Resilience training in the workplace from 2003 to 2014: A systematic review

Ivan T Robertson, Cary L Cooper, Mustafa Sarkar, Thomas Curran

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Over a decade of research attests to the importance of resilience in the workplace for employee well-being and performance. Yet, surprisingly, there has been no attempt to synthesize the evidence for the efficacy of resilience training in this context. The purpose of this study, therefore is to provide a systematic review of work-based resilience training interventions. Our review identified 14 studies that investigated the impact of resilience training on personal resilience and four broad categories of dependent variables: (1) mental health and subjective well-being outcomes, (2) psychosocial outcomes, (3) physical/biological outcomes, and (4) performance outcomes. Findings indicated that resilience training can improve personal resilience and is a useful means of developing mental health and subjective well-being in employees. We also found that resilience training has a number of wider benefits that include enhanced psychosocial functioning and improved performance. Due to the lack of coherence in design and implementation, we cannot draw any firm conclusions about the most effective content and format of resilience training. Therefore, going forward, it is vital that future research uses comparative designs to assess the utility of different training regimes, explores whether some people might benefit more/less from resilience training, and demonstrates consistency in terms of how resilience is defined, conceptualized, developed, and assessed
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)533-562
Number of pages29
JournalJournal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Sept 2015


  • health; interventions; performance; resilience; systematic review; training; well-being; work


Dive into the research topics of 'Resilience training in the workplace from 2003 to 2014: A systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this