From resilience to rigidity: why organizational strength can delay strategic change

Purpose This article examines the unintended consequences of organizational resilience. While resilience is commonly associated with adaptability and long-term survival, the study argues that resilience can become misaligned and reinforce continuity even when strategic transformation is necessary. The article identifies five major resilience pitfalls that can constrain organizational adaptation and contribute to decline. Design/methodology/approach The article uses a conceptual research design grounded in institutional theory, organizational learning and strategic management literature. Through an integrative review of prior resilience scholarship and illustrative corporate examples, the study develops a conceptual framework explaining how resilience may evolve from a source of organizational strength into a mechanism of rigidity and resistance to change. Findings The analysis identifies five major resilience pitfalls: resilience at any expense, suppression of emotions, masking deeper issues, neglect of vulnerability and resistance to change. These mechanisms can reinforce existing assumptions, preserve outdated strategies and reduce organizational responsiveness to environmental shifts. The article demonstrates how resilience may unintentionally contribute to strategic inertia and institutional rigidity. Research limitations/implications The article is conceptual and does not include empirical testing. Future research should examine the proposed framework across industries and organizational contexts to evaluate the conditions under which resilience becomes maladaptive. The study also opens opportunities for longitudinal research examining the relationship between resilience, adaptation and organizational decline. Practical implications The findings encourage managers to approach resilience more critically and strategically. Organizations should regularly reassess assumptions, encourage constructive dissent, acknowledge vulnerabilities and distinguish between preserving stability and enabling adaptation. Leaders who overemphasize continuity may unintentionally reduce long-term strategic flexibility. Originality/value This article contributes to resilience research by shifting attention from the benefits of resilience to its potential limitations. It extends existing literature by introducing the concept of resilience misalignment and developing a framework explaining how resilience can evolve into rigidity under certain organizational conditions.