Presentation of Organizational Resilience Pattern in Manufacturing Companies with Using the Grounded Theory Approach

Abstract
The present study provides a model of organizational resilience so that managers and organizations can be prepared for situations and environmental hazards.
Introduction
Organizations should enhance their ability to cope with adverse environmental conditions. Resilience means that organizations can survive against crises, have a good resistance and improve their performance during or after the crisis. But there are organizations that lack the ability to cope with these problems and will usually be closed. According to reports, 43% of companies affected by severe crises never reopen, and about 30% of them fail in two years (Cerullo and Cerullo, 2004: 70). While official statistics about the closure of organizations are not available to the public, according to the latest unofficial statistics, as of 2016, 60 percent of the Iranian manufacturing plants and more than 50 percent of construction products manufacturers have been closed or semi-closed. However, the rate of bankruptcy in resilient organizations is very low, because focusing on guiding material and immaterial forces and making optimal use of their technical and tactical abilities, they act corresponding to the level of tolerance in the face of challenging situations to enhance success and raise functional levels.
Theoretical framework
To cope with disorders requires organizational resilience. Organizational resilience is the capacity to resist and recover from accidents, shocks, or natural disasters that can affect an organization or a system internally or externally (Annarelli & Nonino, 2016: 6). In order to examine the resilience, the underlying causes of the resilience are important. Some of the causes mentioned in previous studies include agility, change and adaptability, coordination, common goal, evaluation, capacity building, leadership, interaction, knowledge sharing, the willingness to examine current knowledge and to accept new perspectives, etc. (Emmons,2013: 42-46).
Resilience in organizations and societies has different implications. Organizations, in turn, affect the resilience of other organizations. Personnel motivation, financial growth of organizations and the overall level of company activity are contributing factors in change and are among the potential consequences of resilience. Therefore, understanding the nature of organizational activity and evaluating the long-term resilience of industrial and ecological systems may be important (Whiteman et al., 2004: 373). This research has focused on the use of the concept of resilience in organizations and its organizational level.
Materials and Methods and Case Study
This research used interpretive philosophy, qualitative approach, and grounded strategy with the emerging approach. The Glaserian coding steps were used for analysis. The study population includes the construction industry companies that have been active in this industry for at least 10 years and are located in Mazandaran province. The qualitative repository of this research includes managers and experts from selected organizations who have theoretical and practical knowledge of the subject matter and have experienced organizational resilience when facing with problems. From the population and through theoretical sampling, interviews were conducted with 22 people who had at least eight years of related work experience and full knowledge of the processes of becoming resilient. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews.
Discussion and Results
After the axial coding, Glaser's six C's family was used in the theoretical coding in order to synthesis concepts and categories. The central issue in this research is the organizational resilience. The first C is Causes, which includes proactivity, optimization, flexibility, successful competition and product management. The second C is Covariance, which includes innovative efforts, knowledge-oriented management, proper financial management, and consolidation of social capital. The third C is Contingencies, which includes external contexts, organizational climate, organizational culture, occupational and organizational attitudes, and the proper management of human resources. The fourth C is Condition, which includes competitive advantage and social responsibility. The fifth C is Consequences, which involves maintaining organization abilities, strengthening attitudes and constructive behaviors and value creation at the macro level of society. The sixth C is Context, which includes an unfavorable sales environment and an unfavorable supportive environment.
Conclusion
Most researches emphasize resilience management before and after the crisis. This research divided the post-crisis phase into two categories: during the crisis and after the end of the crisis. This innovation became more complete by providing the requirements and conditions for mediation. On the other hand, some studies point to specific ways to become resilient (Grabowski & Roberts, 2016), while this research refers to several ways to achieve organizational resilience and its outcomes through the discovery of the causes of resilience. In previous studies, various components have been cited as the causes of resilience. Since resilience is posed as an "organizational position" for organizations, some scholars have considered many of the causes of resilience as organizational resilience components. In fact, they have considered the causes of resilience as part of the central issue of this research. This mistake was created because resilience was considered only as a position. In one of the most famous resilience studies, McManus et. al. (2008) also committed this mistake.