Disruptions happen. Always. From unexpected supply chain breakdowns to sudden market shifts, organizations and systems are constantly tested. Resilience isn’t just about surviving—it’s about bouncing back, adapting, and sometimes even thriving when circumstances change. Scholars have explored it in many dimensions: the capabilities to absorb shocks, the agility to respond quickly, and the flexibility to adjust operations on the fly. Whether in business, ecology, or human behavior, resilience is what allows systems to maintain performance, navigate uncertainty, and prepare for the next inevitable challenge. Understanding these layers isn’t just academic—it’s essential for anyone who wants to stay ahead in an unpredictable world.
Curated by Business Science Daily — peer-reviewed sources, human-verified. Learn more
About Our Curation Process
Business Science Daily curates academic research in business and economics. Each featured study is selected from reputable, peer-reviewed journals, institutional repositories, or working papers (e.g., Elsevier, Sage, NBER, SSRN).
Articles are carefully summarized to ensure clarity and accuracy, with direct citations or links to original sources. Our process emphasizes transparency, academic integrity, and accessibility for a broader audience.
Learn more in our Editorial Standards & AI Policy.
The general framework of resilience
Resilience is the capability of a system to return to its original (or desired) state after being disrupted (Christopher & Peck, 2004). (Acocella, Caplice, & Sheffi, 2024; Sheffi & Rice Jr, 2005, 2006) relates resilience to the firm’s ability to bounce back, returning to their normal performance level, including production, services and fill rate, after disruption (s). Fiksel (2006) focuses on the capabilities, categorizing them into three processes as such: to survive, to adapt, and to grow in the face of turbulent change. (Priya Datta, Christopher, & Allen, 2007) enhanced Fiksel (2006) definition by identifying resilience as not only the ability to maintain control over performance variability at the time of disturbances but also as an indigenous capability of a an adaptive system to respond to unexpected and significant shifts. Thus, the dominant literature within supply chain studies have identified resilience as a constructive attitude towards consequences of unforeseen challenges (El Baz & Ruel, 2021; Gebhardt, Spieske, Kopyto, & Birkel, 2022; Shen & Sun, 2023), to recover the performance (Hosseini, Ivanov, & Dolgui, 2019; Spiegler, Naim, & Wikner, 2012). Overall, various dimensions for resilience are listed such as collaboration, visibility, velocity, flexibility, agility, redundancy, and social capital and relational competences (Carvalho, Azevedo, & Cruz-Machado, 2012; Christopher & Peck, 2004; Johnson, Elliott, & Drake, 2013; Sheffi & Rice Jr, 2005, 2006; Wieland & Wallenburg, 2013).
It is driven by a disruption
Within Supply Chain Resilience (SCRES) studies, the majority of supply chain management researchers have perceived resilience as the ability of SC, as a system, to cope with the consequences of unforeseen incidents, aiming to return to its original or desired state (Blackhurst, Dunn, & Craighead, 2011; Cabral, Grilo, & Cruz- Machado, 2012; Carvalho et al., 2012; Jüttner & Maklan, 2011; Zsidisin & Wagner, 2010). The overall perception regarding SCRES can, as a consequence, be explained as dynamic abilities of the SC (1) being prepared for probable unforeseen incidents, (2) being ready responding to disruptions in an effective way, and (3) preparedness for recovery by progressing the operations with remaining authority on structures and functions (Ponomarov & Holcomb, 2009). Ponomarov and Holcomb (2009) utterances assert the findings of Christopher and Peck (2004), considering (1) resilience as set of organizational capabilities which could be developed at pre-disruption stage that (2) requires a high inter and intra-organizational collaboration. The processes necessitated (3) the agility dimension, reacting in time to the unexpected incidents, as well as (4) having a cultural environment for detecting and managing the probable risks. Therefore the SCRES mainstream can be summarized into; the ability of firms to absorb consequences of shocks received by extreme incidents as well as an adaptive ability to adjust to new situations (Johnson et al., 2013). Also, the resilience has historically is garnished by unforeseen incidents, being disruption-driven, i.e., (Asbjornslett, 1999; Christopher & Peck, 2004; Ponomarov & Holcomb, 2009; Sheffi & Rice Jr, 2005; Wagner & Bode, 2006; Wagner & Neshat, 2010). The disruption or unforeseen incidents are explained as single, discrete, unique events, are happening; has been happened; or expected to happen, with consequences, usually in a negative format, enforcing firms to become resilient.
Capability-oriented
The second trait is about attaining resilience which requires recognizing as set of capabilities (es) of substance (s). Regarding the capability-oriented perspective, SCRES is as a set of organizational capabilities including response capability, visibility, warning capability, recovery, agility, flexibility, robustness and redundancy that assist firms to react to the consequences of disruptions and mitigate the future risks of re-occurrence (Ambulkar, Blackhurst, & Grawe, 2015; Brandon‐Jones, Squire, Autry, & Petersen, 2014; Faruquee, Paulraj, & Irawan, 2021; Ponis & Koronis, 2012; Tukamuhabwa, Stevenson, Busby, & Zorzini, 2015).
The results of an extensive literature review conducted by Pettit, Fiksel, and Croxton (2010) demonstrate determinants, differently labelled, for SCRES consisting of vulnerability and capability dimensions, i.e., the vulnerability factors include turbulence, deliberate threats, external pressures, resource limits, sensitivity, connectivity, supplier/customer disruptions. And capability sub-categories are flexibility in sourcing, flexibility in order fulfillment, capacity, efficiency, visibility, adaptability, anticipation, recovery, dispersion, collaboration, organization, market position, security, and financial strength. Pettit et al. (2010) discussed that the desired level of resilience, to an optimal threshold, can be achieved by making balance between vulnerabilities and capabilities.
To understand the SCRES procedures, Kamalahmadi and Parast (2016) study aimed to obtain the principles of SCRES particularly for small and medium size enterprises. In this study, three phases of SCRES are proposed as, (1) anticipating the occurrence of disruptions and preparedness (anticipation); (2) the ability to survive and continue the functionality (resistance); and (3) the capability to mitigate the negative effects of disruptions (recovery and responses). Furthermore, four main principles as such are introduced including SC re-engineering (flexibility and redundancy), collaboration (trust and information sharing), agility (visibility and velocity), and supply chain risk management culture (leadership and innovation).
Reactive VS. Proactive Stance
Two perceptions towards resilience is evident within the SCM literature: Considering resilience as a reactive process OR resilience as a proactive procedure (A. Ali, Mahfouz, & Arisha, 2017; I. Ali, Nagalingam, & Gurd, 2017; Dabhilkar, Birkie, & Kaulio, 2016; Faruquee, Paulraj, & Irawan, 2024; Tukamuhabwa et al., 2015). As argued by (Sheffi, 2001; Sheffi & Rice Jr, 2005), supply chain risk management is tightened to redundancies and safety buffers, equipping the SC to minimize the risk of significant damages. This perspective is extended to the SCRES as the ability of SC to take actions after risk has happened (Grötsch, Blome, & Schleper, 2013). Therefore, based on this perspective, the preparation ought to be taken place in advance including, having action plans to soften an agile response to the disruptions (Knemeyer, Zinn, & Eroglu, 2009). Resilience, therefore, in these studies is considered as a reactive process to minimize the consequences of disruptions mainly considered as a set of risks to be mitigated.
Proactive resilience, on the other hand, refers to the ability of firms to avoid the consequences of future disruption at large if not all (Wang, Dou, Muddada, & Zhang, 2018). Proactive resilience guide firms to anticipate and constantly monitor disruptions and their consequences as well as the probable changes in the business ecosystems to establish deterrent measures (A. Ali et al., 2017; Dabhilkar et al., 2016; Faruquee et al., 2024; Tukamuhabwa et al., 2015). The process includes determination of catastrophic risk factors, their potential implications on SC and the relevant plan of actions to prevent or mitigate the consequences (Knemeyer et al., 2009). Overall, the reactive and proactive stances are embedded by different perceptions of resilience from different fields of studies including engineering, ecology, and psychology.
Engineering, Ecological, and Psychological
Three different perceptions around resilience are foreseeable. The dominant SCRES literature focuses on engineering perspective, which is combination of stability and resilience in ecological determinants, examining the ability of systems (firms or networks) to handle the consequences of disruptions to bounce back to the equilibrium state. According to C. S. Holling (1996), the engineering resilience concentrates on stability near an equilibrium steady state, where resistance to disturbance and speed of return to the equilibrium are used to measure the property. The ecological resilience, however, refers to the conditions far from any equilibrium steady state, where instabilities can flip a system into another regime of behavior—that is, to another stability domain (Crawford S Holling, 1973). In this case the measurement of resilience is the magnitude of disturbance that can be absorbed before the system changes its structure by changing the variables and processes that control behavior (C. S. Holling, 1996).
Crawford S Holling (1973) elaborates the ecological standpoint regarding resilience, asserting that “resilience” and “stability” are two distinct properties. The resilience is therefore a property of dynamic systems (Adobor & McMullen, 2018; Crawford S Holling, 1973; C. S. Holling, 1996), which makes examining the characteristics and dynamics of supply chain as a system as such sensible (Walker, Holling, Carpenter, & Kinzig, 2004). (Ivanov, 2021; Ivanov & Dolgui, 2020; Ruel, El Baz, Ivanov, & Das, 2024) extended this perspective to SCRES. Based on this ecological perspective, resilience consists of relationships within a system which measures the system’s ability to absorb changes of state variables, driving variables, and parameters, and can survive. Subsequently, resilience is the property of the system and persistence, or probability of extinction is the result. Stability, on the other hand, is the ability of a system to return to an equilibrium state, after a temporary disturbance. The more rapidly it returns, and with the least fluctuation, the more stable it is. Thereon, stability is another system’s property (Crawford S Holling, 1973; C. S. Holling, 1996).
The third perspective is about the field of psychology, considering resilience as the ability of individuals to bounce back from negative emotional conditions and being able to adapt to the evolving needs of stressful happenings (Bajaj & Pande, 2016; Chmitorz et al., 2018; Oshio, Taku, Hirano, & Saeed, 2018). The psychological perception of resilience has three orientations (Hu, Zhang, & Wang, 2015) including: trait, outcome, and process. The trait perspective represents that resilience is a personal attribute which guides individuals to cope with misfortunes, adapt, and continue development (Hu et al., 2015). This perspective isolated the individuals against the negative implications of adversities (Connor & Davidson, 2003; Ong, Bergeman, Bisconti, & Wallace, 2006). Simply put, resilience rather than being disruptive driven is considered capability- oriented and as an indigenous characteristic of individuals. Resilience is therefore the property of the system. The outcome-oriented approach on the other hand considers resilience as a behavioral outcome that assists individuals to overcome the consequences of adversities and recovery (Harvey & Delfabbro, 2004; Masten, 2001). This perception represents another fundamental point of view that resilience rather than being a set of abilities is the output of certain capabilities. Finally, resilience is considered neither the capability nor the output but, a dynamic process based on which individuals are able to actively adapt and recover constantly from the consequences of super adversaries (Fergus & Zimmerman, 2005; Luthar, Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000).
Resilience is rarely simple. It’s a mix of preparation, response, and adaptation—a property of systems, organizations, and even individuals. Supply chains reroute, teams adjust strategies, and people find ways to recover from setbacks. The key insight? Resilience isn’t just reactive; it’s proactive. It’s built over time, shaped by culture, relationships, and capabilities. And in a world defined by constant change, developing resilience isn’t optional—it’s the difference between bouncing back and falling behind.
Reference
Acocella, A., Caplice, C., & Sheffi, Y. (2024). Great expectations: The moderating effects of supplier service model and market dynamics on relational contract performance. Production and Operations Management, 33(11). https://doi.org/10.1177/10591478241277463
Adobor, H., & McMullen, R. S. (2018). Supply chain resilience: A dynamic and multidimensional approach. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 29(4), 1451–1471. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-04-2017-0093
Ali, A., Mahfouz, A., & Arisha, A. (2017). Analysing supply chain resilience: Integrating the constructs in a concept mapping framework via a systematic literature review. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 22(1), 16–39. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-06-2016-0197
Ali, I., Nagalingam, S., & Gurd, B. (2017). Building resilience in SMEs of perishable product supply chains: Enablers, barriers and risks. Production Planning & Control, 28(15), 1236–1250. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2017.1362487
Ambulkar, S., Blackhurst, J., & Grawe, S. (2015). Firm’s resilience to supply chain disruptions: Scale development and empirical examination. Journal of Operations Management, 33–34, 111–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2014.10.007
Bajaj, B., & Pande, N. (2016). Mediating role of resilience in the impact of mindfulness on life satisfaction and affect as indices of subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 93, 63–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.09.042
Asbjornslett, B. E. (1999). Assess the vulnerability of your production system. Production Planning & Control, 10(3), 219–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/095372899233181
Blackhurst, J., Dunn, K. S., & Craighead, C. W. (2011). An empirically derived framework of global supply resiliency. Journal of Business Logistics, 32(4), 374–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0000-0000.2011.01032.x
Brandon-Jones, E., Squire, B., Autry, C. W., & Petersen, K. J. (2014). A contingent resource-based perspective of supply chain resilience and robustness. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 50(3), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/jscm.12050
Cabral, I., Grilo, A., & Cruz-Machado, V. (2012). A decision-making model for Lean, Agile, Resilient and Green supply chain management. International Journal of Production Research, 50(17), 4830–4845. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2012.657970
Carvalho, H., Cruz-Machado, V., & Tavares, J. G. (2012). A mapping framework for assessing supply chain resilience. International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, 12(3), 354–373. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLSM.2012.047606
Chmitorz, A., Kunzler, A., Helmreich, I., Tüscher, O., Kalisch, R., Kubiak, T., Wessa, M., & Lieb, K. (2018). Intervention studies to foster resilience – A systematic review and proposal for a resilience framework in future intervention studies. Clinical Psychology Review, 59, 78–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2017.11.002
Christopher, M., & Peck, H. (2004). Building the resilient supply chain. International Journal of Logistics Management, 15(2), 1–13. https://www.emerald.com/ijlm/article-abstract/15/2/1/133299/Building-the-Resilient-Supply-Chain?redirectedFrom=fulltext
Connor, K. M., & Davidson, J. R. (2003). Development of a new resilience scale: The Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Depression and Anxiety, 18(2), 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.10113
Datta, P. P., Christopher, M., & Allen, P. (2007). Agent-based modelling of complex production/distribution systems to improve resilience. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 10(3), 187–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675560701467144
Dolgui, A., & Ivanov, D. (2020). Exploring supply chain structural dynamics: New disruptive technologies and disruption risks. International Journal of Production Economics, 229, 107886. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107886
Faruquee, M., Paulraj, A., & Irawan, C. A. (2021). Strategic supplier relationships and supply chain resilience: Is digital transformation that precludes trust beneficial? International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 41(7), 1192–1219. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-10-2020-0702
Faruquee, M., Paulraj, A., & Irawan, C. A. (2024). A typology of supply chain resilience: Recognising the multi-capability nature of proactive and reactive contexts. Production Planning & Control, 35(12), 1503–1523. https://doi.org/10.1080/[InsertDOIHere]
Fergus, S., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2005). Adolescent resilience: A framework for understanding healthy development in the face of risk. Annual Review of Public Health, 26, 399–419. https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.26.021304.144357
Fiksel, J. (2006). Sustainability and resilience: Toward a systems approach. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 2(2), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2006.11907980
Gebhardt, M., Spieske, A., Kopyto, M., & Birkel, H. (2022). Increasing global supply chains’ resilience after the COVID-19 pandemic: Empirical results from a Delphi study. Journal of Business Research, 150, 59–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.06.008
Grötsch, V. M., Blome, C., & Schleper, M. C. (2013). Antecedents of proactive supply chain risk management – a contingency theory perspective. International Journal of Production Research, 51(10), 2842–2867. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2012.746796
Harvey, J., & Delfabbro, P. H. (2011). Psychological resilience in disadvantaged youth: A critical overview. Australian Psychologist. https://doi.org/10.1080/00050060410001660281
Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. In W. R. Burnside (Ed.), Foundations of socio-environmental research: Legacy readings with commentaries (pp. [insert page numbers]). Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/foundations-of-socioenvironmental-research/c-s-holling-1973/93347024CC60F4C3130F936513402FE3
Holling, C. S. (1996). Surprise for science, resilience for ecosystems, and incentives for people. Ecological Applications, 6(3), 733–735. https://doi.org/10.2307/2269475
Hosseini, S., Ivanov, D., & Dolgui, A. (2019). Review of quantitative methods for supply chain resilience analysis. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 125, 285–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2019.03.001
Hu, T., Zhang, D., & Wang, J. (2015). A meta-analysis of the trait resilience and mental health. Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 18–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.11.039
Ivanov, D. (2021). Supply chain viability and the COVID-19 pandemic: A conceptual and formal generalisation of four major adaptation strategies. International Journal of Production Research, 59(12), 3535–3552. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2021.1890852
Johnson, N., Elliott, D., & Drake, P. (2013). Exploring the role of social capital in facilitating supply chain resilience. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 18(3), 324–336. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-06-2012-0203
Jüttner, U., & Maklan, S. (2011). Supply chain resilience in the global financial crisis: An empirical study. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 16(4), 246–259. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598541111139062
Knemeyer, A. M., Zinn, W., & Eroglu, C. (2009). Proactive planning for catastrophic events in supply chains. Journal of Operations Management, 27(2), 141–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2008.09.002
Luthar, S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71(3), 543–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00164
Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American Psychologist, 56(3), 227–238. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.227
Ong, A., Bergeman, C., Bisconti, T., & Wallace, K. (2006). Psychological resilience, positive emotions, and successful adaptation to stress in later life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(4), 730–749. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.730
Oshio, A., Taku, K., Hirano, M., & Saeed, G. (2018). Resilience and Big Five personality traits: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 127, 54–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.01.042
Pettit, T. J., Fiksel, J., & Croxton, K. L. (2010). Ensuring supply chain resilience: Development of a conceptual framework. Journal of Business Logistics, 31(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2158-1592.2010.tb00125.x
Ponomarov, S. Y., & Holcomb, M. C. (2009). Understanding the concept of supply chain resilience. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 20(1), 124–143. https://doi.org/10.1108/09574090910954873
Ponis, S. T., & Koronis, E. (2012). Supply chain resilience: Definition of concept and its formative elements. International Journal of Production Research, 50(18), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2012.710764
Ruel, S., El Baz, J., Ivanov, D., & Das, A. (2021). Supply chain viability: Conceptualization, measurement, and nomological validation. Annals of Operations Research, 335, 1107–1136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04418-4
Sheffi, Y. (2001). Supply chain management under the threat of international terrorism. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 12(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1108/09574090110806262
Sheffi, Y., & Rice Jr, J. (2005). A supply chain view of the resilient enterprise. MIT Sloan Management Review.https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/a-supply-chain-view-of-the-resilient-enterprise/
Sheffi, Y., & Rice Jr, J. (2006). [Title missing]. (Full details not available from link.) https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15487733.2006.11907980
Shen, Z. M., & Sun, Y. (2021). Strengthening supply chain resilience during COVID-19: A case study of JD.com. Journal of Operations Management. https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.1161
Spiegler, V. L. M., Naim, M. M., & Wikner, J. (2012). A control engineering approach to the assessment of supply chain resilience. International Journal of Production Research, 50(21), 6162–6187. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2012.710764
Tukamuhabwa, B. R., Stevenson, M., Busby, J., & Zorzini, M. (2015). Supply chain resilience: Definition, review and theoretical foundations for further study. International Journal of Production Research, 53(18), 5592–5623. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2015.1037934
Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S. R., & Kinzig, A. (2004). Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 9(2), 5. https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5
Wagner, S. M., & Bode, C. (2006). An empirical investigation into supply chain vulnerability. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 12(6), 301–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2007.01.004
Wagner, S. M., & Neshat, N. (2010). Assessing the vulnerability of supply chains using graph theory. International Journal of Production Economics, 126(1), 121–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.10.007
Wieland, A., & Wallenburg, C. M. (2013). The influence of relational competencies on supply chain resilience: A relational view. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 43(4), 300–320. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-08-2012-0243
Wang, J., Dou, R., Muddada, R. R., & Zhang, W. (2018). Management of a holistic supply chain network for proactive resilience: Theory and case study. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 125, 668–677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.05.024
Zsidisin, G. A., & Wagner, S. M. (2011). Do perceptions become reality? The moderating role of supply chain resiliency on disruption occurrence. Journal of Business Logistics, 32(4), 307–320. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2158-1592.2010.tb00140.x