By Kees van der Blom, MSHE, Safety Professional (the Netherlands)
A practitioner’s perspective on resilience and our society
Illustration from United Nations COVID-19 Response on Unsplash
In these times, where the virus causing COVID-19 seems to have taken a leading role, resilience takes on a very special meaning. Where before February 2020 (global outbreak of coronavirus) resilience was a concept for industry and healthcare, it has now become a concept for society. How resilient is society, are its groups and how resilient is the individual today?
Initially, everyone, from governments to policy makers to individual citizens, was ‘taken by surprise’ by the speed with which the virus spread and still continues to spread. ‘Surprised’ as well by the serious consequences this virus apparently can cause. So, panic everywhere, measures galore uncontrollably. In short, a chaos barely manageable was created. Just consider the lack of knowledge about the virus (what we were told), the lack of necessary medical supplies, the intensive care units that were not yet adequately prepared for this outbreak and the apparently enormous global dependency we created ourselves. Suppliers could no longer deliver, huge stock-outs occurred. As it turned out, we were not able to manufacture the simplest of tools ourselves and this only added to the chaos. Gradually, the situation became more manageable and the mere quantity of measures we devised became more structured. Communication about the virus improved, the supply of medical resources got into stride and hospitals got a better grip on the initially chaotic situation.
Finally, resilience started to emerge. After the first ‘blows’, the bounce of society was back and a new, more stable situation arose. Globally, the charts showed more favorable lines. More and more became known about the virus.
It was and is noteworthy that hospitals and its in-house health care staff had to and could respond rapidly to the first signs that preceded the outbreak. Subsequently, they had to do their utmost to be able to deal with the colossal and visible effects of the outbreak. Procedures and protocols came into play in a different way. Skills and confidence turned out to be crucial. The professionals on the shop floor had to react fast and come up with solutions for new situations. Professional care was provided under great pressure. In short, in hospitals the resilience theories became more visible than ever. The Safety II-philosophy became perceptible in practice. Hats off to all the healthcare workers who fulfilled their healthcare duties in a professional manner and continue to do so ever since. As we speak, the healthcare workers in the Netherlands (and probably worldwide) themselves are recuperating from pushing themselves to their limits, and in this recovery process they are assisted in a professional manner. The impact was, and still is, huge.
In a large part of healthcare in the Netherlands, the phenomena of Resilience, Safety II, ‘work as imagined’ versus ‘work as done’ and the FRAM[i]-method are accepted concepts that are increasingly used. FRAM-training courses are offered to healthcare workers (from doctors to nurses). There is increasing attention to what professionals actually do in the workplace. Procedures and protocols are continually analysed and improved in that light. In this way, enhancing resilience is given an important place within healthcare. Apparently, the enhancement of skills in the workplace yields many positive results. During the corona crisis and on the basis of anticipating the changing circumstances, one learned to think and work in other ways. Apparently, it is possible and it works in practice. The question now arises: should we go back to the ‘old’ again? What can we keep from the ‘new way of working’? What about the adaptability and resilience in society?
Initially, after the panic situation, people adopted a ‘cooperative attitude’. Publications, communication moments organized by the government and professional advice from experts led us to a situation that offered control. The public and the individual, both at work, in the street and at home, adjusted. Discipline everywhere. Apparently, society can react flexibly and can show its resilience.
Until…. the moment society starts to show the first signs of ‘being fed up’. Numbers dropped, everything seemed to be under control, why still the ‘lock-down’ with all its adverse consequences? Impatience surfaced. People wished and intended to go back to ‘normal’. Protests against measures are now being organized. This, incidentally, to the utter dismay of healthcare workers in hospitals. They are still recuperating and are horrified by an anticipated resurgence of the virus.
To what extent is a society really resilient enough to be able and willing to organize a different society, after the first shocking deviations from the ‘normal’ one? A society with a better inner resilience, able to cope with new global developments. Obviously, people want to go back to ‘normal’ quickly, whereas it has now been proven that this is absolutely impossible because it no longer works.
In addition to studying the resilience theories for industry and healthcare, it would be interesting to look at society as well. Resilience is not exclusively intended for the industry but should be a quality or character trait of the individual, a group, a society. By now we have seen and experienced that resilience and adaptability are aspects that are becoming increasingly important for our ‘survival’ in this complex society. How do we raise our children? How do we educate each other?
I believe it to be a challenge to turn resilience theories into a social concept and not just reserve it for the industry exclusively. Of course, in essence we are naturally adaptable and resilient, otherwise we would already be extinct. We are continuously adapting to new developments and changes. We don’t even notice it. However, in the context of this coronavirus pandemic, we must also strengthen and enhance societal resilience; in that way are early and better prepared to create a society in which we have to reinvent ourselves at those moments where this is required and inevitable. Tackling this issue will be a challenge for science. Perhaps this is also a topic that can be prominently discussed during the REA[ii] conference in 2021?
[i] FRAM: Functional Resonance Analysis Method
[ii] REA : Resilience Engineering Association