Leadership Approaches Frame Crisis Sensemaking

Leadership Approaches Frame Crisis Sensemaking

Covid-19 became global in 2020, with world leaders varying in their responses to the pandemic, “resulting in substantially different outcomes in terms of virus mitigation, population health, and economic stability” (Crayne & Medeiros, 2021, p. 462). Crayne and Medeiros provide a case study of three styles of leaders’ sensemaking in this public health crisis and elaborate on how those approaches were reflected in decision-making and crisis management (p. 462). The three cases are indicative of how leaders “of comparable influence, facing a universal crisis, can differ in their approach to making sense of the problem at hand” (p. 469).

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is studied as an example of a charismatic leadership approach; Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro provides an example of the ideological approach; and Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel’s approach illustrates a pragmatic style (Crayne & Medeiros, 2021). The authors argue pragmatic leaders may be best equipped for managing crises such as the Covid-19 pandemic, and that the diverse approaches and outcomes exhibited in global responses highlight the need for better understanding of sensemaking in understanding and assessing potential leaders (p. 463).

Crayne and Medeiros describe sensemaking as a process by which individuals interpret cues about their changing environments, utilizing the interpretation to explain what occurred and consider future actions (Crayne & Medeiros, 2021, p. 463). In a crisis, sensemaking is a means to collect information, provide an explanation, and develop appropriate actions, and is an “essential element to successful navigation of crisis events” (Crayne & Medeiros, 2021, p. 463). The process provides a framework for the public to understand the crisis. Such interpretation of a leader’s communication underpins public motivation to comply with measures such as mask-wearing, social distancing, or vaccination (Crayne & Medeiros 2021, p. 464).

The CIP leadership model, as described by Crayne and Medeiros, is viewed through the lens of sensemaking and sense-giving, and is comprised of three pathways: charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic, each of which is correlated to world views, “which impacts how leaders interpret and respond to events in their environment” (Crayne & Medeiros 2021, p. 464). Charismatic leaders, as exemplified by the authors’ study of Trudeau, focus on positive emotions such as hope, and are framed within a vision for the future. “Trudeau’s largely charismatic approach has been consistent … and particularly evident in his approach to Canada’s Covid-19 response …” (Crayne & Medeiros 2021, p. 465). Despite the positive messaging, however, Trudeau has been criticized for his approach to early detection and testing capacity, particularly among Canada’s most vulnerable populations, which has suggested unpreparedness (Crayne & Medeiros 2021, p. 466).

The ideological leadership approach is one we have identified as the CIP approach most closely relating to the style of Alberta Premier Jason Kenney. This review expands the ideological framework rather than the charismatic and pragmatic pathways. According to Crayne and Medeiros (2021), the ideological style of leadership is one that adheres to previously established values and through adherence to tradition, with pathetic appeals to the values of followers and “implies the glory of the past can be reclaimed” (p. 467). This case study also notes the archetypal ideological leadership styles of former American presidents Ronald Regan and Donald Trump.

The past-focused vision of Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who has framed the Covid-19 pandemic in terms of “us-versus-them” is typical of an ideological leader. Some of his comments have been overwhelmingly negative, such as stating the virus was the result of media “hysteria” that was tricking citizens and exaggerating the “little flu” (Crayne & Medeiros 2021, p. 467). Bolsonaro has consistently called for a return to normal, focusing on jobs and the Brazilian economy, which underscores his past focus and idealized perspective of Brazil’s past (Crayne & Medeiros 2021, p. 467), and emphasizes the president’s prioritization of economic over public health actions as he contends “any downturns in the stock market were because of a misrepresentation of Covid-19 in the media” (Crayne & Medeiros 2021, p. 467). The president’s denialism of Covid-19, advocacy for non-scientific ‘cures’ and the resulting delayed response to the pandemic has resulted in Brazil’s “careen[ing] toward a full-blown public health emergency and economic crisis” (Crayne & Medeiros 2021, p. 468). Such behaviours are indicative of ideological sensemaking outcomes, which include “tight adherence to values, demands of fealty, and dismissal of information and individuals that contravene the thematic narrative” (Crayne & Medeiros, 2021).

Based on the outcomes, including mass testing and lower Covid-19 related death rates, the study’s authors conclude the most effective leadership style in managing the pandemic is one illustrated by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose evidence-based response has been communicated with “rationality and appeals to scientific evidence” (Crayne & Medeiros, 2021, p. 468). They argue the pragmatic leader is the most effective problem solver and most able to lead in high stakes circumstances (p. 468) due to consistency in approach, and according to Mumford (2016), an “overwhelmingly problem-focused, rational approach to leadership” (p. 468). The authors state a “willingness and ability to seek expert advice, manage situational complexity, and balance differential goals,” are all distinguishing features of a pragmatic style of leadership (p. 469). Crayne and Medeiros caution, however, that there is no one size fits all to leadership or crisis management, with successful leadership also dependent on being able to effectively respond to challenges, and the fast-changing dynamics of the Covid-19 pandemic potentially requiring different styles as needs also change over time.

Because our research qualitatively studies narrative messaging from Alberta’s Premier Jason Kenney, as the province was in the midst of a Covid-19 fourth wave with public health strained beyond capacity, case numbers and deaths steadily increasing, and younger people contracting and dying from the disease, this study is particularly pertinent. Identifying the leadership ideology that has contributed to a public health crisis in Alberta is vital information and provides a basis for future research into Albertans’ responses to the provincial response.