Not having recovery plans can impede adaptive resilience (Alexander, 2013). Disaster planning can facilitate rebuilding the resilience of organizational infrastructure, thus contributing to planned resilience (Faulkner & Vikulov, 2001). However, research also indicates complexities in the relationship between planned and adaptive resilience. Somers (2009) found that disaster planning did not significantly affect organizational resilience. Dalziell and McManus (2004) suggest that planning only partly facilitates organizational recovery post-disaster. Organizations should, therefore, focus on building adaptive resilience rather than creating stepby-step plans (Somers, 2009).

Adapting Lee et al.’s (2013) conceptualization of organizational resilience for the tourism sector, Orchiston, Prayag, and Brown (2016) found strong evidence of two dimensions – ‘collaboration and innovation’ and ‘planning and culture’, which are different to the original planned and adaptive resilience. This is possibly due to the methodological and analytical differences between the two studies. Nevertheless, the importance of effective planning for emergent issues, problem-solving, building external linkages, and making effective decisions as a team are highlighted (Orchiston et al., 2016). These practices can favorably impact business performance (Avery & Bergsteiner, 2011).