Analysing a Resilience Development Program: who benefits?

Objective: This article presents findings from an analysis of resilience and resilience development.  Design: Convergent, mixed-methods research used an online survey to gather data from participants in a resilience development program, in combination with a small number of semi-structured intervi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jonathon Heather, Elizabeth Shannon, Sue Pearson
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: ACHSM 2019-07-01
Series:Asia Pacific Journal of Health Management
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journal.achsm.org.au/index.php/achsm/article/view/253
id doaj-42d0c4aa94c14c9b88605cc2d89fa583
record_format Article
spelling doaj-42d0c4aa94c14c9b88605cc2d89fa5832021-03-09T17:34:50ZengACHSM Asia Pacific Journal of Health Management1833-38182204-31362019-07-0114210.24083/apjhm.v14i2.253197Analysing a Resilience Development Program: who benefits?Jonathon Heather0Elizabeth Shannon1Sue Pearson2University of TasmaniaUniversity of TasmaniaUniversity of Tasmania Objective: This article presents findings from an analysis of resilience and resilience development.  Design: Convergent, mixed-methods research used an online survey to gather data from participants in a resilience development program, in combination with a small number of semi-structured interviews with managers.  Setting: The research was carried out on public sector health and human services managers and staff, during a time of ‘downsizing’ and organisational restructuring.  Main outcome measures: The Wagnild Resilience Scale was used to measure resilience levels and their association to respondent demographic, educational and professional groupings.  Results: Interviews with senior managers found a consensus of opinion that resilience was important; and the resilience development program either had, or potentially had, benefits for their workforce. Perceptions about exactly who would benefit differed between senior managers and participants in the program. Participant survey results indicated that respondent characteristics (age, occupational group, highest level of education and departmental role) were associated with differing levels of resilience.  Conclusions: This study found that resilience development may benefit two groups of employees in particular: non-nursing staff under 50 years of age, and managers. These findings add to the body of knowledge associated with staff resilience development, organisational change management and organisational learning. These results inform health service manager practice by suggesting potential target groups for resilience development.  https://journal.achsm.org.au/index.php/achsm/article/view/253resilience; human resource development; change management; health and human services; leadership development
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Jonathon Heather
Elizabeth Shannon
Sue Pearson
spellingShingle Jonathon Heather
Elizabeth Shannon
Sue Pearson
Analysing a Resilience Development Program: who benefits?
Asia Pacific Journal of Health Management
resilience; human resource development; change management; health and human services; leadership development
author_facet Jonathon Heather
Elizabeth Shannon
Sue Pearson
author_sort Jonathon Heather
title Analysing a Resilience Development Program: who benefits?
title_short Analysing a Resilience Development Program: who benefits?
title_full Analysing a Resilience Development Program: who benefits?
title_fullStr Analysing a Resilience Development Program: who benefits?
title_full_unstemmed Analysing a Resilience Development Program: who benefits?
title_sort analysing a resilience development program: who benefits?
publisher ACHSM
series Asia Pacific Journal of Health Management
issn 1833-3818
2204-3136
publishDate 2019-07-01
description Objective: This article presents findings from an analysis of resilience and resilience development.  Design: Convergent, mixed-methods research used an online survey to gather data from participants in a resilience development program, in combination with a small number of semi-structured interviews with managers.  Setting: The research was carried out on public sector health and human services managers and staff, during a time of ‘downsizing’ and organisational restructuring.  Main outcome measures: The Wagnild Resilience Scale was used to measure resilience levels and their association to respondent demographic, educational and professional groupings.  Results: Interviews with senior managers found a consensus of opinion that resilience was important; and the resilience development program either had, or potentially had, benefits for their workforce. Perceptions about exactly who would benefit differed between senior managers and participants in the program. Participant survey results indicated that respondent characteristics (age, occupational group, highest level of education and departmental role) were associated with differing levels of resilience.  Conclusions: This study found that resilience development may benefit two groups of employees in particular: non-nursing staff under 50 years of age, and managers. These findings add to the body of knowledge associated with staff resilience development, organisational change management and organisational learning. These results inform health service manager practice by suggesting potential target groups for resilience development. 
topic resilience; human resource development; change management; health and human services; leadership development
url https://journal.achsm.org.au/index.php/achsm/article/view/253
work_keys_str_mv AT jonathonheather analysingaresiliencedevelopmentprogramwhobenefits
AT elizabethshannon analysingaresiliencedevelopmentprogramwhobenefits
AT suepearson analysingaresiliencedevelopmentprogramwhobenefits
_version_ 1724227466677977088