Enterprise Antifragility Scorecard

Comprehensive assessment of your organization's antifragile capabilities across multiple dimensions.

This comprehensive scorecard evaluates your organization's antifragility across six key dimensions based on Nassim Nicholas Taleb's framework and the latest research. Antifragile organizations don't just resist disruption—they actually improve and grow stronger through exposure to volatility, stressors, and disorder.

1. Exposure & Absorption of Shocks

Antifragile systems don't avoid stressors; they engage with them. Small, frequent stressors act as "vaccines" that build strength. One dimension is the degree of calculated exposure to volatility an organization allows. Coupled with this is absorptive capacity — the ability to absorb shocks without breaking. In organizations, this could be financial slack or spare capacity that can absorb a surge or loss.

— Adapted from Taleb (2012); Johnson & Gheorghe (2013)

Frequency of stress-testing or scenario simulationsLeading
i
How often does your organization conduct planned stress tests, simulations, or scenario planning exercises?

Never

Annually

Semi-annually (twice per year)

Quarterly

Monthly or more frequently

Availability of financial slack to absorb shocksLeading
i
What level of financial buffer resources (cash reserves, credit lines) does your organization maintain?

Very Low (Cash reserves <5% of annual operating costs)

Low (Cash reserves 5-10% of annual operating costs)

Moderate (Cash reserves 10-20% of annual operating costs)

High (Cash reserves 20-30% of annual operating costs)

Very High (Cash reserves >30% of annual operating costs)

Availability of operational slack to absorb shocksLeading
i
What level of operational buffer resources (inventory, capacity) does your organization maintain?

Very Low (Operating at >95% capacity)

Low (Operating at 90-95% capacity)

Moderate (Operating at 80-90% capacity)

High (Operating at 70-80% capacity)

Very High (Operating at <70% capacity)

Range of volatility the organization can tolerateLeading
i
How much variation in demand, supply, or other key variables can your organization handle without disruption?

Very Narrow (Can handle up to 5% fluctuation in demand/supply)

Narrow (Can handle 5-10% fluctuation in demand/supply)

Moderate (Can handle 10-20% fluctuation in demand/supply)

Wide (Can handle 20-35% fluctuation in demand/supply)

Very Wide (Can handle >35% fluctuation in demand/supply)

Recovery speed from last significant disruptionLagging
i
How quickly did your organization recover from its last significant disruption?

Very Slow (>6 months)

Slow (3-6 months)

Moderate (1-3 months)

Fast (1 week-1 month)

Very Fast (<1 week)

2. Optionality & Redundancy

Taleb emphasizes optionalities — having multiple alternatives and bets that cap downside but allow plenty of upside. In an organization, this translates to strategic and operational redundancy, as well as flexibility. Redundancy (spare capacity, backup systems, extra inventory, diversified talent) provides the slack needed to seize opportunities during disorder. Redundancy goes hand-in-hand with diversity — a diversity of ideas, products, or approaches increases the chance that one of them will thrive in a new environment.

— Adapted from Taleb (2012); Johnson & Gheorghe (2013); Kennon et al. (2015)

Diversity of revenue streams or supplier baseLeading
i
How diversified are your organization's revenue streams and/or supplier relationships?

Poor (Single source >80% of revenue/supply)

Limited (Largest source 60-80% of revenue/supply)

Adequate (Largest source 40-60% of revenue/supply)

Good (Largest source 20-40% of revenue/supply)

Excellent (No single source >20% of revenue/supply)

Number of independent innovation initiatives or pilotsLeading
i
How many independent "small bets" or innovation initiatives does your organization maintain at any time?

None (No innovation initiatives)

Minimal (1-2 initiatives, or <1% of resources allocated to innovation)

Moderate (3-5 initiatives, or 1-3% of resources allocated to innovation)

Substantial (6-10 initiatives, or 3-5% of resources allocated to innovation)

Extensive (>10 initiatives, or >5% of resources allocated to innovation)

Resource FlexibilityLeading
i
How would you rate your organisation's resource flexibility?

Very Rigid (Resources cannot be reallocated)

Somewhat Rigid (Up to 10% of resources can be quickly reallocated)

Moderately Flexible (10-25% of resources can be quickly reallocated)

Highly Flexible (25-40% of resources can be quickly reallocated)

Extremely Flexible (>40% of resources can be quickly reallocated)

Availability of contingency plansLeading
i
How comprehensive and accessible are your organization's contingency plans for various disruption scenarios?

Nonexistent (No formal contingency plans)

Basic (Plans exist but are limited in scope and rarely updated)

Adequate (Plans cover major risks and are updated annually)

Comprehensive (Plans cover most risks and are updated semi-annually)

Extensive & Well-Tested (Plans cover all key risks, are regularly tested and updated quarterly)

3. Adaptive Learning (Non-Monotonicity)

A hallmark of antifragile organizations is learning from mistakes and failures. "Non-monotonicity" means performance doesn't just gradually decay under stress; sometimes a shock causes a jump to a better state because the organization learns. This aligns with the idea of a learning organization that treats every setback as feedback. In practice, this construct involves mechanisms for continuous improvement, such as post-mortem analyses, knowledge sharing, and experimentation.

— Adapted from Johnson & Gheorghe (2013); Aven (2015); Maden et al. (2024)

Culture of learning from disruptions or mistakesLeading
i
How would you characterize your organization's approach to failures, errors, and unexpected events?

Reactive (Problems are addressed but rarely analyzed for lessons)

Basic (Some lessons captured but limited sharing)

Moderate (Regular post-mortems but inconsistent implementation)

Advanced (Structured learning processes with good implementation)

Proactive (Systematic learning with continuous improvement cycles)

Knowledge management and information sharing systemsLeading
i
How effective are your organization's systems for capturing, sharing, and applying lessons learned?

Nonexistent (No formal knowledge management)

Rudimentary (Basic documentation exists but is rarely accessed)

Functional (Systems exist and are moderately used)

Advanced (Well-organized systems with regular usage)

Sophisticated & Well-Used (Integrated systems that are actively used and maintained)

Implementation rate of improvements after failuresLagging
i
What percentage of identified lessons from failures/disruptions are implemented as improvements?

Very Low (<20%)

Low (20-40%)

Moderate (40-60%)

High (60-80%)

Very High (>80%)

Time from failure identification to implemented solutionLagging
i
How quickly does your organization typically move from identifying a problem to implementing a solution?

Very Slow (>12 months)

Slow (6-12 months)

Moderate (3-6 months)

Fast (1-3 months)

Very Fast (<1 month)

4. Governance & Decentralization

Stemming from systems theory (Ashby's Law of Requisite Variety), a system needs as much complexity in its control mechanisms as exists in its environment. For an organization, this often means empowering decentralized decision-making and having a variety of responses available for any given challenge. A rigid, top-down hierarchy is often fragile because it cannot respond quickly to local shocks; in contrast, more decentralized organizations can adapt in a bottom-up fashion.

— Adapted from Johnson & Gheorghe (2013); Ramezani & Camarinha-Matos (2020)

Decision-making decentralization and speedLeading
i
How distributed is decision-making authority in your organization?

Highly Centralized (All significant decisions require executive approval)

Centralized (Most decisions require management approval)

Balanced (Decision authority matches decision impact)

Decentralized (Teams can make most operational decisions)

Highly Decentralized (Teams have authority for nearly all decisions in their domain)

Autonomy of front-line teams to respond to changesLeading
i
How much freedom do frontline teams have to adapt to changes without escalation?

Minimal (Must get approval)

Limited (Minor decisions only)

Moderate (Some significant decisions)

Substantial (Most decisions)

Extensive (Full autonomy)

Organizational network structureLeading
i
How would you characterize your organization's structure in terms of cross-functional connections?

Siloed (Few cross-connections)

Mostly Siloed

Somewhat Connected

Well Connected

Highly Networked (Many cross-connections)

Speed of cross-functional response to emergenciesLagging
i
How quickly can your organization form cross-functional teams to address emergent issues?

Very Slow (Weeks)

Slow (Days)

Moderate (1 day)

Fast (Several hours)

Very Fast (Within an hour)

5. Outcome & Growth

Ultimately, antifragility is about having a convex response curve to volatility — small shocks produce small gains or little harm, while big shocks also produce disproportionate gains (or at least limited harm). A resilient metric might be time-to-recovery, but an antifragile metric could be the time it takes to not only recover but exceed the pre-shock performance. Another could be the magnitude of post-crisis improvement — did sales or market share grow following a supply chain disruption?

— Adapted from Aven (2015); Größler (2020); Kennon et al. (2015)

Post-shock performance improvementLagging
i
Following significant disruptions, how does your organization's performance typically change?

Decline (Worse than before)

No Change (Return to baseline)

Slight Improvement (1-5% better)

Noticeable Improvement (5-15% better)

Significant Improvement (>15% better)

Market share trends during industry disruptionsLagging
i
How does your organization's market share typically change during industry-wide disruptions?

Significant Loss (>5% market share loss)

Moderate Loss (2-5% market share loss)

Stable (±2% market share change)

Moderate Gain (2-5% market share gain)

Significant Gain (>5% market share gain)

Recovery improvement rateLagging
i
How would you characterize your organization's ability to recover faster from each successive disruption?

No Improvement (Recovery speed unchanged across incidents)

Minimal Improvement (5-10% faster recovery each time)

Slight Improvement (10-20% faster recovery each time)

Moderate Improvement (20-30% faster recovery each time)

Significant Improvement (>30% faster recovery each time)

New capabilities developed from disruptionsLagging
i
How frequently does your organization develop new capabilities directly as a result of disruptions?

Rarely or Never (No new capabilities developed)

Infrequently (New capabilities emerge in <25% of disruptions)

Sometimes (New capabilities emerge in 25-50% of disruptions)

Frequently (New capabilities emerge in 50-75% of disruptions)

Consistently (New capabilities emerge in >75% of disruptions)

6. Risk Attitude & Innovation Culture

A strong antifragile culture will support all other dimensions — it produces the "antifragile mindset" that Taleb espouses (embracing uncertainty and variation). Cultural aspects include risk attitude (do employees feel encouraged to take calculated risks and share bad news?), innovation culture (are new ideas rewarded, even if they fail initially?), and collaboration (since collaboration and information sharing were identified as success factors for antifragile supply chains).

— Adapted from Ghasemi & Alizadeh (2017); Corvello et al. (2024)

Organizational attitude toward calculated risk-takingLeading
i
How would you characterize your organization's attitude toward risk-taking?

Risk-Averse (Avoids uncertainty)

Cautious (Minimizes risk)

Balanced

Risk-Tolerant (Accepts calculated risks)

Risk-Embracing (Seeks calculated risks)

Tolerance for productive failureLeading
i
How does your organization respond when calculated risks don't pay off?

Punitive (Failures are punished)

Disapproving (Failures are discouraged)

Neutral (Failures are tolerated)

Accepting (Failures are learning opportunities)

Encouraging (Failures are celebrated as learning)

Cross-functional collaboration effectivenessLeading
i
How effective is collaboration across different departments or functions?

Poor (Siloed thinking)

Fair (Limited collaboration)

Good (Regular collaboration)

Very Good (Frequent collaboration)

Excellent (Seamless collaboration)

Employee adaptability and skill diversityLeading
i
How would you characterize your workforce's ability to adapt to new roles or challenges?

Very Specialized (Employees have narrow, deep expertise in one area)

Somewhat Specialized (Limited cross-training in related areas)

Moderately Versatile (Solid skills in primary area plus some adjacent skills)

Highly Versatile (Proficient in multiple skill areas)

Extremely Adaptable (Deep expertise in one area plus broad skills across many areas)

Enterprise Antifragility Scorecard

1. Exposure & Absorption of Shocks

Frequency of stress-testing or scenario simulationsLeadingiHow often does your organization conduct planned stress tests, simulations, or scenario planning exercises?

Availability of financial slack to absorb shocksLeadingiWhat level of financial buffer resources (cash reserves, credit lines) does your organization maintain?

Availability of operational slack to absorb shocksLeadingiWhat level of operational buffer resources (inventory, capacity) does your organization maintain?

Range of volatility the organization can tolerateLeadingiHow much variation in demand, supply, or other key variables can your organization handle without disruption?

Recovery speed from last significant disruptionLaggingiHow quickly did your organization recover from its last significant disruption?

2. Optionality & Redundancy

Diversity of revenue streams or supplier baseLeadingiHow diversified are your organization's revenue streams and/or supplier relationships?

Number of independent innovation initiatives or pilotsLeadingiHow many independent "small bets" or innovation initiatives does your organization maintain at any time?

Resource FlexibilityLeadingiHow would you rate your organisation's resource flexibility?

Availability of contingency plansLeadingiHow comprehensive and accessible are your organization's contingency plans for various disruption scenarios?

3. Adaptive Learning (Non-Monotonicity)

Culture of learning from disruptions or mistakesLeadingiHow would you characterize your organization's approach to failures, errors, and unexpected events?

Knowledge management and information sharing systemsLeadingiHow effective are your organization's systems for capturing, sharing, and applying lessons learned?

Implementation rate of improvements after failuresLaggingiWhat percentage of identified lessons from failures/disruptions are implemented as improvements?

Time from failure identification to implemented solutionLaggingiHow quickly does your organization typically move from identifying a problem to implementing a solution?