagement and innovative behavior compared to environments lacking these elements.
• Importance of Organizational Support: When employees experience strong organizational support alongside psychological safety and high resilience/adaptability, their likelihood of reporting high engagement or innovative behavior increases sixfold.

Based on these findings, the authors recommend four specific actions leaders must take:

1. Set a clear organizational North Star to provide stability amid change.
2. Build psychological safety to create a true community, not just a workforce.
3. Demonstrate personal resilience and adaptability as role models.
4. Facilitate group-based learning of these skills.

The Broader Implications

Research from other sources supports these recommendations. A study published in the Academy of Management Review by Christopher G. Myers emphasizes how social learning accelerates the development of new capabilities. Additionally, research in the Journal of Computer Assisted Learning shows that group-based learning creates stronger retention and application of new skills.

Historical and Contemporary Relevance

The authors' analysis gains particular relevance when considering historical parallels. They note how the industrial transition from steam to electricity took 30 years because companies couldn't adapt quickly enough. Today's leaders face multiple simultaneous disruptions—technological, economic, geopolitical, and social—making the development of both resilience and adaptability even more critical.

Resilience and Adaptability: A Dual Necessity

A particularly compelling aspect of the research is the finding that neither resilience nor adaptability alone is sufficient. While 56 percent of employees demonstrate high resilience and 28 percent show high adaptability, only 23 percent excel at both. This gap represents both a challenge and an opportunity for organizations.

Practical Implications

The practical implications are significant. Organizations must move beyond traditional change management approaches that often focus solely on resilience ('pushing through') or adaptability ('pivoting quickly'). Instead, they need integrated approaches that develop both capabilities simultaneously.

One pharmaceutical company cited in the article provides an instructi ve example. Their comprehensive training program reached 9,000 employees across all levels, using a combination of in-person workshops, digital tools, and social learning. The key to their success was creating a shared learning experience that developed both resilience and adaptability while aligning with business objectives.

Conclusion

For modern organizations, the stakes are high. As the authors conclude, leaders 'can't afford to take another three decades to figure out how to integrate and adapt when the next big game changer in business emerges.' The research makes clear that building both resilience and adaptability isn't just about surviving disruption—it's about creating competitive advantage through it.

The path forward requires a fundamental shift in how organizations approach capability building. Rather than treating resilience and adaptability as separate skills or nice-to-have attributes, they must be recognized as essential, interconnected capabilities that require systematic development at all organizational levels.