Responding to the COVID-19 crisis: a principled or pragmatist approach?

Abstract

Uncertainties run deep during a crisis. Yet, leaders will have to make critical decisions in the absence of information they would like to have. How do political leaders cope with this challenge? One way to deal with crisisinduced uncertainty is to base all decisions on a core principle or value. This is what we call a principled approach. The pragmatist approach offers an alternative: an experimental, trial-and-error strategy based on quick feedback. In this paper, we consider both approaches in light of the COVID-19 experience in four European countries. We conclude that the pragmatic approach may be superior, in theory, but is hard to effectuate in practice. We discuss implications for the practice of strategic crisis management. KEYWORDS Strategic crisis management; political leadership; COVID-19; pragmatism Introduction: categorizing strategic approaches to crisis managementThe COVID-19 crisis has presented political leaders everywhere with extreme governance challenges. They had to contain a mysterious virus, with limited data, widely varying estimates, unexpected capacity shortfalls, and intense contestation about interventions whose intended and unintended consequences were unknown.The uncertainties ran deep. There was uncertainty with regard to the main channels of transmission, whether successful recovery would lead to immunity from future infections, if and how the virus might mutate. There was uncertainty about the number of people infected, the number of people who would require intensive care, the number of potential fatalities or the long-term effects of the virus on recovered patients ('long-COVID'), the available capacities in healthcare facilities, or the economic and social

Coordination and crisis management. The case of the federal Government and two sub-national governments in Mexico

“…Under the new institutionalism approach the article highlights the importance of the features of the political-administrative system in Mexico for the first responses of the federal government, if these responses influence subsequent policies (Bode and Culebro, 2018). Similar to the pragmatic approach in crisis management (Boin and Lodge, 2021b) the federal and the subnational governments in México did not impose severe measures that may affect severely mobility or the use of armed forces.…”

Unleashing the potential of digital technologies in emergency supply chain: the moderating effect of crisis leadership

“…The growing body of rich literature on the impact of crisis leaders on tackling such situations is "…characterized by a high degree of fragmentation, considerably hindering the generation of parsimonious theory and practically useful insights" (Schaedler et al 2021, p. 1). The positive beliefs of the leaders about the usefulness of the DT during crises result in certain managerial actions that help the organizations to assimilate the DT as an integral component of their organizational design (Boin and Lodge, 2021). Based on crisis leadership theory (Littlefield and Quennette, 2007;Wu et al 2021), the author argues that managing emergency supply chain leaders need to recognize and respect each worker's identity and must be open to innovative ideas and ways to tackle the situations favorably.…”

Embedding Expertise for Policy Responses to COVID-19: Comparing Decision-Making Structures in Two Federal Democracies

“…They were held accountable for developing and enforcing measures aimed at reducing contagion and minimising deaths. (Boin & Lodge, 2021 ; Boin et al, 2017 ).…”

“…This relationship is arguably important for governmental capacity to handle crises. Understanding the structures and processes of advice between leaders and experts and the uptake of advice can offer valuable insights for crisis management (Boin & Lodge, 2021 ; Boin et al, 2017 ). The present study focused on the dimensions of how expertise was embedded, along with issues of coordination and communication.…”