Simon AndrewSudha ArlikattiLaura SiebeneckKannapa PongponratKraiwuth JaikampanUniversity of North TexasMahidol UniversityRajabhat University2018-12-112019-03-142018-12-112019-03-142016-01-01Disasters. Vol.40, No.1 (2016), 65-8414677717036136662-s2.0-84955174838https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/43572© Overseas Development Institute, 2016. Based on the Institutional Collective Action framework, this research tests the impact of two competing hypotheses-bonding and bridging-on enhancing organisational resiliency. The bonding hypothesis posits that organisational resiliency can be achieved if an organisation works closely with others, whereas the bridging hypothesis argues that such a structure places considerable stress on an organisation and advocates for an organisation to position itself as a central actor to gain access to novel resources from a diverse set of entities to achieve resiliency. The paper analyses data gathered from semi-structured interviews with 44 public, private, and non-profit organisations serving communities affected by the Great Floods of 2011 in the Thai capital, Bangkok (urban), and in Pathum Thani (suburban) and Ayutthaya (rural) provinces. The findings suggest that: organisational resiliency was associated with the bridging effect; organisations in the rural province were more resilient than those in the suburban and urban centres; and private and non-governmental organisations generally were more resilient than public sector organisations. The findings highlight the importance of fostering multi-sector partnerships to enhance organisational resiliency for disaster response.Mahidol UniversityEarth and Planetary SciencesArticleSCOPUS10.1111/disa.12136