{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027607361963190184, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.751724137931035, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Rethinking Resilience: Definition, Context, and Measure

A sizeable literature treats “resilience” without defining it. Seeking to promote resilience from ubiquitous buzzword to managerially useful concept, we focus on situations in which human decision is paramount—organizational, community, and personal resilience—and exclude discussion of, e.g., resilience of fixed infrastructure and of unmanaged natural ecosystems. We argue that the word resilience, without modification or context, carries no meaning, but that strategic planning is a context that gives specific and useful meaning to resilience. Bringing in ideas from system theory, we discuss the role of anticipation, showing that resilience is not reactive; and the role of learning, showing that resilience is not a return to the status quo ante. These results provide diagnostic guidance for organizational management and for industry commentators, and a rigorous basis for further advances in resilience theory.