{"title":"Yes, We (Still) Can! A Qualitative Study on the Dynamic Process of Team Resilience","authors":"Silja Hartmann, Matthias Weiss, Martin Hoegl","doi":"10.1177/01492063251342209","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research on psychological resilience in the workplace is on the rise, aiming to better understand how to successfully manage adverse events. Although scholars have started to explore the concept of team resilience, the focus of the theory on team resilience has been largely on cognitive mechanisms. However, neglecting the role of relational mechanisms discounts the collaboration and social interaction that are necessary for successful teamwork, especially in the face of adverse events. To address this research gap, we conducted a qualitative study with a palliative care team that experienced work-related adverse events. Based on our data and applying conservation of resources theory, we develop a process model of team resilience. This model specifies the experience of adverse events as loss events and illustrates how teams can counteract these losses and enact team resilience through the relational process of caring. Caring in teams can be enacted through four dimensions, which we refer to as understanding, being with, doing for, and enabling. By enacting these caring dimensions, teams can heal social safety and collective action capabilities and can moreover build valuable resources, which may buffer resource loss and fuel resource growth in subsequent team resilience episodes. Our findings provide a better understanding of the role of relational processes in team resilience enactment and specify caring as a core relational mechanism that enables team resilient outcomes. Overall, we provide a nuanced understanding of the different elements within a team resilience process.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251342209","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Research on psychological resilience in the workplace is on the rise, aiming to better understand how to successfully manage adverse events. Although scholars have started to explore the concept of team resilience, the focus of the theory on team resilience has been largely on cognitive mechanisms. However, neglecting the role of relational mechanisms discounts the collaboration and social interaction that are necessary for successful teamwork, especially in the face of adverse events. To address this research gap, we conducted a qualitative study with a palliative care team that experienced work-related adverse events. Based on our data and applying conservation of resources theory, we develop a process model of team resilience. This model specifies the experience of adverse events as loss events and illustrates how teams can counteract these losses and enact team resilience through the relational process of caring. Caring in teams can be enacted through four dimensions, which we refer to as understanding, being with, doing for, and enabling. By enacting these caring dimensions, teams can heal social safety and collective action capabilities and can moreover build valuable resources, which may buffer resource loss and fuel resource growth in subsequent team resilience episodes. Our findings provide a better understanding of the role of relational processes in team resilience enactment and specify caring as a core relational mechanism that enables team resilient outcomes. Overall, we provide a nuanced understanding of the different elements within a team resilience process.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Management (JOM) aims to publish rigorous empirical and theoretical research articles that significantly contribute to the field of management. It is particularly interested in papers that have a strong impact on the overall management discipline. JOM also encourages the submission of novel ideas and fresh perspectives on existing research.
The journal covers a wide range of areas, including business strategy and policy, organizational behavior, human resource management, organizational theory, entrepreneurship, and research methods. It provides a platform for scholars to present their work on these topics and fosters intellectual discussion and exchange in these areas.