Allister Coetzee would not have had any illusions over the scale of the job he inherited a month ago, but Saturday's defeat to a 14-man Ireland represents a severe bump back to reality after two weeks of unrelenting optimism.It was an extremely disappointing afternoon, in which the Springboks were beaten in every facet of the match before CJ Stander's harsh 23rd-minute red card.Thereafter, parity was restored on the field (which is a concern when you're 15 playing against 14), but not on the scoreboard, and the Springboks could not convert possession to points. Most disappointingly, their only points in the second half came from an intercept try.The result, and even the manner in which it occurred, is not a reason to abandon all optimism and replace it with a lack of confidence in the new coach. The same reasons for optimism that existed prior to Saturday's loss remain.There are new players, hopefully new thinking, and good reason to believe that those players can be significantly better than they were on Saturday.There were reports from the Bok camp about a shift in energy, that the squad was happy and the general mood was relaxed and upbeat. If those qualities in a team environment are desirable (I'd say they are), then it would be a shame to have them punctured within 80minutes.That said, upon hearing that midweek, the sceptic in me thought: "It's all fun and games until you're losing."Now that Coetzee has tasted defeat, his ability to stay true to the principles of the last two weeks will be tested.The acid test for any coach is how they are able to balance staying true to their foundational principles and "personality", while adapting and changing enough to overcome adversity such as that faced by a Springbok team after a loss. That balance between adaptability and consistency, innovation and stability, is where the art of leadership and the science of thought intersect.Eddie Jones is a case in point. He is in the process of achieving this with England, turning what is largely the same group of players who failed in the World Cup in October into a formidable proposition, who, on Saturday stunned Australia on a good weekend for the northern hemisphere.Jones brings a seemingly complex paradoxical set of qualities to the role. He is exceptionally analytical but demands simplicity. He is unwaveringly confident in his own formula, yet is open to innovation and ideas. Such balance is critical for success.After all, simplicity without the enormous detail that must underpin it is what I'd call stupidity. True confidence comes only after inviting scrutiny, and then being secure enough to take it on board.In my experience, South African sport tends to respond to adversity with a siege mentality (circle the wagons). This is understandable, because it's the easiest way to motivate players - "sport as war" allows teams to compensate for all manner of deficits.It's no real kind of solution, though. It works, and the success it produces papers over the cracks until the next time.It leaves little room for creativity, and it's in creativity solutions must be found. I'd also argue that the excitement around the Boks prior to this weekend existed in large part because of the hope for creativity that Coetzee and a pocket of new players might bring. That should remain.For, in the words of Edward do Bono, who created the term "lateral thinking" almost 50 years ago, "without creativity there will be no progress and we would forever repeat the past".It's far too early to slip back into the typical South African rugby cycle of paranoia and despair, interspersed with the occasional passionate, resounding victory. But the centripetal force that holds us in that cycle will be broken only by new thinking, and now that the Coetzee reign is under way, it will be fascinating to see how he responds to that pressure...