Resilience or over-adaptation: do you actually know which one you’re practising?

A CFO describes his CHRO colleague with admiration. Four managers in two years. Headcount cut in half. 70% of her scope absorbed by a colleague after a restructure.

“What a model of resilience ! She holds the line, supports everyone, keeps things moving.”

I listened. And I wanted to ask him: are you sure?

Because I know that posture. I lived it for nearly twenty years, as a CHRO.

What I called resilience … and what it actually was

Absorbing reorganisations as smoothly as possible. Carrying announcements I disagreed with. Holding the line for my teams while my own situation dropped to third place on the list.

Everyone called it resilience. Me included.

What I hadn’t yet seen was that behind the reed that bends without breaking, something else was at work.

The fear of being too vocal. The fear of causing disruption. The difficulty of setting a boundary without losing my position.

It wasn’t just resilience. It was also over-adaptation.

And the line between the two is much thinner than most people believe.

The distinction that changes everything

Resilience is moving through something difficult while staying yourself.

Over-adaptation is moving through something difficult while progressively erasing yourself.

One strengthens you. The other erodes you, often without anyone noticing.

What I look for when working with CHROs and board members

When executives talk to me about their adaptability, I dig. Not to undermine the quality — it’s real and necessary. But to see what’s underneath.

Because an organisation can benefit from your over-adaptation for years without ever flagging it. You pay the price, quietly.

The question I ask them and ask myself

The last time you ‘held the line’ at the cost of who you are — how did you find your way back to yourself once it was over?

No need to answer here. But if the question lands, it may be worth giving it serious space.