Understanding Administrative Burden Among Emergency Managers During Disaster Service Provision

• In Event: Testing the Boundaries of Administrative Burden

Abstract

Frontline emergency management professionals (EMPs) played a critical role in delivering disaster-related services during the COVID-19 pandemic. In doing so, many EMPs faced substantial administrative burden—defined not only by compliance costs (navigating complex policies and procedures) but also by learning costs (acquiring new knowledge) and psychological costs (stress, fatigue, burnout). These burdens were further intensified by the physical risks associated with their work, including exposure to COVID-19, leading some EMPs to question whether the job was “worth it.”

Despite the growing importance of EMPs in emergency response, limited research has examined the specific organizational and structural factors that shape their experiences of administrative burden. This study addresses two core questions: (1) What factors influence EMPs’ perceived administrative burden during disaster service provision? and (2) How do organizational support systems and decision-making structures impact this burden?

To answer these questions, we conducted a mixed-methods study combining thematic analysis of 57 qualitative interviews with EMPs and statistical analysis of survey responses from 362 university-based emergency managers across the United States.

Our findings reveal several key insights. First, while the overall impact of disasters on student health and university continuity does not directly influence EMPs’ perceived burden, internal coordination within universities—often involving fragmented processes and conflicting expectations—significantly increases administrative strain. Second, coordinating with external stakeholders, such as public health agencies and local governments, does not appear to increase perceived burden; in fact, EMPs often described these interactions as mutually supportive and morale-boosting. Third, EMPs’ involvement in decision-making processes did not significantly affect their perceived burden, suggesting that participation alone does not alleviate stress unless it is accompanied by structural support.

Most notably, the presence of strong organizational support—such as clear logistical systems, availability of personal protective equipment (PPE), and visible, committed leadership—was found to significantly reduce EMPs’ perceived administrative burden. These findings emphasize that how organizations structure their disaster response efforts and support frontline personnel can meaningfully shape workforce well-being during crises.

This study contributes to public administration literature by applying a public service logic to examine the real-world implementation challenges faced by emergency management professionals. The results have important implications for practitioners and decision-makers: improving logistical coordination, ensuring adequate protective resources, and demonstrating leadership commitment are critical to sustaining the resilience and morale of frontline personnel. As disasters become more frequent and complex, the findings also raise important questions about the limitations of “small government” models in delivering timely, inclusive, and effective emergency response.

Authors

• Suyang Yu, University of Illinois, Springfield
  Non-Presenting Co-Author

• Wole Solomon Olamijulo, University of Illinois, Springfield
  Presenting Author