In the context of increasing global uncertainty, organizational stability is increasingly proclaimed as a universal response to crises; however, the very content of this concept remains theoretically blurred. The article demonstrates that in contemporary academic and managerial literature the categories of stability, organizational resilience, and sustainable development are often used interchangeably, despite their fundamentally different ontological status, temporal logic, and managerial functions. Such a reduction in terminology leads to goals being substituted for means, it also complicates the interpretation of empirical findings and weakens the practical relevance of management models. Based on a systematic analysis of classical and contemporary studies, the article substantiates that stability reflects the preservation of a system’s given state, organizational resilience represents a dynamic capability of organizations to adapt and transform under shocks and uncertainty, while sustainable development defines a normative and institutionally legitimized trajectory of long-term economic, social, and environmental value creation. The study proposes a hierarchical model of their interrelationship, in which organizational resilience acts as a necessary condition for the implementation of a sustainable development strategy, ensuring coherence between short-term survival and long-term objectives. The findings provide a new perspective on the architecture of management in turbulent environments and form a theoretical basis for the development of managerial decisions aimed not only at organizational survival but also at shaping sustainable development trajectories.