Author
Listed:
- Dumisani Manzini
- Rudolph Oosthuizen
- Hilda Chikwanda
- Rina Peach
Abstract
The increasing systemic complexity of the Fourth Industrial Revolution has heightened the need for robust approaches to organisational resilience. Despite its growing prominence, resilience research remains fragmented, with limited consensus on core dimensions, causal interdependencies and mechanisms suitable for dynamic assessment. This study addresses these gaps by developing and validating an organisational resilience framework to support system dynamics modelling and resilience measurement. A structured two‐round Delphi methodology was applied, engaging a functionally diverse panel of professionals spanning strategy, technology and information systems, risk and financial management, organisational resilience and people leadership. Following attrition, five experts completed the final round. Response convergence was assessed using response ratios and frequency distributions of expert ratings. Within the final panel, unanimous or high agreement was achieved on 94% of the proposed resilience dimensions. The validated framework integrates systems thinking to capture dynamic causal relationships among disruption, adaptability, digital transformation and situational awareness, enabling simulation, stress testing and identification of strategic leverage points. The findings offer practical value for organisational leaders, regulators and policymakers by supporting evidence‐based resilience assessment and policy experimentation. Although empirically grounded in the South African financial sector, the framework is designed as a sector‐agnostic, systems‐based model applicable across diverse sociotechnical systems.
Suggested Citation
Dumisani Manzini & Rudolph Oosthuizen & Hilda Chikwanda & Rina Peach, 2026.
"Systems‐Based Organisational Resilience Framework: A Delphi Study‐Based Validation and Verification,"
Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(4), pages 1615-1644, July.
Handle:
RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:43:y:2026:i:4:p:1615-1644
DOI: 10.1002/sres.70061
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:43:y:2026:i:4:p:1615-1644. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.