Unpacking the Ideology Effect of Public Leaders on Administrative Burdens

Abstract

Research aim: Our aim in this paper is to explore the impact of leaders’ communication on the psychological dimensions of administrative burden, i.e., citizens’ levels of stress and stigma.

Theoretical framework: During the pandemic, while many potential claimants of the financial emergency aid experienced administrative burdens to access the benefits, different public leaders worked to ensure that the aid reached those who needed it most, by communicating the criteria to assess the benefit. However, we observed that the role of public leadership tends to be overlooked in administrative burden literature. We adopted the administrative burden and public leadership literatures to compare the political andadministrative leaders, and a neutral with a right-wing leader.

Research design: We employed a quantitative approach, using an online survey experiment with 135 beneficiaries of the emergency financial aid (“auxílio emergencial”).

Results: Findings indicate that leaders’ communication decreased the psychological burden, but this impact was observed only for right-wing leaders on conservative citizens.Specifically, our findings indicate that leftist citizens experienced higher levels of burdens, suggesting that ideological congruence plays a crucial role in shaping the impact of leaders' communication on citizens' experiences.

Originality: Previous literature on administrative burden has largely ignored how leaders’ communication alter citizens’ feelings of stigma and stress to request benefits, and our study advances by using new typology of leaders and their distinct impact on citizens’ burdens.

Practical and theoretical contributions: Our research helps practitioners to understand ways of mitigating administrative burden through effective communication, advance knowledge about political congruency between citizens and leaders, and anticipates citizens’ behavior about claiming benefits in digital environments.