She’ll Be Right (mate)!
If we’re to believe the Aussies (and why wouldn’t we) this phrase is a Kiwi thing. Regardless of its source, debate has raged on its merits. Is it a supportive statement toward a positive future and assumed outcomes in times of trouble? Could it be a worthwhile steer-along to support an already strong confidence that things will work out fine? Or is it a negligent, arrogant head-in-the-sand, hope-for-the-best lazy-oriented expression?
In chatting with my Aussie mates, they tend to conveniently claim the expression as their own when defined in the former above, but they let us Kiwis claim it when it’s the latter! The history books tend to suggest the expression holds a passport in both countries, emerging popular from the rural sectors at the turn of the last century. It’s a well-worn phrase in which its simplicity suggests it would make a great affirmation. Hmmm.
Anyway, let’s assume in this context it implies that a decent level of experience and level of resilience sits behind the phrase because both the outback cockies and their shaky-isle counterparts absolutely fit that mould, as farming is bloody hard work. And the same goes for any individuals operating in an environment experiencing a constant barrage of unpredictable and highly disruptive factors (such as weather, interest rates, global markets, pests, disease, pricing, family, and the weather). Business models and lives can be turned upside down in a flash, and farmer folk are perpetually on guard. Resilience is king.
We hear the word resilience bandied around plenty – whether referring to our kids, or their teachers, or us adults (both young and old). And there seems a general narrative, on the back of little more than a loosely gauged feeling, that things aren’t quite right here. Some propose portions of society have somehow missed out or been skewed or lured away from historically enjoyed resilience levels. Resilience itself broadly encompasses an individual’s level of durability, bounce-back, determination, guts, stamina, and fortitude – all of which are largely subjectively measured. In a professional or academic capacity, benchmarking one’s resilience level is anchored to a specific challenge or trauma event (perhaps a household quiz following the family pet being run over in the driveway) to gain a measure of comparative objectivity. Individual resilience levels develop over time through teachings, and life experiences. It’s all about how good we are at picking ourselves up, dusting ourselves off, and getting on with life with minimal disruption or ongoing negatively oriented outcomes or consequences. There is much work to do in this space, but the good news is resilience levels can be assessed, and any desirable actions considered.
Separately, and notwithstanding the additional nuances, convolutions and permutations existing in a business environment, it remains worthy of consideration as to how a business generally measures up resilience-wise. Is your closest business competitor more durable than your own company? Which would cope better (or worse) in a significant business crisis? Can we do anything about it? As risky as it might sound in opening more HR rabbit holes (such as poring over employee resilience scores the day the receptionist runs off with the CEO) and while not an exact science, it makes sense to have a chew on it. And what we see people usually think first is, ‘Who in our team is more (or less) resilient? Who could be influencing others? Can we or should we lend a hand? Could a team of more resiliently trained employees be better off than a team of snowflakes? Probably. Could the same apply with a sports team?
Meantime, back to an individual’s resilience, there’s a separate aspect which goes a bit against the (resilience) grain. This relates to the recovery phase or when we are getting over things. I guess most of us would consider ourselves desirably tough, able to ‘weather the storm’, to put on a brave face, and plough ahead, while exhibiting courage, and learning that ‘what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger’ and leaving the past behind. We could go on and on how we think we need to see ourselves, but it’s the moving on bit that always bothered me. When I was a victim of acts of individual cruelty, I’d always hear after the main act and trauma had played out things like, ‘Right, now just let it go, put it to bed, let bygones be bygones, move on, live and let live, learn to forgive, blah blah’. You get the picture. To be fair to my wife, I do sometimes need to calm my farm, and not keep reliving some of the past, and so should we all. But it was only recently suggested that the insistence to moving on by blocking out or forgetting and forgiving is not the best approach.
If we are to learn to balance and build stronger resilience and confidence from our experiences, we should never let those bad experiences totally disappear. Broken bones heal but the scars underneath are always there to remind us of what happened, and how strong we were/are. Pinging thoughtfully on those historical moments builds even stronger resilience; it does not make us weaker or appear as not coping well (as many sideline spectators and expert commentators often imply). It’s true that ‘buried in the past’ and wallowing in self-pity can be incredibly self-destructive, but equally ignoring or pushing away the core disturbance entirely (and those associated subconscious pokes we inevitably receive) is not the way to go.
This reminds me of a Simpsons episode where Marge advised Lisa to walk around pretending all her problems and worries are in her shoes, squashed accumulatively through her little feet all day long. An additional takeaway here was Lisa becoming ‘taller’ through her approach!
What we need to do is instead (without being dragged back to the misery-pit from which we have only just climbed out) acknowledge the event but not let it go. We find a way to retain enough of the guts of what happened, reflect on what we have learned and not let that lesson go. In some of the more persistent trauma situations this step can be critical. What happens in a lot of typical post-trauma situations is a desire for unity through forgiveness, but often this does not happen. Instead, trauma sufferers (such as in physical or sexual abuse cases) victims hold onto a glint of hope that it’s now time for themselves to better handle the situation, and (ironically perhaps) better prepare themselves for the next onslaught. Worse again, thinking one can (finally!) change that person and reduce or eliminate their unfavourable and targeted behaviour in the future.
Modern positive psychology contends the step to not let go is precisely the appropriate course for victims caught up in serious episodes of persistent targeting, deliberate gas-lighting or around those holding a narcissistic playbook. To forgive plays directly into the hands of these targetters and allows for their cursed control cycle and soul-destructive efforts to march steadily forward. To forget completely can set you up bigtime. I’m pretty sure the toughest high-country farmer never forgets the most severe winter cold-snap they ever faced, and neither should we.