The COVID-19 Marathon
Demands and Resources of Crisis Managers in Continuous Operation
Abstract
Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic required the deployment of crisis management teams (CMTs) on an unprecedented scale. Due to their high level of responsibility and wide-ranging decision-making authority, the enduring resilience and health of CMT members is essential. Yet, during pandemics, they are permanently challenged. With cross-sectional data from 219 CMT members, we tested six pre-registered hypotheses based on the Job Demands–Resources model. We found the expected positive association between experienced demands and exhaustion (H1), which was moderated by home resources (partly confirming H2); a positive association between experienced resources and work engagement (H3), which was not moderated by demands (rejecting H4); and associations between exhaustion and engagement with outcome measures such as CMT members’ self-assessed performance, satisfaction, and quitting intention (mostly confirming H5 and H6). Furthermore, we explore how the pandemic has changed from experts’ perspectives, describe lessons learned, and derive practical recommendations and suggestions for future research.
Crisis management teams (CMTs) are deployed in large emergency situations that overwhelm individual local units and must be centrally coordinated. The COVID-19 pandemic has required the deployment of these teams on a scale unprecedented in peacetime, but little is known about the well-being and motivation of its members. Initial analyses and qualitative interviews with COVID-19 CMTs (e.g., Fasth et al., 2022; Klinger et al., 2022; Thielsch et al., 2021) revealed both specific demands of managing a pandemic but also certain resources that were helpful for CMT members. However, these analyses were not based on theoretically derived hypotheses and quantitative data. Moreover, extant research usually considered only the first months of the pandemic. Yet, the COVID-19 pandemic persisted for several years, with additional challenges for CMTs emerging during later phases, such as corona fatigue, and the rejection of effective measures in parts of the population (e.g., by antivaccinationists).
In this study, based on online survey data from 219 CMT members, we address implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for CMTs after 2 years of continuous work. Using the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) model (e.g., Bakker & Demerouti, 2017) as a theoretical framework, we examine specific demands on and resources of CMT members, building on and extending earlier qualitative findings with quantitative research. Moreover, we derive recommendations on how operational readiness of CMT members can be maintained in longer-lasting crises and which interventions might be helpful.
This paper provides four main contributions: First, we use theoretical principles derived from the JD-R model to explain central states of CMT members (e.g., well-being, motivation) that are important for their operational capability. In doing so, we also contribute to the existing literature by simultaneously examining motivational processes and health impairments of CMT members. Second, we explore changes of the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of CMT members, particularly contrasting later phases with initial phases and the pandemic in general. Third, we provide one of the first quantitative investigations of COVID-19 CMTs, complementing and extending extant qualitative assessments. Finally, we provide exploratory data on lessons learned from the perspective of CMT members, yielding valuable practical implications for training and management of CMTs more generally. Other emergencies and crises with long duration and high spatial impact are likely in the future, for instance, due to climate change (e.g., Schulman, 2022) or political and economic disruptions leading to forced migration (e.g., Echterhoff et al., 2020). Therefore, lessons learned from CMTs during the COVID-19 pandemic could be useful for future crisis management.
Theoretical Background
Crisis Management Teams
Crisis management teams (CMTs) are multiprofessional teams deployed to address the multiple challenges arising from major emergencies, including coordination, prevention, mitigation, and response strategies. They handle complex, highly dynamic, and often nontransparent events that pose substantial risks to humans and the environment. CMTs are typically installed in larger organizations or at different levels of public administration (e.g., municipal, district, state, or federal) and are equipped with decision-making power to execute policy directives and safety measures. CMT members interact with several groups and stakeholders (e.g., citizens, executing agencies, other CMTs, higher-level authorities) and communicate and enforce decisions. To do so, CMTs are composed of members with heterogeneous experience, status, knowledge, and occupational backgrounds (e.g., administration and law, emergency response and medical care, logistics and supply management, or press and public relations; e.g., Heath, 1998).
CMT work can be highly demanding due to time pressure and situation complexity, which can cause difficulties in communication, decision-making, and team processes (e.g., McConnell & Drennan, 2006; Weisæth et al., 2002). Consequently, conflict is often inevitable, leading to high psychological demands and stressful experiences (McMaster & Baber, 2012; Weisæth et al., 2002). Usually, CMTs are deployed for only short periods until a local emergency (e.g., thunderstorm, wildfire) subsides and local units (e.g., rescue services, fire departments, etc.) no longer need higher-level control. Thus, short periods of very intense work can be followed by an appropriate recovery period. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has required many CMTs to continue their work for more than 2 years, with alternating workload over time. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic came with new challenges for CMTs, for which routines were lacking. Particularly, CMT members themselves were affected by the threat (infection) and countermeasures of the pandemic (e.g., physical distancing). Also, the geographic expansion of the pandemic required coordination with diverse stakeholders and led to competition for resources, such as medical supplies (e.g., Klinger et al., 2022; Schulman, 2022; Thielsch et al., 2021).
Studies with other frontline workers (e.g., medical staff) suggest that working during a pandemic posed serious threats to mental and physical health (e.g., Luo et al., 2020). CMTs are at the core of crisis management, compiling and evaluating information, coordinating measures, and anticipating future developments. Therefore, crisis management desperately suffers when CMT members perform poorly or leave their team due to strain. Thus, in addition to the basic provision of sufficient work resources, health-oriented leadership is particularly important in such crisis situations (Klebe et al., 2021).
The Job Demands–Resource Model and Long-Term Crises
The Job Demands–Resource model (JD-R; e.g., Bakker & Demerouti, 2017) is rooted in occupational health research and has been successfully applied as a heuristic model in various contexts from blue- to white-collar workers, from employees to managers (Schaufeli & Taris, 2014). This model assumes two central categories of job characteristics: first, job demands which are defined as the physical, psychological, social, or organizational aspects of a job that require sustained physical, cognitive, and/or emotional effort and are therefore associated with certain physiological and/or psychological costs (Demerouti et al. 2001); second, job resources which are defined as the physical, psychological, social, or organizational aspects of the job that have motivating potential, that are functional in achieving work goals, that regulate the impact of job demands, and that stimulate learning and personal growth (Bakker et al., 2023). High demands can exhaust workers’ energy and lead to psychological strain and burnout. High resources, in contrast, lead to increased motivation and higher productivity (Demerouti et al., 2001). According to the JD-R model, health and well-being result from a balance between resources and demands. We apply the JD-R framework to examine how CMTs can ensure their operational readiness by maintaining healthy and motivated members.
CMTs are usually confronted with stressful, complex, highly dynamic, and potentially life-threatening situations. The COVID-19 pandemic further added uncertainty about the pandemic’s development, personal affectedness, and contact restrictions and led to high and lasting workloads (Schulman, 2022; Thielsch et al., 2021). Such situation characteristics of a pandemic and problems within the CMT as well as with stakeholders were central demands from the perspective of CMT members (Thielsch et al., 2021). While adaptation on such working conditions might be possible, we assume that the high work intensity of CMTs over a long period is highly demanding, particularly given that CMT members are usually not prepared or trained for this. Indeed, studies with healthcare workers show that fighting the COVID-19 pandemic can strongly challenge separating work and private life, leading to additional stress and exhaustion (Barello et al., 2021; Rapp et al., 2021). We assume that CMT members have had similar experiences and that the pandemic required continuous efforts to compensate for the high demands. In accordance with the principle articulated in the JD-R model that high demands are associated with a process of health impairment, we hypothesize that such prolonged physical, emotional, and cognitive exertion imposes psychological and physiological costs on CMT members that translate individually into exhaustion.
Experienced demands in CMTs are positively associated with reported exhaustion.
The second key factor in the JD-R model is individuals’ resources which help workers regulate demands and achieve their goals (Bakker et al., 2023). In times of crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, resources originating from different domains are particularly important (Demerouti & Bakker, 2022). Thus, based on Demerouti and Bakker (2022) and our previous research on CMTs (Thielsch et al., 2021), we consider job, personal, and home resources in the context of CMTs: Job resources include a robust working structure that functions also under adverse conditions and help CMTs to cope with unexpected demands (Hayes et al., 2021). Moreover, high team cohesion can protect members against emotional demands in high-risk environments (Tuckey & Hayward, 2011). Furthermore, COVID-19 CMT members have reported that personal resources (e.g., positive attitude, sense of duty) helped them to cope with demanding conditions (Thielsch et al., 2021). In addition, individual education and experience can increase CMT members’ ability to make sense of complex developments, leading to better reactions to demands (Waller et al., 2014). Finally, home resources such as strong social ties in the private domain can counterbalance the stressful work of crisis managers (Janka et al., 2015). Demerouti and Bakker (2022) suggest that resources from different domains can compensate for different demands. However, the exact interaction of different types of resources is still unclear, which is why we will initially only assume and investigate a general buffer effect of the CMT members’ resources:
The relationship between reported demands and exhaustion is moderated by individuals’ perceived resources: High (as compared to low) individual resources are associated with a weaker relationship between reported demands and exhaustion.
According to the JD-R model, resources initiate a motivational process and increase work engagement, which positively impacts outcomes. For instance, several job resources (e.g., task significance, task variety, and feedback) were mentioned by COVID-19 CMT members as beneficial for their intrinsic motivation (Thielsch et al., 2021). Furthermore, strong team cohesion is assumed to satisfy psychological needs for relatedness, which should also contribute to CMT members’ intrinsic motivation (Gagné & Deci, 2005). Strong personal resources (e.g., sense of duty) should be motivating, as they increase CMT members’ perception of being indispensable for the team (Hertel et al., 2018). Finally, home resources that enable recovery enhance the willingness to exert efforts at work (ten Brummelhuis & Bakker, 2012). Overall, we hypothesize:
The resources CMT members experience are positively related with their subjective work engagement.
Resources are particularly motivating when individuals are confronted with challenging demands; in other words, resources “become particularly useful when needed” (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017, p. 275). However, we assume that this effect will no longer occur if the demands on the CMTs persist permanently and exceed the level of feasibility (see Demerouti & Bakker, 2022). For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, conflicts between politicians and experts or between central and local authorities were particularly demanding for CMTs (Christensen & Lægreid, 2020). Authorities have repeated earlier mistakes (Fedele & Porter, 2020; Powell, 2022), and pandemic fatigue made the public less willing to follow rules (Haktanir et al., 2021). We therefore suspect that CMT members felt helpless and ineffective in the face of persisting demands despite existing resources, which should weaken the motivational impact of resources. Thus, we hypothesize that persisting demands create frustration and hamper the motivating effect of individuals’ resources.
The relationship between individuals’ perceived resources and engagement is moderated by experienced demands, in the sense that high experienced demands are associated with a weaker relationship between resources and engagement.
Finally, similar to other emergency contexts and in crisis work in general (e.g., Gregg et al., 2022), we expected that strain (in terms of exhaustion) and work engagement are central antecedents for desirable outcomes of CMT work (see also Bakker et al., 2023; Demerouti & Bakker, 2022). On the individual level, the more strained a CMT member is, the less energy the member can mobilize to perform as required in crisis management. The construct of work engagement includes persistence in the face of difficulties, enthusiasm, and the ability to fully focus on the work (Bakker et al., 2023; Schaufeli et al., 2002). These aspects are vital in managing a crisis as complex and as threatening as the pandemic. From our point of view, particularly relevant outcome measures for CMT members are their satisfaction with their own work, their own perceived performance, and the individual intention to quit the CMT. Hence, we hypothesize:
Experienced exhaustion of CMT members is negatively related with individual satisfaction with their own work and their own perceived performance and positively related with individual intention to quit the CMT.
Work engagement of CMT members is positively related with individual satisfaction with their own work and their own perceived performance and negatively related with individual intention to quit the CMT.
Figure 1 shows our hypotheses within the JD-R framework. In addition, we explored how CMT members perceived the pandemic situation in 2022 as compared to the beginning of the pandemic in 2020, particularly with respect to new demands and lessons learned for future CMT missions.
Methods
To investigate our research questions and hypotheses, we conducted a pre-registered online survey (https://aspredicted.org/47x9g.pdf) in German and English. In the paper, we have adjusted the numbering and some phrases to make the hypotheses easier to understand. The study procedure including a codebook with all items and instructions is depicted in the online supplement at https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12643 (Thielsch et al., 2023). A supplement available at https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12636 also includes additional information regarding sample composition, descriptive item statistics, and internal consistencies of the measurement instruments.
Sample
The survey was open to all members of COVID-19 CMTs; we sourced participants from CMTs at various institutions by directly contacting public authorities and CMTs, personal networks, and participants of our 2020 study on COVID-19 CMTs. Additionally, participation was requested via a social media post by the Fire Service Institute of the German state of North-Rhine Westphalia (Germany’s largest fire academy), and the study was announced via e-mail by the German Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance. Of the 219 CMT members included in the analyses, 74% were male and 26% were female; the average age was 45.14 years (SD = 10.91, Min = 20, Max = 66). The sample included CMT members from various deployment levels with different roles within the crisis team; 33% had leadership positions and 54% completed a CMT training (see Appendix A in the online supplement at https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12636). At the time of the survey, individuals had been on a COVID-19 CMT for, on average, over 21 months (M = 21.45, SD = 5.5).
Procedure
At the beginning of the study, we informed participants about the involved researchers, anonymity, data protection and processing, voluntariness, procedure, and study duration. The survey included five sections: (1) a self-report of personal data (age, gender, education level) and experiences in CMT work; (2) questions about the current COVID-19 situation and current work in the COVID-19 CMT; (3) an assessment of demands, resources, and behaviors in one’s current CMT; (4) overall evaluation and outcomes of the CMT work; and (5) lessons learned regarding participants’ own skill acquisition and best practices as well as helpful tools in COVID-19 CMT work. The questionnaire was online between December 14, 2021, and March 16, 2022; most participants took part from mid-January through February 2022. The median time participants spent answering all questions was 16.42 min (M = 19.32 min, SD = 12.98 min).
Measures
Unless otherwise specified, participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement with each item of the following questionnaires on seven-point Likert scales. Based on the results of Thielsch et al. (2021), we created 28 items to measure four categories of demands (general characteristics of the situation, problems within the CMT, problems with stakeholders, personal workload) and three categories of resources (job, home, and personal resources).
Strain in terms of exhaustion was measured with the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI), shortened from eight items to seven (Demerouti et al., 2003). Engagement was measured with a modified nine-item short version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (Schaufeli et al., 2006), in which we replaced one item with another item from the long version due to a better fit to the CMT context. Additionally, strain was measured using one general item from Thielsch et al. (2021) and overall motivation with a self-constructed global assessment item. Both measures served as controls for validity and correlated highly with the respective scales (strain overall and exhaustion: r = .69, motivation overall and work engagement: r = .67; both p < .001). Only the exhaustion and engagement scales were used in the further analysis.
Participants evaluated the outcomes of CMT work using two items on satisfaction with their own work and with work of the crisis management team from Thielsch et al. (2021) and using four items we created on the overall assessment of their own performance, the overall performance of the CMT, the overall capability of the CMT, and their intention to quit the CMT. Of these four items, the first three were assessed with a six-point scale (1 = very good, 2 = good, 3 = satisfactory, 4 = adequate, 5 = poor, 6 = unsatisfactory), while the fourth was assessed on a seven-point Likert scale (1 = never to 7 = always). The analyses in the current paper focus on the individual outcomes of CMT work, as these could be directly influenced by the well-being and motivation of CMT members.
In addition, lessons learned were assessed with an adapted seven-item scale based on Thielsch and Hadzihalilovic (2020) and one additional open question on best practices. Furthermore, effective behaviors of CMTs were assessed with 12 items based on the results of Thielsch et al. (2021).
Results
The underlying data for the analyses are provided in the online supplement at https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12643, analysis script at https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12642, and the presentation of supplementary quantitative and qualitative analyses via https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12636 (Thielsch et al., 2023).
Demands and Resources in COVID-19 Crisis Management 2 Years After the Outbreak
Before testing the hypotheses, we examined how the rather abstract categories of demands and resources actually manifested in CMT work. We calculated CMT members’ average evaluation of demands and resources at the level of each subcategory (see Table 1) and explored which aspects received the highest ratings in their subcategory (for a detailed presentation, see Table B3 in the online supplement at https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12636).
Demands
Among the three general characteristics of the situation that were queried, unpredictability of further developments stood out (M = 4.32, SD = 1.77). From the four problems with stakeholders, counterproductive behavior by higher-level authorities and agencies was rated most demanding (M = 3.98, SD = 2.08). Regarding personal workload, double burdens due to additional duties besides the CMT were particularly demanding (M = 5.06, SD = 1.81).
Resources
Among seven queried job resources, trustful and professional teamwork received the highest rating (M = 5.55, SD = 1.34), and within the category of home resources, support from family and friends was most important (M = 5.19, SD = 1.59). Furthermore, participants stated that a sense of responsibility was the most relevant personal resource (M = 5.85, SD = 1.15).
Exploratively conducted one-way ANOVAs indicated significant mean differences among both the categories of demands and resources. For demands, two-sided post hoc t-tests revealed that problems inside the CMT were rated as significantly less impactful than personal demands (t[416.76] = 7.00, p < .001, d = 0.67), general characteristics of the situation (t[427.57] = 6.69, p < .001, d = 0.64), and problems with stakeholders (t[434.91] = 4.41, p < .001, d = 0.42). On the other hand, personal resources were weighted significantly higher than home resources (t[392.4] = 7.74, p < .001, d = 0.75) and job resources (t[424.9] = 8.63, p < .001, d = 0.83).
Open questions regarding further resources and demands yielded problems with antivaccinationists as only new aspect.
Hypothesis Testing
To test hypotheses H1–H4, we computed two multiple regression analyses in which overall demands, overall resources, and their interaction term were considered as predictors of reported exhaustion and work engagement, respectively. In line with H1, experienced demands were positively associated with exhaustion (β = 0.89, p = .010, f2 = .55). Mixed findings occurred with respect to H2: Overall, individuals’ perceived resources did not moderate this relationship between reported demands and exhaustion (β = −0.32, p = .374, f2 < .01). Yet, a separate analysis of each category of resources (instead of the overall measure) indicated a significant moderation effect of home resources (β = −0.83, p = .011, f2 = .03), confirming H2 for this type of resource.
Furthermore, analyses confirmed H3, showing that overall resources CMT members experience were positively related to work engagement (β = 0.37, p = .049, f2 = .36). In contrast, H4 had to be rejected because overall experienced demands did not moderate this relationship between resources and engagement (β = 0.29, p = .453, f2 < .01), nor did the single categories of demands.
Finally, H5 and H6 were tested with further multiple regressions, with exhaustion and work engagement considered as predictors. In line with H5, exhaustion was negatively related to satisfaction with participants’ performance (β = −.23, p < .001, f2 = .18) and positively related to quit intention (β = 0.49, p < .001, f2 = .38). Contrary to H5, it was not related to the self-assessed grade for participants’ performance (β = −0.12, p = .086, f2 = .04). In line with H6, work engagement was positively associated with participants’ satisfaction with their performance (β = 0.49, p < .001, f2 = .34) and self-assessed grade for their performance (β = 0.31, p < .001, f2 = .11), and negatively related to quit intention (β = −0.19, p = .002, f2 = .05).
CMT Members’ Perception of the Pandemic Situation
Early in the pandemic, the 7-day incidence (new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days per 100,000 people) in Germany/Western Europe rarely exceeded 45.1 At the time of the study, the 7-day incidence in the respondents’ CMT jurisdiction was more than 20 times higher (M = 962.62, SD = 564.06). CMT members indicated how they perceived the pandemic in terms of (1) the pandemic in general and (2) the situation (at the time of the survey) during the Omicron wave in winter 2022 (Figure 2). We calculated chi-square tests, and responses highlighted the duration and the dynamic development of the pandemic during the Omicron wave. Dynamic development was mentioned more often as a specific characteristic in winter 2022 (χ2[1] = 31.4, p < .001, φ = .27), while less frequent responses included novelty of the threat (χ2[1] = 28.8, p < .001, φ = .26), personal affectedness (χ2[1] = 17.1, p < .001, φ = .20), and duration (χ2[1] = 8.1, p = .004, φ = .14). When directly asked for differences to the situation compared to spring 2020, participants in winter 2022 mentioned negative aspects (increasing frustration and indifference, splitting society) and positive developments (increasing digitization, improved medical care; Table C1 in the online supplement). Finally, participants indicated, on average, a moderate level of strain (M = 2.82, SD = 0.95, Min = 1, Max = 5) that was comparable with 2020 (M = 2.67, SD = 0.99; cf. Thielsch et al., 2021).
Managing Pandemics – Lessons Learned
We also asked CMT members to summarize their work experiences by rating the effectiveness of different work behaviors and by evaluating their learning experiences (Table 2). These results confirm previous findings on the importance of structured CMT work, good communication, and problem-solving skills (Thielsch et al., 2021). Furthermore, similar to the beginning of the pandemic, CMT members reported valuable learning experiences that can be transferred to other crisis situations. Regarding best practices, qualitative analyses revealed that important factors for effective CMT work include the use of work structuring tools (e.g., to-do-lists, Eisenhower matrix) and digital applications (e.g., video conferencing software), the ability to make decisions quickly, and high team spirit (Table C2 in the online supplement).
Discussion
This study investigated how COVID-19 CMT members successfully accomplished their work after an untypically long period of deployment. CMTs’ persistent adverse work environment underlines the need for a detailed understanding of their members’ health and motivation. Therefore, we used the JD-R framework in this context. As expected, a high level of experienced demands was related to reported exhaustion (H1). This emphasizes the health-impairing effect of demands and corresponds with research on other professions whose members worked on the frontline against the pandemic (e.g., Luo et al., 2020). According to our hypothesis, individuals’ home resources buffered the effect of demands (H2), but perceived job resources and personal resources did not. This partly contradicts research emphasizing the buffering effect of job resources such as cohesion (e.g., Tuckey & Hayward, 2011). Generally, we think that job resources and personal resources are valuable for effective CMT work per se, and our expected hypothesis may come true as demands increase or relevant resources are substantially absent. With respect to home resources, the conservation of resources theory (Hobfoll et al., 2018) implies that the availability of time for social and leisure activities becomes especially important when free time is scarce. This is often the case with CMTs due to additional burdens and unpredictable developments. Furthermore, this rationale also matches our assumption that a lack of separation between work and private life is particularly stressful (see Barello et al., 2021; Rapp et al., 2021).
We confirmed that experienced resources are positively associated with work engagement (H3), and, contrary to our rather pessimistic expectation with regard to CMTs in continuous operation, demands did not attenuate this relationship (H4). This pattern suggests that the motivating mechanisms behind resources are robust, although external developments such as pandemic fatigue may have lowered the effectiveness of CMT work and might have led to frustration. Thus, our prior assumption that CMTs were exposed to constant high demands over long periods of time with insufficient resources may not have been correct for the majority of COVID-19 CMTs. Our findings fit better with Demerouti and Bakker's (2022) suggestion that workers in the context of crises who are exposed to manageable demands with sufficient resources can adapt to the situation and achieve sufficient levels of well-being and performance.
In line with H5, exhaustion was negatively related to satisfaction with one's own performance and thus positively related to the intention to quit. However, the expected negative relationship to the overall evaluation of one's own performance was not found; it is possible that the respondents included other circumstances besides exhaustion in this global self-assessment. Finally, with regard to H6, the expected motivating aspects of work engagement – higher satisfaction, a better evaluation of one's own performance, and a lower intention to quit – are found.
The results demonstrate that the JD-R model is a helpful framework in the CMT context and that health and motivation of CMT members are relevant for their performance. On looking simultaneously at health-risk and motivational processes, we see that many COVID-19 CMT members have found a way to cope with consistently high work demands after 2 years of pandemic. Thus, in line with Demerouti and Bakker (2022), we conclude that balancing high (but still acceptable) demands and strong resources is required for long-term operational readiness in crisis management. Two approaches can achieve such a balance: reducing demands that hinder CMTs’ work and creating a high level of resources (cf. Hannah et al., 2009). As new demands emerged during the pandemic that were beyond the scope of even top-performing CMTs, building strong resources is critical. Importantly, the process of creating resources can be started before a crisis (e.g., by training enough personnel, preparing shift plans, doing team building). Yet, the process of reducing demands is more reactive, as it depends strongly on the actual demands that arise.
In sum, the situation for CMTs after 2 years of pandemic work entails positive and negative aspects: For the positive, CMTs seem to have found viable ways to deal with the exceptional situation. Despite the Omicron variant, which caused the highest numbers of infections so far, scientific and experiential knowledge made it easier to find adequate responses. An indicator that CMTs have adjusted to the situation is that CMT-internal problems were rated least relevant compared to other demands. Here, our findings again confirm that structured work processes, transparent communication, and effective problem-solving behavior were seen as important for successful CMT work (e.g., Thielsch et al., 2021; Uitdewilligen & Waller, 2018).
On the negative side, reported workload and strain were similar levels to what we saw in spring 2020, and CMTs were still struggling with the same issues (cf. Thielsch et al., 2021). This could have several reasons: First, at the time of the study, the pandemic was still highly dynamic. Future developments were unclear, leading to uncertainty. Second, our demographic data show that about half of the respondents had not received any CMT training. After 2 years since the onset of the crisis, this should be better. In this context, the high reported learning experiences are partly rooted in this deficit (see Table 2). Third, societal and political responses to the long-lasting pandemic were creating new difficulties: The population became less willing to comply with measures, governments and authorities continuously issued new, sometimes contradictory regulations, and too little has been learned from past mistakes (e.g., Haktanir et al., 2021; Powell, 2022).
Practical Implications
According to our findings, public authorities or private organizations who appoint CMTs should strive to establish a favorable work environment, characterized by strong resources and as little as possible demands that interfere with effective work. However, it is difficult to control demands in acute crisis situations. Therefore, we recommend identifying possible needs for action in forehand, using as orientation the demands and resources described in this study. Additionally, as a resource’s value depends on individual preferences (Halbesleben et al., 2014), CMT members should be involved in this process and asked what they need to do their work properly. Authorities and organizations should furthermore ensure high-quality CMT training for all who will potentially be on a CMT. Such training is essential (McConnell & Drennan, 2006; Thielsch et al., 2021) and imparts problem-solving skills (e.g., Uitdewilligen & Waller, 2018), which helps CMTs manage demands on their own during operations. Simultaneously, other efficient project management techniques can be employed, such as clearly defining strategic goals, coherently prioritizing tasks and effectively structuring meetings. Innovative approaches can help to deal with high demands, such as using digital tools or agile methods (Koch & Schermuly, 2021) as well as core findings of team science, especially for promoting team resilience and team well-being (see Traylor et al., 2020).
Furthermore, health and sufficient recovery of the CMT members must be considered. Especially in times of crisis, health-oriented leadership is important and effective (Demerouti & Bakker, 2022; Klebe et al., 2021). Thus, authorities, organizations, and CMT leaders should enable CMT members to take breaks, strengthen home resources, and pursue leisure activities. Our results suggest that job resources such as good team cohesion cannot compensate for insufficient social and leisure time. Hence, teams need a well-structured shift system with redundancies in all positions, which requires a large group of trained personnel. However, from our experience, CMT members may not seek out breaks. Thus, CMT leaders should strongly encourage breaks and be good role models themselves. CMT leaders must emphasize that through this promotion of resources, members can buffer the negative effects of the situational demands themselves. Several additional specific suggestions for CMT work are described in our qualitative precursor study (see Thielsch et al., 2021, pp. 175–180).
Limitations and Future Research
Our results must be interpreted against the background of some limitations, which also reveal opportunities for future research: First, generalizability of the findings might be restricted as the sample came primarily from German-speaking countries and surrounding European countries, which are comparatively rich with large healthcare systems. Replication studies in other areas would be interesting (see Gregg et al., 2022). Second, no central directory exists for all deployed COVID-19 CMTs and their characteristics (cf. Klinger et al., 2022), and CMTs were rarely set up in small and medium-sized enterprises (Fasth et al., 2022). Thus, it is difficult to estimate how representative our sample was for the whole population. We can only assume that our broad targeting of respondents provided a valid data basis, and future studies should verify this. Third, it would be interesting to take a closer look at the concrete working conditions of CMT members, especially regarding hybrid and virtual forms of work. Fourth, our study was cross-sectional, which makes it difficult to identify causal effects and effective interventions. Future experimental or longitudinal studies should be conducted based on our findings and could test, for example, which resource-building interventions are particularly valuable. Such a longitudinal study would also allow a more accurate comparison of crisis managers' perceptions over time of a pandemic or other long-lasting crises. Finally, it could be promising to illuminate the work of CMTs from a 360° perspective, capturing not only the views of the actors themselves but also the views of higher-level (political) authorities and the various individuals/organizations affected by the CMTs' actions. In this context, it would also be very interesting to carry out direct measurements of CMT work success in terms of subjective and objective indicators. Additionally, although methodologically costly, the processes and outcomes of the current study should be examined at the team level of entire CMTs (Gregg et al., 2022).
Conclusion
With an unpredictable virus, emerging conflicts, and a seemingly never-ending crisis, CMT work during the COVID-19 pandemic was highly demanding. However, CMTs are not defenseless against these conditions: Their performance can be maintained by resources such as trustful and professional team spirit, training, or recreational activities. Further crises with the characteristics of a pandemic (e.g., long durations, volatile dynamics, unclear legal frameworks) are to be expected, whether they are caused by wars, migration flows, or climate change. Thus, we suggest that strong CMT resources should be built up in advance to promote the long-term viability of these key crisis management entities.
We thank all crisis management team members who gave valuable time to our study despite their heavy workload. Furthermore, we thank Cordelia Kleinstück, Ida Osterkamp, and Laura Schoneberg for their reliable and prompt support in data and manuscript preparation. Finally, we thank Celeste Brennecka for her very helpful comments on earlier versions of this manuscript.
References
(2017). Job demands-resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 273–285. 10.1037/ocp0000056
(2023). Job demands–resources theory: Ten years later. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 10(1), 25–53. 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-120920-053933
(2021). Factors associated with emotional exhaustion in healthcare professionals involved in the COVID-19 pandemic: An application of the job demands-resources model. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 94(8), 1751–1761. 10.1007/s00420-021-01669-z
(2020). Balancing governance capacity and legitimacy: How the Norwegian Government handled the COVID-19 crisis as a high performer. Public Administration Review, 80(5), 774–779. 10.1111/puar.13241
(2022). Job demands-resources theory in times of crises: New propositions. Organizational Psychology Review. In press. 10.1177/20413866221135022
(2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 499–512. 10.1037//0021-9010.86.3.499
(2003). The convergent validity of two burnout instruments: A multitrait–multimethod analysis. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19(1), 12–23. 10.1027/1015-5759.19.1.12
(2020). Psychological Antecedents of Refugee Integration (PARI). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(4), 856–879. 10.1177/1745691619898838
(2022). Crisis management as practice in small- and medium-sized enterprises during the first period of COVID-19. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 30(2), 161–170. 10.1111/1468-5973.12371
(2022). COVID-19 NHS infection control strategy: Errare humanum est, perseverare autem diabolicum. Oral diseases, 28(Suppl 1), 849–851. 10.1111/odi.13605
(2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362. 10.1002/job.322
(2022). When disaster strikes! An interdisciplinary review of disasters and their organizational consequences. Journal of Management, 48(6), 1382–1429. 10.1177/01492063221076808
(2021). Do we experience pandemic fatigue? current state, predictors, and prevention. Current Psychology, 41(10), 7314–7325. 10.1007/s12144-021-02397-w
(2014). Getting to the “COR”. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1334–1364. 10.1177/0149206314527130
(2009). A framework for examining leadership in extreme contexts. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(6), 897–919. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.09.00
(2021). Non-technical skills for emergency incident management teams: A literature review. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 29(2), 185–203. 10.1111/1468-5973.12341
(1998). Dealing with the complete crisis – The crisis management shell structure. Safety Science, 30(1–2), 139–150. 10.1016/S0925-7535(98)00042-3
(2018). Effort gains in occupational teams—The effects of social competition and social indispensability. Frontiers in Psychology, 9,
Article 769 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00769(2018). Conservation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5(1), 103–128. 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104640
(2015). Stress in crisis managers: Evidence from self-report and psychophysiological assessments. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 38(6), 970–983. 10.1007/s10865-015-9654-1
(2021). Healthy leadership in turbulent times: The effectiveness of health-oriented leadership in crisis. British Journal of Management, 32(4), 1203–1218. 10.1111/1467-8551.12498
(2022). COVID-19 pandemic response teams: Organization, competencies, and challenges—understanding and using structural realities. Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz, 65(6), 650–657. 10.1007/s00103-022-03542-x
(2021). Managing the crisis: How COVID-19 demands interact with agile project management in predicting employee exhaustion. British Journal of Management, 32(4), 1265–1283. 10.1111/1467-8551.12536
(2020). The psychological and mental impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on medical staff and general public—A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Research, 291,
Article 113190 . 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113190(2006). Mission impossible? Planning and preparing for crisis. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 14(2), 59–70. 10.1111/j.1468-5973.2006.00482.x
(2012). Multi-agency operations: Cooperation during flooding. Applied Ergonomics, 43(1), 38–47. 10.1016/j.apergo.2011.03.006
(2022). Learning lessons from the Covid-19 pandemic. Health Economics, Policy and Law, 18(1), 88–103. 10.1017/S1744133122000160
(2021). Boundary work as a buffer against burnout: Evidence from healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(8), 1169–1187. 10.1037/apl0000951
(2006). Utrecht Work Engagement Scale-9 (UWES-9) [Database record]. APA PsycTests. 10.1037/t05561-000
(2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness studies, 3(1), 71–92. 10.1023/A:1015630930326
(2014). A critical review of the job demands-resources model: Implications for improving work and health. In G. F. BauerO. Hämmig (Eds.), Bridging occupational, organizational and public health (pp. 43–68). Springer Science + Business Media. 10.1007/978-94-007-5640-3_4
(2022). Reliability, uncertainty and the management of error: New perspectives in the COVID-19 era. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 30(1), 92–101. 10.1111/1468-5973.12356
(2012). Staying engaged during the week: The effect of off-job activities on next day work engagement. Journal of occupational health psychology, 17(4), 445–455. 10.1037/a0029213
(2020). Evaluation of fire service command unit trainings. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 11(3), 300–315. 10.1007/s13753-020-00279-6
(2021). Managing pandemics—Demands, resources, and effective behaviors within crisis management teams. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 70(1), 150–187. 10.1111/APPS.12303
(2023). Supplemental materials to “The COVID-19 marathon: Demands and resources of crisis managers in continuous operation”. https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.12643
(2020). Helping healthcare teams save lives during COVID-19: Insights and countermeasures from team science. American Psychologist, 76(1), 1–13. 10.1037/amp0000750
(2011). Global and occupation-specific emotional resources as buffers against the emotional demands of fire-fighting. Applied Psychology, 60(1), 1–23. 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2010.00424.x
(2018). Information sharing and decision-making in multidisciplinary crisis management teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(6), 731–748. 10.1002/job.2301
(2014). Focusing on teams in crisis management education: An integration and simulation-based approach. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 13(2), 208–221. 10.5465/amle.2012.0337
(2002). Technological disasters, crisis management and leadership stress. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 93(1), 33–45. 10.1016/S0304-3894(02)00036-5
1Based on data from Germany, France, Austria, and the Netherlands between March and June 2020, European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control retrieved from https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/data-daily-new-cases-covid-19-eueea-country on August 04, 2022.
