We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) crisis response in Sweden was managed foremost by a collaboration of several national agencies. Normally, their strategical and operational collaboration is limited, but the pandemic required new and unfamiliar collaborations. This study aimed to clarify the facilitators and barriers of perceived effective staff work within and between 4 national agencies.
Methods:
A qualitative study of 10 participants with leading roles within the 4 national agencies’ crisis organization was conducted via snowball sampling. The participant interviews were conducted between August and November 2020 and analyzed using content analysis.
Results:
Four categories emerged from the analysis: individual characteristics, intra-agency organization, interorganizational collaboration, and governmental directives. Subcategories crystallized from the data were analyzed and divided into factors for facilitating or to function as barriers for effective staff work.
Conclusion:
Individual factors such as attitude and approach were important for perceived effective staff work as well as clear mandates and structure of the organization. Barriers for perceived effective staff work include lack of network, the complexity of the mission and organizational structures, as well as lack of preparations and unclear mandates. Although flexibility and adaptability are necessary, they cannot always be planned, but can be incorporated indirectly by selecting suitable individuals and optimizing organizational planning.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.