The Need for Organisational Resilience - Chapter 1

surrounding of, one extremity of the army. In fact, to surprise an army it is not necessary to take it so

entirely unawares that the troops will not even have emerged from their tents; it is sufficient to attack it

in force at the point intended, before preparations can be made to meet the attack. (Adapted from De

Jomini 2008, 165)

[TEXT BOX ENDS]

From an Allied perspective, they ‘merely’ had to ‘stand their ground’, for a defensive

system to absorb any attack by their German enemies until countermeasures could be made

to go onto the offensive against a weakened enemy (see Figure 1.4).

Progressive (Achieving results)

Performance Optimisation (Improving and exploiting)

Adaptive Innovation (Imagining and creating)

Consistency (Goals, processes, routines)

Flexibility (Ideas, views, actions)

Mindful Action (Noticing and responding)

Preventative Control (Monitoring and complying)

Defensive (Protecting results)

Figure 1.4: Allied Resilience portfolio

It is no surprise that, as the French relied on a predominantly ‘citizen army’, it lacked the

capability to be progressive and, in particular, to be flexible. However, French farmers,

businessmen and many others from different professions could be moulded into a capable

fighting force by focussing on Consistency; making people compliant to rules, processes and

procedures.

From the attacker’s perspective (see Figure 1.5), Germany would face a great many

more fluid situations, fleeting opportunities and chaotic conditions. With such great

uncertainty, they would need to be more progressively flexible in their attack, and

defensively progressive in adapting to any counter manoeuvres by the Allies. They would

13 | P a g e