Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 1

PORTADA

(Elaborada por la revista)

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 614

Organizational Resilience and Sustainability: The Role of

Proactive and Reactive Capabilities in Uncertain Environments

Resiliencia Organizacional y Sostenibilidad: El Papel de las Capacidades

Proactivas y Reactivas en Entornos Inciertos

Pablo Guerrero Sánchez

pablo.guerrero@uaem.mx

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2701-8393

Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Morelos

Cuernavaca, Morelos - México

Nohemí Roque Nieto

nohemi.roque@hotmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5433-9478

Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Morelos

Cuernavaca, Morelos - México

Augusto Renato Pérez Mayo

renatomayo@hotmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1094-3283

Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Morelos

Cuernavaca, Morelos - México

Artículo recibido: 29/11/2025

Aceptado para publicación: 03/01/2026

Conflictos de Intereses: Ninguno que declarar

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 615

ABSTRACT

This article presents an extensive review of recent literature on the relationship between

organizational resilience, corporate sustainability, and corporate purpose—an emerging field

that has gained prominence amid growing global volatility and complexity. Drawing on various

theoretical perspectives, including dynamic capabilities theory, sustainability (ESG), supply

chain management, and digital transformation, the study examines how organizations develop

capabilities for anticipation, absorption, adaptation, and transformation to confront disruptions

such as the COVID-19 pandemic, geopolitical tensions, and technological advancements. The

findings indicate that resilience and sustainability form an interdependent system that drives

organizational continuity and long-term value creation, while corporate purpose adds a

strategic and ethical dimension that guides decision-making. The review also highlights the

enabling role of digitalization, digital organizational culture, and management control systems

in strengthening these capabilities. Finally, the article identifies theoretical and empirical gaps,

proposing future research directions aimed at advancing the integration of the SRP framework

(Sustainability, Resilience, and Purpose) and assessing its impact on organizational

performance.

Keywords: organizational resilience, corporate sustainability, corporate purpose, digital

transformation, supply chain resilience

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 616

RESUMEN

Este artículo presenta una revisión exhaustiva de la literatura reciente sobre la relación

entre la resiliencia organizacional, la sostenibilidad corporativa y el propósito corporativo, un

campo emergente que ha cobrado relevancia ante la creciente volatilidad y complejidad global.

A partir de diversas perspectivas teóricas, entre ellas la teoría de las capacidades dinámicas, la

sostenibilidad (ESG), la gestión de la cadena de suministro y la transformación digital, el

estudio examina cómo las organizaciones desarrollan capacidades de anticipación, absorción,

adaptación y transformación para enfrentar disrupciones como la pandemia de COVID-19, las

tensiones geopolíticas y los avances tecnológicos. Los hallazgos indican que la resiliencia y la

sostenibilidad conforman un sistema interdependiente que impulsa la continuidad

organizacional y la creación de valor a largo plazo, mientras que el propósito corporativo aporta

una dimensión estratégica y ética que orienta la toma de decisiones. Asimismo, la revisión

destaca el rol habilitador de la digitalización, la cultura organizacional digital y los sistemas de

control de gestión en el fortalecimiento de estas capacidades. Finalmente, el artículo identifica

vacíos teóricos y empíricos, y propone líneas futuras de investigación orientadas a profundizar

la integración del marco SRP (Sostenibilidad, Resiliencia y Propósito) y a evaluar su impacto

en el desempeño organizacional.

Palabras clave: resiliencia organizacional, sostenibilidad corporativa, propósito

corporativo, transformación digital, resiliencia de la cadena de suministro

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 617

INTRODUCTION

In a global context characterized by increasing volatility, uncertainty, and accelerated

transformations, organizations face challenges that exceed traditional management

frameworks. Phenomena such as the COVID-19 pandemic, disruptions in global supply chains,

intensive digitalization, and growing social and environmental pressures have highlighted the

need to develop capabilities that enable not only resistance to crises but also adaptation and

long-term prosperity. In this scenario, the concepts of Organizational Resilience (OR),

corporate sustainability, and corporate purpose have gained unprecedented strategic relevance,

becoming fundamental pillars for the continuity and competitiveness of contemporary

organizations.

Since 2018, literature has experienced significant growth regarding the interrelationship

between resilience and sustainability, to the point of forming a multidisciplinary field that

integrates perspectives from strategic management, dynamic capabilities theory, sustainability

studies, supply chain management, and digital transformation. Organizational resilience is now

understood as a set of dynamic capabilities that allow organizations to anticipate risks, absorb

impacts, and adapt or transform when facing disruptive events, while corporate sustainability

extends this logic toward the pursuit of long-term social, environmental, and economic value.

The recent incorporation of corporate purpose as a third component (SRP: Sustainability,

Resilience, and Purpose) adds an orienting dimension that links organizational identity with

responsible and strategically coherent practices.

Likewise, technological advancements —particularly digitalization, advanced analytics, and

artificial intelligence— emerge as essential enablers for strengthening both resilience and

sustainability, especially in complex environments and global supply chains. Similarly, the role

of Management Control Systems (MCS) becomes increasingly relevant as they provide

mechanisms to monitor, coordinate, and align behaviors and decisions under conditions of

uncertainty.

Despite these advances, theoretical and empirical gaps remain regarding how resilience,

sustainability, and purpose interact, which internal and external factors drive these capabilities,

and what methodologies enable the assessment of their impact on organizational performance.

Therefore, this article develops a comprehensive review of recent literature to map the main

trends, theoretical approaches, methodologies, and empirical findings shaping this emerging

field.

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 618

Overall, this introduction offers a framework for understanding the strategic importance of

integrating resilience, sustainability, and corporate purpose, highlighting their role as essential

drivers of competitiveness, operational continuity, and value creation in an increasingly

complex global environment.

DEVELOPMENT

Literature review

The Conceptual Framework of Resilience and Sustainability

Contemporary research focuses on the interconnectedness of organizational resilience (OR),

corporate sustainability, and, at times, corporate purpose (SRP) (Florez-Jimenez et al., 2024;

Neacșu & Georgescu, 2024). This field of study has grown steadily since 2018, driven by

disruptive events (Neacșu & Georgescu, 2024), such as COVID-19 (Orlando et al., 2022). with

respect to Organizational Resilience (OR), that is a key concept that has been discussed on

organizational agendas since 1998 (Mallak, 1998, cited in Corrales-Estrada et al., 2021),

gaining sustained interest from 2018 onwards (Linnenluecke, 2017; Ruiz-Martin et al., 2018;

Annarelli & Nonino, 2016, cited in Weber et al., 2024). Resilience is understood as the capacity

to recover or to incorporate adaptive processes and mechanisms that combine assets and risk

factors in a cumulative and interactive pattern (Southwick et al., 2014, cited in Florez-Jimenez

et al., 2024).

Regarding to Organizational vulnerability (OR) capabilities are a relevant topic in the literature,

contributing 27% of articles and 17% of total citations in certain analyzed bodies of knowledge

(Corrales-Estrada et al., 2021). Research has explored how OR relates to Business Continuity

Management (BCM), highlighting that organizational vulnerabilities to disruptions lead to

BCM practices (Corrales-Estrada et al., 2021). Integrating business continuity and disaster

recovery planning requires an integrated approach to managing OR levels (Sahebjamnia et al.,

2015, cited in Corrales-Estrada et al., 2021).

SRP Intersection (Sustainability, Resilience and Purpose)

The combination of Sustainability, Resilience, and Purpose (SRP) is a research area that seeks

to identify levers for the long-term prosperity of organizations (Florez-Jimenez et al., 2024).

There are five main academic traditions: Stakeholder Identification (Roberts & Dutton, 2009,

cited in Florez-Jimenez et al., 2024); Strategic Resources (Santos et al., 2014, cited in Florez-

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 619

Jimenez et al., 2024); Human and Complex Systems (Mannen et al., 2012; Walker, 2016, cited

in Florez-Jimenez et al., 2024); and Multi-Stakeholder Organization. Social Entrepreneurship

(Bonfanti et al., 2016, cited in Florez-Jimenez et al., 2024). Therefore, Companies with a clear

purpose and a focus on sustainability have a greater probability of long-term survival (Ortiz-

de-Mandojana & Bansal, 2016).

Sustainability and Financial Performance.

The literature intensively investigates the relationship between financial performance and

sustainability in the context of organizational resilience (Neacșu & Georgescu, 2024).

Temporal analysis identified three important periods of discussion: 2013–2019 (analysis of

corporate sustainability, influenced by seminal works such as Linnenluecke & Griffiths, 2013),

2020–2021 (emphasis on resilience due to the COVID-19 pandemic/organizational

sustainability), and 2022–2023 (introduction of the concept of organizational resilience)

(Neacșu & Georgescu, 2024). Six core research themes have been identified in this area:

innovative policies, crisis risk management, sustainable financial performance, corporate

responsibility strategy management, sustainable business strategies, and sustainable leadership

practices (Neacșu & Georgescu, 2024). Empirical studies are the dominant approach,

suggesting a predominantly inductive scientific approach (Neacșu & Georgescu, 2024).

The Impact of Digitalization and the Supply Chain

Digitalization and advanced technologies are crucial for improving resilience and

sustainability. Digital Culture and Capabilities; Digital Organizational Culture (DOC), based

on dynamic capabilities theory, positively influences Absorptive Capacity (AC), Supply Chain

Resilience (SCR), and Sustainable Performance (SP) of manufacturing companies, especially

in Mexico (Rodríguez-González et al., 2023). The relationship between DOC and SP is

mediated by AC and SCR (Rodríguez-González et al., 2023). Digitalization can reinvent

business resilience (Santos et al., 2023), as observed during COVID-19 (Bresciani et al., 2022).

Digital technologies are also being explored as enablers for sustainability and innovation (Xie

et al., 2022; Annarelli & Palombi, 2021). with regard to Supply Chain Resilience (SCR);

Organizational complexity is a factor that affects supply chain resilience, especially in the

context of a global paradigm shift where the loss of the dollar as a reference currency can cause

inflation and the disruption of globalization (Sánchez et al., 2022). This scenario affects the

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 620

ability to achieve low production costs in value chains and economies of scale (Sánchez et al.,

2022).

Dominant Research Methodologies are presented, and the studies are based on rigorous

methods, both for literature review and data analysis. Literature Review Methods; Systematic

literature reviews (SLRs) are often guided by protocols such as the PRISMA guidelines

(Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) (Page et al., 2021;

Denyer & Tranfield, 2009). Methods used include bibliometric analysis and SLRs (Chen, 2017;

Marzouk & Elshaboury, 2022; Zupic & Čater, 2015). Science mapping analysis is a key

technique used to map the development of scientific fields and visualize knowledge structures

(Cobo et al., 2012; Mongeon & Paul-Hus, 2016; Marzouk & Elshaboury, 2022; Núñez-Merino

et al., 2022). on Quantitative and Configurational Methods; the use of two key statistical and

configurational approaches is observed, Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling

(PLS-SEM): This method is used to test hypotheses and analyze structural models (Hair et al.,

2021; Hair et al., 2014; Sarstedt et al., 2021). It is used to verify the reliability of variables with

a reliability value greater than the cutoff point of 0.706 (Henseler et al., 2015). Fuzzy Set

Comparative Qualitative Analysis (fsQCA): This method is used for asymmetric thinking and

the construction of causal theories from typologies (Fiss, 2011; Pappas & Woodside, 2021;

Schneider & Wagemann, 2012). fsQCA analyzes causal conditions and configurations using

metrics such as consistency (CON) and coverage (COV) (Ragin, 2006). A CON value between

0.9 and 0.8 suggests that a condition is always necessary (Ragin, 2006), and the method allows

for the study of configurational conditions for high and low organizational resilience (Zhang

et al., 2022, cited in Primadasa et al., 2025).

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 621

Figura 1 Organizational Resilience and Sustainability

Fuente: Elaboración propia.

Organizational Resiliencies capabilities.

Stages of the process of (Duchek, 2020).

Anticipation; (preparation availability of resources).

Coping (acceptance, sensemaking, MCS and alternative control systems).

Adaptation/transformation (rapid recovery, reflection and learning, capacity for

transformation, MCS and systems of Beliefs/limits/diagnosis).

Organizational Resiliencie capabilities; core RO capabilities.

Absorption capacities; (redundancy, robustness, agility).

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 622

Adaptability skills (ingenuity, adaptability, flexibility).

Other capabilities (innovation, managerial, dynamic capacity).

Management Control systems (MCS).

Role of resilience

(support the implementation of resilience measures, resilience capabilities, resilience-oriented

MCS (design)

Key theoretical frameworks

Simons' LoC levers (LoC) (Belief systems, boundary systems, diagnostic control systems,

interactive control systems)

Merchant control object.

MCS and performance

(Impact on organizational performance during crisis, interactive use in crisis (interactive

control)

Corporate sustainability.

Definition and scope.

(triple bottom line; environmental, social, and technological economics; integration of ethical

and technological aspects; objective: to maintain long-term well-being).

Relationship with resilience.

SC as an antecedent of RO (interdependence) SCM for resilience (adaptive capacity) DT and

RO: contributes to social well-being

Sustainable performance (SP).

Multidimensional measurement (economic, social, environmental), positive influence of SCR

and AC, integration strategies (green learning)

Figura 2 Organizational Resilience and Sustainability

Fuente: Elaboración propia.

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 623

Factors and drivers of resilience and sustainability (SP)

Internal resources and capacity.

Financial resources (liquidity, ROA), relational resources (relationship with stakeholders),

innovation capacity (R&D), transitive memory systems (TMT, TMS), (positive impact on RO

and SDP (absorptive capacity (AC); acquisition, assimilation, transformation, exploration,

improvement, SCR and SP)

External environment and dynamics.

Market environment (competition (increases technological innovation (creative competition),

increases pressure and costs (destructive competition), environmental uncertainty (ELU),

increases the need for agility, affects legitimacy and compliance.

Supply Chain Resilience (SCR)

Definition.

Ability to prevent, absorb and recover from disruptions; adaptive capacity of the supply chain.

Key dimensions.

Flexibility, reserve capacity, integration (information exchange), diversification (suppliers and

buyers), crisis control (advance preparation)

SCR and complexity.

Complexity increases the frequency of disruptions (weakens SCR), while complexity fosters

flexibility (strengthens SCR).

Figura 3 Impact of Digital Transformation (DT) and AI

Fuente: Elaboración propia.

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 624

Impact of Digital Transformation (DT) and AI

Digital organizational culture (DOC).

Has a positive effect on AC, SCR, and SP, fostering channel integration and efficient use of

information.

Benefits of sustainable development.

Improved operational efficiency, strengthened operational response and agility, alignment with

the SDGs.

AI innovation dilemma.

(creating sustainable value; reducing major challenges) (destroying sustainable value;

introducing new challenges); predictable problems; design, data bias; unpredictable problems

(deployment, learning curve)

Database & focus

• Sustainability (MDPI)

• Review of Managerial Science

• Business Strategy & the Environment

• Sustainability (MDPI)

• Environment, Development and Sustainability

• IJCI

• Governance & resilience

• ESG + resilience

• Technovation

• Governance & strategy

Notes / comparative insights

• Bibliometric review of resilience + sustainability: idenca cinco escuelas de pensamiento.

• Conecta sustentabilidad, resiliencia y propósito corporativo; señala la falta de tradición

académica que las relacione.

• Revisión híbrida sobre cómo resiliencia y sostenibilidad interactúan a dominio

organizacional.

• Revisión sistemática de 35 años de literatura; ve la resiliencia como componente de la

sostenibilidad en organizaciones.

• Empírico: resiliencia organizacional (anticipación, robustez, recuperación) y efectos en

sostenibilidad social y económica.

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 625

• Estudio en educación: muestra correlación significativa entre resiliencia y

sostenibilidad organizacional.

• Estudia la gobernanza corporativa como factor de resiliencia organizacional. Introduce

el “compliance/governance” al tema de resiliencia.

• Marco conceptual que integra ESG (Governance incluido) con resiliencia

organizacional.

• Estudio empírico que investiga cómo desempeño de sostenibilidad (ESG) y resiliencia

están relacionados, con moderador de “operational slack”.

• Analiza cómo mecanismos de gobernanza corporativa y decisión estratégica impulsan

la resiliencia y por ende sostenibilidad.

Citation (APA)

Ciasullo, M. V., et al. (2024). Mastering the interplay of organisational resilience and

sustainability: A hybrid domain-based literature review. Business Strategy & the

Environment. (Wiley Online Library)

Flórez-Jiménez, M. P., Lleo, A., Ruiz-Palomino, P., & Muñoz-Villamizar, A. F. (2024).

Corporate sustainability, organisational resilience, and corporate purpose: A review of

the academic traditions connecting them. Review of Managerial Science, 19, 67-104.

(SpringerLink)

Galanos, A. K. (2023). Corporate governance and resilience: What ... (paper). Redalyc.

(Redalyc)

Kantabutra, S. (2024). A cutting-edge framework and the research agenda. Sustainability,

16(19), 8431. (MDPI)

Leoni, L. (2025). Integrating ESG and organisational resilience through system thinking: A

conceptual framework. (Emerald). (emerald.com)

Matebese, H. (2025). The dynamic correlation between corporate governance and strategy to

inform organisational resilience. Future Studies Research Journal: Trends and

Strategies, 17(1), e929. (future.emnuvens.com.br)

Rai, S. S., Rai, S., & Singh, N. K. (2021). Organisational resilience and social-economic

sustainability: COVID-19 perspective. Environment, Development and Sustainability,

23(8), 12006-12023. (SpringerLink)

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 626

Sezen-Gültekin, G., & Argon, T. (2020). Examination of the relationship between

organisational resilience and organisational sustainability at a higher-education

institution. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 12(Spec. Issue), 329-

343. (eric.ed.gov)

Weber, M. M. (2023). The relationship between resilience and sustainability in the

organisational context — A systematic review. Sustainability, 15, 15970.

(ResearchGate)

Yan, F., Jia, F., Chen, L., & Nazrul, A. (2025). Nexus of sustainability and organisational

resilience: The role of operational slack. Technovation. (ScienceDirect)

CONCLUSION

The literature review demonstrates that organizational resilience, corporate sustainability, and

corporate purpose have evolved from independent constructs into an integrated analytical

framework responding to the increasing demands of volatile, uncertain, and technologically

transformed environments. The growing number of studies since 2018 confirms that disruptive

phenomena—such as the COVID-19 pandemic, geopolitical tensions, global supply chain

disruptions, and accelerated digitalization—have acted as catalysts pushing both academia and

organizations to rethink their strategic foundations.

Theoretically, organizational resilience is consolidated as a set of dynamic capabilities that

enable organizations to anticipate risks, absorb impacts, and adapt or transform in the face of

crises. These processes not only support survival but also strengthen corporate sustainability

by fostering mechanisms of learning, innovation, and strategic flexibility. In parallel, corporate

sustainability—especially from an ESG perspective—emerges both as an antecedent and a

consequence of resilience, forming a virtuous cycle that reinforces long-term value creation.

The introduction of corporate purpose as a third pillar (SRP) adds an identity-driven and ethical

dimension that guides organizational decision-making and encourages behaviors aligned with

social and environmental well-being.

From a practical standpoint, the evidence indicates that digitalization, digital organizational

culture, and emerging technologies (such as AI and advanced analytics) play a decisive role in

strengthening resilience capabilities at both the organizational and supply-chain levels. These

tools facilitate information integration, operational agility, real-time decision-making, and

adaptive capacity under uncertainty. Likewise, management control systems—particularly

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 627

those based on Simons’ Levers of Control framework—enable the alignment of strategy, risk

monitoring, innovation, and behavior management consistent with resilience and sustainability

objectives.

Furthermore, the reviewed studies show that organizational and environmental complexity acts

as a double-edged sword: it can increase vulnerability to disruptions but also foster flexibility

and learning if properly managed. This underscores the importance of internal innovation

policies, absorptive capacity, strong financial resources, and robust stakeholder relationships

to mitigate risks and enhance sustainability.

Theoretical Implications

1. Integrated SRP conceptualization: There is a need for a unified theoretical framework

that articulates resilience, sustainability, and corporate purpose as an interdependent

system.

2. Dynamic capabilities as a common foundation: Resilience increasingly aligns with

dynamic capabilities theory, offering a conceptual bridge between adaptation,

innovation, and sustainability.

3. Digitalization as a cross-cutting dimension: The literature suggests advancing towards

models that recognize digitalization as a fundamental enabler within the construct of

organizational resilience.

Practical Implications

1. Resilience-based strategic management: Organizations must develop anticipation,

absorption, and adaptation capabilities as integral elements of their strategy, not merely

as crisis responses.

2. ESG + resilience integration: Incorporating resilience indicators into ESG frameworks

allows for a more comprehensive assessment of organizational sustainability.

3. Strengthening supply-chain resilience: Diversification, digitalization, flexibility, and

information integration are essential to improving resilience and ensuring operational

continuity.

4. Strategic use of MCS: Management control systems should balance diagnostic and

interactive mechanisms to foster learning, innovation, and control under uncertainty.

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 628

Future Research Directions

1. Development of integrated SRP models: Empirical validation of how purpose,

resilience, and sustainability interact and reinforce one another.

2. Impact of AI and automation on resilience: Examination of ethical dilemmas, data

biases, and technological risks affecting resilient capabilities.

3. Longitudinal studies: Research assessing the long-term impact of resilience on

sustainable performance.

4. Resilience in highly complex environments: Exploration of how inflation, global

disruptions, and geopolitical shifts (e.g., the potential decline of the dollar as a reference

currency) influence supply-chain resilience.

5. Corporate governance, transparency, and resilience: Investigation of how governance

mechanisms strengthen or weaken organizational response capabilities.

REFERENCES

Annarelli, A., & Nonino, F. (2016). Organizational resilience: an integrated approach to

business continuity and disaster recovery planning. European Journal of

Operational Research, 252(2), 395-408.

Annarelli, A., & Palombi, G. (2021). Digitalization capabilities for sustainable cyber

resilience: A conceptual framework. Sustainability, 13(23), 13065.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313065

Bonfanti, A., Battisti, E., & Pasqualino, L. (2016). Social entrepreneurship and corporate

architecture: evidence from Italy. Management Decision, 54(2), 390–417.

https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-08-2014-0532

Bresciani, S., Ferraris, A., Santoro, G., & Kotabe, M. (2022). Opening up the black box

on digitalization and agility: Key drivers and main outcomes. Technological

Forecasting and Social Change, 178, 121567.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121567

Chen, C. (2017). Science Mapping: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of Data

and Information Science, 2(4), 1-40. https://doi.org/10.1515/jdis-2017-0006

Ciasullo, M. V., Troisi, O., Montera, R., & Cosimato, S. (2024). Mastering the interplay

of organizational resilience and sustainability: A hybrid domain-based literature

review. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(1), 3530–3548.

https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3530

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar

Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025

Página | 629

Cobo, M. J., Lõpez-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2012). SciMAT:

a new science mapping analysis software tool. Journal of the American Society

for Information Science and Technology, 63(8), 1609–1630.

https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22688

Corrales-Estrada, A. M., Gómez-Santos, L. L., Bernal-Torres, C. A., & Rodriguez-

López, J. E. (2021). Sustainability and Resilience Organizational Capabilities to

Enhance Business Continuity Management: A Literature Review. Sustainability,

13(8196). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158196

Denyer, D., & Tranfield, D. (2009). Producing a Systematic Review. In L. L. F. K. H. S.

S. S. (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Research Methods (pp. 671–

689). SAGE Publications.

Fiss, P. C. (2011). Building better causal theories: a fuzzy set approach to typologies in

organization research. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 393–420.

https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2011.60263120

Florez-Jimenez, M. P., Lleo, A., Ruiz-Palomino, P., & Muñoz-Villamizar, A. F. (2024).

Corporate sustainability, organizational resilience, and corporate purpose: a

review of the academic traditions connecting them. Review of Managerial

Science, 18(4), 1075–1108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-024-00735-3

Flórez-Jiménez, M. P., Lleo, A., Ruiz-Palomino, P., & Muñoz-Villamizar, A. F. (2024).

Corporate sustainability, organizational resilience, and corporate purpose: A

review of the academic traditions connecting them. Review of Managerial

Science, 19(1), 67–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-024-00735-3

Galanos, A. K. (2023). Corporate governance and resilience: What makes firms

sustainable under crisis? Corporate Governance and Organizational Behavior

Review, 7(1), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.22495/cgobrv7i1p7

Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2021). Partial Least Squares

Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R: A Workbook. Springer

Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7

Hair Jr, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & Kuppelwieser, V. G. (2014). Partial least

squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business

research. European Business Review, 26(2), 106–121.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing

discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of

the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135.

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar 
Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025 
Página | 630 
Kantabutra,  S.  (2024).  A  cutting-edge  framework  and  the  research  agenda. 
Sustainability, 16(19), 8431. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198431 
Leoni,  L.  (2025).  Integrating  ESG  and  organizational  resilience  through  systems 
thinking:  A  conceptual  framework.  Management  Decision,  63(2),  401–418. 
https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-10-2024-1774  
Linnenluecke,  M.  K.,  &  Griffiths,  A.  (2013).  Firms  and  sustainability:  Mapping  the 
intellectual  origins  and  structure  of  the  corporate  sustainability  field.  Global 
Environmental  Change,  23(1),  382-391. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.07.007  
Mallak,  L.  (1998).  Putting  organizational  resilience  to  work.  Industrial  Management, 
40(6), 8–13. 
Mannen,  D.,  Hinton,  S.,  Kuijper,  T.,  &  Porter,  T.  (2012).  Sustainable  Organizing:  a 
Multiparadigm  Perspective  of  Organizational  Development  and  Permaculture 
Gardening.  Journal  of  Leadership  &  Organizational  Studies,  19(3),  355–368. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051812442967  
Marzouk, M., & Elshaboury, N. (2022). Science mapping analysis of embodied energy 
in  the  construction  industry.  Energy  Reports,  8,  1362–1376. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2021.12.049  
Matebese,  H.  (2025).  The  dynamic  correlation  between  corporate  governance  and 
strategy to inform organizational resilience. Future Studies Research Journal: 
Trends  and  Strategies,  17(1),  e929. 
https://doi.org/10.24023/FutureJournal.2025.v17n1p929  
Mongeon,  P.,  &  Paul-Hus,  A.  (2016).  The  journal  coverage  of  web  of  Science  and 
Scopus:  a  comparative  analysis.  Scientometrics,  106(1),  213–228. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-7  
Neacșu,  M.,  &  Georgescu,  I.  E.  (2024).  Positions  and  Delimitations  Regarding  the 
Financial  Performance  -  Sustainability  Relationship  in  the  Context  of 
Organizational Resilience. Scientific Annals of Economics and Business, 71(2), 
241-263. https://doi.org/10.47743/saeb-2024-0017  
Núñez-Merino, M., Maqueira-Marín, J. M., Moyano-Fuentes, J., & Castaño-Moraga, C. 
A. (2022). Industry 4.0 and supply chain. A systematic Science Mapping analysis. 
Technological  Forecasting  and  Social  Change,  181,  121788. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121788  

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar 
Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025 
Página | 631 
Orlando, B.,  Tortora, D., Pezzi,  A., &  Bitbol-Saba, N.  (2022).  The disruption  of  the 
international supply chain: firm resilience and knowledge preparedness to tackle 
the COVID-19 outbreak. Journal of International Management, 28(1), 100876. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INTMAN.2021.100876  
Ortiz-de-Mandojana, N., & Bansal, P. (2016). The long-term benefits of organizational 
resilience through sustainable business practices. Strategic Management Journal, 
37(8), 1615–1631. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2410  
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. 
D.,  et  al.  (2021).  The  PRISMA  2020  statement:  An  updated  guideline  for 
reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71  
Pappas, I. O., & Woodside, A. G. (2021). Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis 
(fsQCA): guidelines for research practice in Information Systems and marketing. 
International  Journal  of  Information  Management,  58,  102310. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102310  
Primadasa,  R.,  Kusrini,  E.,  Mansur,  A.,  &  Masudin,  I.  (2025).  Interrelationship 
performance  indicators  model  of  agile  supply  chain  management  in  palm  oil 
industry.  Sustainable  Futures,  10,  101373. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2025.101373  
Ragin, C. C. (2006). Set relations in social research: evaluating their consistency and 
coverage.  Political  Analysis,  14(3),  291–310. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpj019  
Rai, S. S., Rai, S., & Singh, N. K. (2021). Organizational resilience and social-economic 
sustainability:  COVID-19  perspective.  Environment,  Development  and 
Sustainability, 23(8), 12006–12023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-01154-
6  
Roberts, L. M., & Dutton, J. E. (2009). Exploring positive identities and organizations: 
Building  a  theoretical  and  research  foundation.  Routledge. 
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203879245  
Rodríguez-González, R.  M.,  Madrid-Guijarro, A., &  Maldonado-Guzmán,  G.  (2023). 
Digital  organizational culture  and  absorptive  capacity  as  precursors  to  supply 
chain resilience and sustainable performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 420, 
138411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138411  
Ruiz-Martin, C., Lopez-Paredes, A., & Wainer, G. (2018). What we know and do not 
know  about  organizational  resilience.  International  Journal  of  Production 

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar 
Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025 
Página | 632 
Management  and  Engineering,  6(1),  1-10. 
https://doi.org/10.4995/ijpme.2018.7898  
Sahebjamnia, N., Torabi, S. A., & Mansouri, S. A. (2015). Integrated business continuity 
and  disaster  recovery  planning:  Towards  organizational  resilience.  European 
Journal  of  Operational  Research,  242(1),  256–267. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2014.10.027  
Sánchez, P. G., Guevara, I. S., & Pérez Mayo, A. R. (2022). Economic Crisis, Changing 
Paradigms  and  Organizational  Complexity.  Journal  of  Human  Resource  and 
Sustainability Studies, 10, 737–752. https://doi.org/10.4236/jhrss.2022.104043  
Santos, G. S., Junior, K., Doln, M. L. M., De Araújo, L. M., & Bittencourt, J. V. M. 
(2014).  A  proposal  of  method  for  technical  performance  assessment  of  citrus 
juices extraction process. Espacios, 35(8). 
Santos,  S.  C.,  Liguori,  E.  W.,  &  Garvey,  E.  (2023).  How  digitalization  reinvented 
entrepreneurial  resilience  during  COVID-19.  Technological  Forecasting  and 
Social Change, 189, 122398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122398  
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation 
modeling.  In  Handbook  of  Marketing  Research  (pp.  587–632).  Springer. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57413-4_15  
Schneider,  C.  Q.,  &  Wagemann,  C.  (2012).  Set-Theoretic  Methods  for  the  Social 
Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Cambridge University 
Press. 
Sezen-Gültekin,  G.,  &  Argon,  T.  (2020).  Examination  of  the  relationship  between 
organizational resilience and organizational sustainability at a higher education 
institution.  International  Journal  of  Curriculum  and  Instruction,  12(Special 
Issue), 329–343. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1245133 
Southwick, S. M., Bonanno, G. A., Masten, A. S., Panter-Brick, C., & Yehuda, R. (2014). 
Resilience  definitions,  theory,  and  challenges:  interdisciplinary  perspectives. 
European  Journal  of  Psychotraumatology,  5(1),  25338. 
https://doi.org/10.3402/ejpt.v5.25338  
Walker,  T.  (2016).  Entrepreneurial  wisdom.  In  CSR,  Sustainability,  Ethics  & 
Governance (pp. 165–179). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28287-
9_13  

Prisma ODS Revista Científica Multidisciplinar 
Volumen 4, Número 2 - Año 2025 
Página | 633 
Weber,  M.  M.  (2023).  The  relationship  between  resilience  and  sustainability  in  the 
organizational  context:  A  systematic  review.  Sustainability,  15(22),  15970. 
https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215970 
Weber, M.  M.,  Bresciani,  S.,  &  Simons,  R.  (2024).  Resilience-oriented  management 
control systems: a systematic literature review. Journal of Management Control. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-024-00385-2  
Xie,  X.,  Wu,  Y.,  Palacios-Marqués,  D.,  &  Ribeiro-Navarrete,  S.  (2022).  Business 
networks and organizational resilience capacity in the digital age during COVID-
19:  a  perspective  utilizing  organizational  information  processing  theory. 
Technological  Forecasting  and  Social  Change,  177,  121548. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121548  
Yan, F., Jia, F., Chen, L., & Nazrul, A. (2025). Nexus of sustainability and organizational 
resilience:  The  role  of  operational  slack.  Technovation,  130,  102817. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2024.102817  
Zhang, X., Chang, B. G., & Wu, K. S. (2022). COVID-19 Shock, Financial Flexibility, 
and  Hotels'  Performance  Nexus.  Frontiers  in  Public  Health,  10,  792946. 
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.792946  
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and Organization. 
Organizational  Research  Methods,  18(3),  429–472. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629  
 
 
 
 
©  Los  autores.  Este  artículo  se  publica  en  Prisma  ODS  bajo  la  Licencia  Creative  Commons  Atribución  4.0 
Internacional (CC BY 4.0). Esto permite el uso, distribución y reproducción en cualquier medio, incluidos fines 
comerciales,  siempre  que  se  otorgue  la  atribución  adecuada  a  los  autores  y  a  la  fuente  original. 
 
 
 
            : https://doi.org/10.65011/prismaods.v4.i2.121  
 
Cómo citar este artículo (APA 7ª edición): 
Guerrero Sánchez,  P.  .,  Roque  Nieto,  N.  .,  &  Pérez  Mayo,  A.  R.  .  (2026).  Organizational 
Resilience and Sustainability: The Role of Proactive and Reactive Capabilities in Uncertain 
Environments. Prisma  ODS:  Revista  Multidisciplinaria  Sobre  Desarrollo  Sostenible, 4(2), 
614-633. https://doi.org/10.65011/prismaods.v4.i2.121 