Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42205954›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026

Between acceptance and change - a qualitative study about how leaders deal with bureaucracy.

Jule Uhl, Maren M Michaelsen, Johanna Hertzberg, Mira Kriegesmann, Magdalena Wallkamm, Tobias Esch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jule UhlInstitute for Integrative Health Care and Health Promotion, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Maren M MichaelsenInstitute for Integrative Health Care and Health Promotion, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Johanna HertzbergInstitute for Integrative Health Care and Health Promotion, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Mira KriegesmannInstitute for Integrative Health Care and Health Promotion, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Magdalena WallkammInstitute for Integrative Health Care and Health Promotion, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Tobias EschInstitute for Integrative Health Care and Health Promotion, Faculty of Health, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Bureaucracy is characterized by narrowly defined rules and regulations. Such structures can limit both the performance of organizations and the health of employees. Materials and methods: Guided interviews were conducted with leaders from the German health, education and social service sectors who self-reported as motivated and healthy despite bureaucratic requirements. Transcriptions were iteratively analyzed using the grounded theory methodology. Quantitative surveys provide additional information. Results: The leaders ( Conclusion: The experience of meaningfulness of bureaucratic regulations appears to be crucial for successfully managing bureaucratic demands. Bureaucracy offers protective effects, such as inner sense of safety and justice at the societal level. However, it is also associated with significant negative consequences, such as stress and restrictions in decision-making. The identified resources and coping mechanisms should be fostered in organizations to ensure health and motivation of leaders. Further research should explore whether certain bureaucratic regulations could be reduced, e.g., by strengthening inter-personal trust and increased inner sense of safety.

Indexed as

behavior change resource modelbureaucracycoping strategiesgrounded theoryinner sense of safetyleadershipmeaningful worksalutogenesis

Identifiers

PMID42205954
PMCPMC13201172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.