Critique of Current Resilience Approaches
- Surface-Level Interventions vs. Deep Cognitive Work
- A 2020 meta-review in Occupational Health Sciencefound that many resilience interventions produce small-to-moderate effects, with limited long-term impact.
- Most focus on symptom reliefrather than cognitive restructuring, meaning stress often returns when external pressures rise again.
- Cognitive-based interventions (CBT, REBT) were found to be more effectivethan mindfulness-only or wellness programmes in reducing distress.
- Environmental vs. Individual Responsibility
- Researchers like Michael Ungar (Dalhousie University) argue that true resilience is shaped more by the interaction between the individual and their environmentthan by internal traits alone.
- However, many corporate programmes shift the burden onto individuals (without support), ignoring systemic stressors like poor leadership, misaligned goals, and unclear expectations.
- Organisational Culture & Role of Thinking
- Studies show that employees’ perception of control, support, and psychological safetyare far stronger predictors of resilience than access to yoga classes or wellness apps.
- These perceptions are driven by how people interpret situations—i.e., their thinking styles, beliefs, and mental models.
- Cognitive Behavioural Interventions Are Undervalued
- Research published in Journal of Occupational Health Psychologyconfirms that CBT-based resilience training helps individuals challenge irrational beliefs, reframe stressors, and sustain behaviour change.
- Yet these methods are underutilised in favour of more “palatable” wellness offerings.
Want to achieve genuine change & unlock growth within your business?
Contact Human Synergistics to find out how we can help you today!