When resilience is not enough: Theoretical development and validation of the antifragility at work scale

Abstract

While prior research has established the importance of resilience in coping with increased job demands, the construct of resilience has remained unclear. We address this by redefining resilience in relation to antifragility at work, a psychological capacity that goes beyond resilience by embracing disorder as a tool for growth rather than merely adapting to it. We propose a circumplex distinguishing antifragility, resilience, and the psychological rigidity of fragility. Using a multi-study approach with U.S. samples, we developed measures for each construct. Study 1, with 223 and 205 full-time U.S. employees, supported the factorial structure of antifragility (two factors: optionality to gain and disorder embracement), resilience (unidimensional), and fragility (two factors: limited optionality to adapt and disorder aversion). Study 2, with 185 U.S. employees, supported convergent and discriminant validity among the measures and highlighted antifragility's unique relationship with thriving at work, learning, and vitality. Study 3, with 179 U.S. employees, supported the criterion validity of antifragility, showing positive correlations with proactive personality, learning goal orientation, core self-evaluation, willingness to take risks, intrapreneurship, and negative correlations with burnout. The findings, implications, limitations, and future research directions are discussed.