Women Illustration
Overview of the personalised Resilience Assessment Report

See how we measure Resilience and the detailed insights into individual strengths and growth areas.

Download Report

Resilience Under the Threat of Conflict and Crisis

  • Periods of geopolitical shock and conflict reliably trigger the same evolved threat responses, flight, fight, or freeze, whatever the specific event. Feeling strongly affected is a normal reaction, not a sign anything is wrong with you.
  • A three-step method, name it, tame it, reframe it, gives you a practical way to move from reactive distress back toward calm, focused capability.
  • You can’t control global events. You can control your own physiology, attention, and response, and that’s precisely where genuine resilience is built.

Major conflict and geopolitical shock trigger a real, ominous sense of threat, whatever era they arrive in. These moments rarely arrive in isolation; they tend to land on top of whatever else has already tested people, economic strain, disrupted routines, accumulated fatigue from earlier disruptions. It’s worth naming clearly: if you feel shocked, anxious, or unsettled by conflict and instability in the world, that’s a genuinely normal reaction. Nature itself can be harsh, but when the suffering is caused by deliberate human choice rather than circumstance, it adds a real layer of moral outrage on top of the fear.

The real question is how to navigate your own way through periods like this, especially on top of whatever fatigue and strain already preceded them. For leaders, the challenge is different in scale but the same in kind: how do you support your people, reduce unnecessary distress, and maintain genuine collaborative capability while the wider world feels unstable? This is exactly the territory resilience is built for. With it, adversity becomes something you can bounce back from and grow through. Without it, adversity can cause real, lasting suffering.

A Reality Check Worth Doing First

A good doctor carefully reviews recent history before diagnosing anything. If you’ve already been through a genuinely difficult stretch, economic strain, disrupted routines, accumulated pressure, your reserves may already be more depleted than you realise. Confronting a fresh, major threat on top of that can trigger reactions that feel disproportionate to the immediate event, not unlike the way trauma responses can generalise beyond their original trigger. Don’t be surprised if your own reactions, or those of people around you, feel unusually strong. That’s a genuine, explicable pattern, not a personal failing.

There are real things you genuinely cannot change. Accept that clearly. Then focus your actual energy on what you can influence, and be deliberate about it.

Name Your Experience

Evolution wired humans to survive genuine adversity through three distinct reactions. The first is flight, driven by fear and the impulse to escape or avoid a threat. You might experience this as a mild undercurrent of anxiety, or as an acute surge of fear, even panic.

The second is fight, driven by anger and the impulse to confront a threat directly. This can show up as mild frustration or as genuine anger and rage.

When a threat can’t be avoided or confronted, the third reaction is freeze: a biological collapse in blood pressure and movement. This can feel like an undercurrent of despair, or in more extreme cases, a genuine collapse, submission under the threat, tearfulness, and for some, a slide toward depression.

Humans are the only species that can consciously focus on and describe this experience as it happens, which is exactly what naming it does. Putting a reaction into words, “I feel fear,” “I feel anger,” “I feel despair,” turns it into an object of your attention rather than something running you unseen. The power of the reaction softens almost immediately once named, an effect that shows up clearly in measurable brain activity: reactive, reflexive activity becomes conscious and available to work with.

Tame Your Experience

Being reactive under real threat rarely serves you well. The goal is to become conscious and responsive instead, which requires mastering a specific practice: tactical calm. Once you’ve named the reactive emotion clearly, you can work directly on calming your physiology, your emotions, and your mind, in that order.

The simplest technique: drop your attention into your body and exhale slowly and completely through the nose. Inhale gently and slowly, also through the nose. Steady the rhythm into a smooth six-second exhale and four-second inhale.

1

Identify and Name the Distress

Notice what you’re actually feeling and put a specific word to it before trying to change anything.

2

Lengthen Your Spine

Sit or stand a little taller, without straining. Posture and physiological state genuinely influence each other.

3

Soften Your Face and Focus on Your Body

Release tension in the jaw and around the eyes. Bring attention fully into physical sensation rather than looping thought.

4

Exhale Slowly for Six Seconds

A complete, unhurried exhale through the nose, taking a full six seconds.

5

Pause

A brief, natural pause before inhaling again.

6

Inhale Slowly for Four Seconds

A gentle, unforced inhale through the nose, taking about four seconds.

7

Repeat the Ten-Second Cycle as Needed

Continue the six-second exhale, pause, four-second inhale pattern for as long as genuinely helpful.

Tactical calm slows your breathing, allows carbon dioxide to build slightly as you extend the exhale, and restores healthier heart rate rhythms. You’re directly countering the sympathetic activation behind flight and fight, and the parasympathetic collapse behind freeze. The result is a genuine sense of calm and security. You’re back in control of your own emotions and thoughts, and genuinely ready to respond with skill rather than reflex.

Reframe Your Experience

With genuinely calm, secure physiology in place, you can apply your mind and emotions to constructive responses and meaningful connection, something that simply isn’t accessible while you’re in flight, fight, or freeze. Activating tactical calm brings the ventral vagus nerve back online, and that’s what opens the door to adapting with real skill.

Under serial adversity and overload, simplify and focus on your single top task. Define it clearly and complete it with real discipline. Collaborate around shared purpose and a common goal.

Under disengagement and decision fatigue, refresh with genuine, regular breaks. Establish daily rhythms you can actually sustain. Build a working cadence and actively seek momentum rather than waiting for it to arrive.

Under fear and the impulse to avoid, relax, protect real sleep, and slow your breathing deliberately. Practise tactical calm, meditation, or prayer, whichever genuinely fits. As a leader, reassure your people, acknowledge the real challenge honestly, and actively encourage rest.

Under anger and the impulse to attack, slow down, and lead with respect and genuine understanding. Be kind to yourself and generous toward others. Actively make room for different perspectives, and model the kindness you want to see reflected back.

Under collapse and sadness, connect with others and get real help defining and understanding what you’re experiencing. Listen, acknowledge, and appreciate. Share plans forward with genuine optimism and hope, not forced positivity.

History over long timescales has, on balance, trended toward less violence and conflict than earlier eras, an influential though genuinely debated thesis put forward by psychologist Steven Pinker, drawing on centuries of data. Whatever your view of that broader historical arc, it offers little comfort about any single event unfolding in front of you right now. Adversity remains a genuine crucible for learning and growth. You can’t control world events. You can restrict your own exposure to inflammatory, doom-driven media. You can’t control other people. You can master yourself. And when you do, you’re genuinely ready to help lead others toward something better.

You cannot stop the world from being unstable. You can build the specific, trainable skill of staying steady inside it, and that skill is exactly what lets you actually help the people around you.

Further reading:
The Better Angels of Our Nature, Steven Pinker, 2011

What Our 2020 Data Got Right (and Wrong) About Crisis Resilience

  • In March to June 2020, RI’s own diagnostic data found average resilience had risen roughly 7% compared to the same period in 2019, a genuinely counterintuitive early-pandemic finding.
  • That finding makes complete sense in light of the well-established Phases of Disaster framework: the sample was captured during the heroic and honeymoon phases of the crisis, the period of mobilisation and community bonding that reliably comes before a longer, harder decline.
  • The transferable lesson matters more than the specific 2020 numbers: early positive resilience signals during any crisis, a downturn, a restructure, a market shock, often reflect a temporary mobilisation phase, not a resolved trend. Reading them as the final word is a real risk.

In the middle of 2020, a few months into the pandemic, we looked at our own diagnostic data and found something that surprised us. Resilience hadn’t fallen. On average, across a sample of over 1,600 professionals and executives, it had gone up. Six years on, that finding is still worth revisiting, not as current data, but as a genuinely useful case study in how resilience actually behaves during the early phase of a major disruption, and why reading that phase correctly matters.

What the 2020 Data Actually Showed

We compared Resilience Diagnostic results from March to June 2019 (1,599 participants) against the same window in 2020 (1,659 participants), drawn from a similar pool of professionals and executives across comparable organisations. The average resilience ratio rose from 1.51 to 1.61, a roughly 7% increase during the acute early phase of a global crisis, not the decline anyone would have predicted going in.

The pattern wasn’t uniform. Male participants improved more clearly, from an average of 1.57 to 1.70, with the proportion at risk actually falling slightly. Female participants showed no change in the average ratio, but the proportion at risk rose by 15%, with increases specifically in anhedonia, self-doubt, and depressive symptoms. This tracks with separately well-documented research from the same period on the disproportionate caregiving and domestic burden many women carried during pandemic-era lockdowns and school closures, a genuine and important asymmetry inside an otherwise positive headline number.

At a category level, mental strength, physical energy, stress mastery, and related risk categories were slightly better during the crisis window. Emotional engagement, disengagement, and depressive symptoms were slightly worse. Specific strength factors that improved included purpose, integrity, fulfilment, compassion, situational agility, optimism, and sleep quality. Factors that declined included trust, flow, decisiveness, emotional agility, and empathy.

Why This Isn’t as Strange as It Sounds

Psychologists Leonard Zunin and Diane Myers developed a framework, widely used in disaster psychology, describing the emotional phases most communities move through during a prolonged crisis: warning, impact, heroic, honeymoon, disillusionment, and reconstruction. The heroic phase is marked by altruism and mobilisation, first responders, healthcare workers, and communities pulling together with real intensity. The honeymoon phase that often follows brings a genuine, if short-lived, sense of optimism and community bonding, along with a belief that things will return to normal reasonably quickly.

March to June 2020 sits squarely inside that window for most of the world. Our data wasn’t capturing a crisis that had resolved well. It was capturing a population still inside the heroic and honeymoon phases, genuinely mobilised, purposeful, and pulling together, before the far longer disillusionment phase that followed. That later phase, well documented separately across 2020 to 2022, brought the more severe and prolonged mental health decline most people actually associate with the pandemic: rising burnout, anxiety, and depression as the crisis stretched on far longer than the initial mobilisation could sustain.

Seen through that lens, the 2020 finding isn’t really a story about resilience being immune to crisis. It’s a story about which phase of a crisis a snapshot happens to catch, and how easy it is to mistake a heroic-phase mobilisation for a resolved, stable new normal.

The Transferable Lesson

This matters well beyond one pandemic. Any organisation moving through a major disruption, a restructuring, a market downturn, a leadership change, a merger, will likely see something similar in its early resilience or engagement data: a genuine, real mobilisation effect in the first weeks or months, purpose and cohesion measurably up, as people pull together around the immediate challenge. Reading that early signal as evidence the disruption has been successfully absorbed is a real risk. The honest interpretation is closer to: the team is currently in its heroic or honeymoon phase, and the real test comes later, when the mobilisation naturally fades and the underlying, unresolved strain has had time to surface.

Two practical implications follow. First, treat early positive signals during any crisis with appropriate caution rather than as confirmation the hard part is over. Second, plan deliberately for the later phase, the point where disillusionment risk peaks, rather than being caught off guard by a decline that the Phases of Disaster framework would have predicted from the outset.

A crisis rarely announces which phase it’s in. Knowing the shape of the curve in advance is what turns a surprising early number into a useful one.