Conceptualizing and Explaining Flexibility in Administrative Crisis Management: A Cross-district Analysis in Germany

Abstract

Flexibility in administrative crisis management is a frequently reported determinant for a successful crisis response. But there is little agreement about how to conceptualize, measure and explain flexibility. We use a three-dimensional measure of administrative flexibility, capturing employees’ decision leeway, staff mobility, and organizational innovation in a crisis response. We then develop and test an explanation of variation in flexibility, focusing on the refugee crisis of 2015/16 in Germany and analyzing survey and socio-economic data from 235 districts using linear regression analysis. The main finding is that differences in flexibility cannot be explained by the scope of the crisis in a district, but by organizational factors: Agencies with politically unconstrained leadership, with higher financial resources and more crisis-related experience, respond more flexible. These findings contribute to theorizing and explaining administrative flexibility in and beyond crisis management and have practical implications for crisis learning and preparation.

Policy makers believe money motivates more than it does

“…One reason is that neoclassical approaches remain central in policy education. For instance, we reviewed curricula of all 17 public management programs for federal and state civil servants and the top 10 law schools in Germany—two of the most popular degrees held by German mayors 30 , 31 —and found that none of these curricula included the above ‘behavioral’ literature on the potential limitations of financial incentives. Another reason is that policy makers make frequent and ongoing use of financial incentives to promote contributions to public goods.…”