To face crises, public administrations must learn to balance order and disorder

The study contributes to the ongoing debate about the ability of public organizations to respond to turbulent conditions. Traditionally, public administrations have been thought to follow one of two models: a more bureaucratic and centralized one, driven by rigid rules, or a more flexible, decentralized model that fosters bottom-up innovation. However, recent studies point to the rise of more complex governance frameworks that blend features of both.

The COVID-19 pandemic was an unprecedented stress test for the public sector, exposing the limitations of rigid, hierarchical governance models. Italian regions faced challenges such as vaccine shortages, sudden product suspensions (like AstraZeneca’s), new virus variants, and vaccine hesitancy. Under these volatile conditions, organizations needed to adapt quickly and innovate constantly.

In this context, the concept of robust governance gained attention as a way to blend stability and change. The research investigates how

• organizational structures,
• coordination mechanisms,
• leadership styles

are designed and evolve in public organizations that have proven resilient in times of crisis. The goal is to understand how such configurations support flexible adaptation and proactive innovation, without sacrificing control or consistency.

The study analyzes six regional responses to the pandemic across Italy, using a qualitative approach based on in-depth interviews with 43 regional officials, healthcare executives, and frontline workers.

Data was collected from multiple sources, including 968 news articles, official documents (such as vaccination plans and regional decrees), and semi-structured interviews. This triangulation offered a comprehensive picture of the strategies employed and the organizational dynamics that emerged during the vaccination campaign between December 2020 and June 2021, a period marked by high instability.

The researchers used a multi-case comparative method and discrepant case analysis to identify organizational configurations that successfully balanced standardization and innovation. They assessed the capacity for flexible adaptation and proactive innovation by analyzing participants’ perceptions and quantifying references to standardized practices and creative solutions.

The findings show that the most effective regions adopted hybrid configurations, featuring:

1. Network-based structures centered on adhocracies: Temporary operational units, such as control rooms, that coordinated strategic decisions and ensured connection between central leadership and local actors. These structures combined centralized decision-making with local autonomy, enabling fast and adaptive responses.
2. Hybrid coordination mechanisms: A blend of formal (institutional meetings, official decrees) and informal (WhatsApp chats, video calls) communication practices that supported both centralized control and local adaptation. Though the balance varied, this duality was constant across all cases, facilitating swift information flow and agile solution deployment.
3. Energizing leadership: A leadership style that promotes initiative and experimentation by energizing people at all levels of the organization. Effective leaders didn’t just make strategic decisions; they inspired, motivated, and engaged frontline personnel, fostering bottom-up innovation.

Despite these common traits, the study also observed variations in how these elements played out: networks ranged from flat to hierarchical, coordination from informal to formal, and leadership from distributed to more centralized or dual models.

The study’s main takeaway is that there is no one-size-fits-all model for robust governance. The most effective public organizations are those that flexibly combine different approaches depending on the context, adapting to external challenges while designing structures that are open to change.

One particularly discrepant case highlighted the importance of an emergency mindset. This mindset requires public leaders and frontline staff to pragmatically adapt strategies and decisions to local needs, experimenting and encouraging the adoption of creative solutions.

Finally, the study opens new avenues for research on the role of positive emotions and energizing leadership in fostering effective organizational responses during crises. Future studies could explore how these dynamics unfold across different contexts and settings.

Marta Micacchi, Maria Cucciniello, Benedetta Trivellato, Daniela Cristofoli, Alex Turrini, Giovanni Valotti, Greta Nasi, “How to Organize in Turbulence: Arrangements and Pathways for Robust Governance,” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2025; muae027, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae027.