Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2025-6
Exploring the relationship of administrative burden with doctors’ motivation and patients’ experience of care: Evidence from primary healthcare in Catalonia
Administrative burden (AB) focuses on citizens’ subjective experiences upon facing administrative tasks as potential public policy beneficiaries. This paper examines the AB experienced by professionals in public healthcare, in this case, by general practitioners (GPs). After distinguishing between red tape and AB, we test whether the onerous experience of following guidelines and procedures is associated with their intrinsic motivation (IM) and, indirectly, with patient experience (PE). We base our analysis on surveys of GPs and PE and satisfaction in Catalonia. Using structural equation modelling, the study confirms a negative association between AB and doctors’ IM and a significant but smaller direct and mediated relationship between AB and PE. Efforts to increase professionals’ performance through standardization may increase service quality. This study shows the importance of considering the negative AB relationship between medical professionals and their patients.
Points for practitioners
This study underscores that although health authorities aim to improve performance through standardization, this often increases the AB on employees with strong professional identities, demotivating them and worsening patient care experiences. Practitioners and managers should consider not only the primary objectives of rules and procedures but also how they shape individual experiences, given their impact on overall organizational performance.
AhmedFBurtJRolandM (2014) Measuring patient experience: concepts and methods. The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research7(3): 235–241.
2.
Anhang PriceRElliottMZaslavskyA, et al. (2014) Examining the role of patient experience surveys in measuring health care quality. Medical Care Research And Review71(5): 522–554.
3.
BaekgaardMMikkelsenKSMadsenJK, et al. (2021) Reducing compliance demands in government benefit programs improves the psychological well-being of target group members. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory31(4): 806–821.
4.
BaekgaardMTankinkT (2022) Administrative burden: untangling a bowl of conceptual spaghetti. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance5(1): 16–21.
5.
BallartXRicoG (2023) How much convergence exists between registered process measures and patient reported experience measures? A study on Catalan primary healthcare. The International Journal of Health Planning and Management38(6): 1772–1788.
6.
BeckRDaughtridgeRSloanePD (2002) Physician–patient communication in the primary care office: a systematic review. The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice15(1): 25–38.
7.
BellETer-MkrtchyanAWehdeW, et al. (2021) Just or unjust? How ideological beliefs shape street-level bureaucrats’ perceptions of administrative burden. Public Administration Review81(4): 610–624.
8.
BorryEL (2016) A new measure of red tape: introducing the three-item red tape (TIRT) scale. International Public Management Journal19(4): 573–593.
9.
BozemanB (1993) A theory of government “red tape”. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory3(3): 273–304.
10.
BozemanB (2012) Multidimensional red tape: a theory coda. International Public Management Journal15(3): 245–265.
11.
BozemanBFeeneyMK (2011) Rules and Red Tape: A Prism for Public Administration Theory and Research: A Prism for Public Administration Theory and Research. London: Routledge.
12.
BozemanBYoutieJ (2020) Robotic bureaucracy: administrative burden and red tape in university research. Public Administration Review80(1): 157–162.
13.
BrownTA (2015) Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research, 2nd ed. New York: The Guilford Press.
14.
BurdenBCCanonDTMayerKR, et al. (2012) The effect of administrative burden on bureaucratic perception of policies: evidence from election administration. Public Administration Review72(5): 741–751.
15.
CampbellJWPandeySKArnesenL (2023) The ontology, origin, and impact of divisive public sector rules: a meta-narrative review of the red tape and administrative burden literatures. Public Administration Review83(2): 296–315.
16.
CerasoliCPNicklinJMFordMT (2014) Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: a 40-year meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin140(4): 980–1008.
17.
ChangABrewer GeneA (2023) Street-level bureaucracy in public administration: a systematic literature review. Public Management Review25(11): 2191–2211.
18.
ChudnovskyMPeetersR (2022) A cascade of exclusion: administrative burdens and access to citizenship in the case of Argentina’s national identity document. International Review of Administrative Sciences88(4): 1068–1085.
19.
DeciERyanR (2000) The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry11(4): 227–268.
20.
DeciELOlafsenAHRyanRM (2017) Self-determination theory in work organizations: the state of a science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior4(1): 19–43.
21.
EricksonSMRockwernBKoltovM, et al. (2017) Putting patients first by reducing administrative tasks in health care: a position paper of the American College of Physicians. Annals of Internal Medicine166(9): 659–661.
22.
EsteveMSchusterC (2019) Motivating Public Employees. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (Elements in Public and Nonprofit Administration).
23.
GagnéMDeciEL (2005) Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior26(4): 331–362.
24.
GagnéMForestJGilbertM-H, et al. (2010) The motivation at work scale: validation evidence in two languages. Educational and Psychological Measurement70(4): 628–646.
25.
GardnerKParkinsonABanfieldM, et al. (2016) Usability of patient experience surveys in Australian primary health care: a scoping review. Australian Journal of Primary Health22(2): 93–99.
26.
HattkeFHenselDKaluczaJ (2020) Emotional responses to bureaucratic red tape. Public Administration Review80(1): 53–63.
27.
HerdPMoynihanDP (2018) Administrative Burden. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
28.
HerzbergF (1968) One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees?Harvard: Harvard Business Review.
29.
JohnsonDKrollA (2020) What makes us tolerant of administrative burden? Race, representation, and identity. Journal of Behavioral Public Administration4(1): 1–9.
30.
JorgensenTDPornprasertmanitSSchoemannAM, et al. (2022) semTools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling. R package version 0.5–6. Available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=semTools (accessed 20 August 2024).
31.
KilponenKHuhtalaMKinnunenU, et al. (2021) Illegitimate tasks in health care: illegitimate task types and associations with occupational well-being. Journal of Clinical Nursing30(13–14): 2093–2106.
32.
KlineRB (2016) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 4th ed. New York: Guilford Press.
33.
LinosEQuanLTKirkmanE (2020) Nudging early reduces administrative burden: three field experiments to improve code enforcement. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management39(1): 243–265.
34.
LipskyM (1980) Street Level Bureaucracy. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
35.
LorkowskiJGrzegorowskaO (2020) Assessment of time spent by doctors on medical documentation- initial analysis and preliminary study. Education of Economists and Managers58(4): 47–64.
36.
LuytenJMarneffeW (2023) Measuring red tape in a hospital setting: a survey experiment. International Review of Administrative Sciences89(4): 958–976.
37.
MadsenJKMikkelsenKSMoynihanDP (2022) Burdens, sludge, ordeals, red tape, oh my!: a user’s guide to the study of frictions. Public Administration100(2): 375–393.
MollerACJagerAJWilliamsGC, et al. (2019) US Physicians’ work motivation and their occupational health: a national survey of practicing physicians. Medical Care57(5): 334–340.
40.
MollerACOlafsenAHJagerAJ, et al. (2022) Motivational mechanisms underlying physicians’ occupational health: a self-determination theory perspective. Medical Care Research and Review79(2): 255–266.
41.
PandeySKScottPG (2002) Red tape: a review and assessment of concepts and measures. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory12(4): 553–580.
42.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBPodsakoffNP (2012) Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology63(1): 539–569.
43.
RaoSKKimballABLehrhoffSR, et al. (2017) The impact of administrative burden on academic physicians: results of a hospital-wide physician survey. Academic Medicine92(2): 237–243.
44.
RosseelY (2012) Lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software48(2): 1–36.
45.
RyanRMDeciEL (2000) Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology25(1): 54–67.
46.
SalisburyCWallaceMMontgomeryAA (2010) Patients’ experience and satisfaction in primary care: secondary analysis using multilevel modelling. BMJ341: c5004.
47.
SemmerNKJacobshagenNMeierLL, et al. (2015) Illegitimate tasks as a source of work stress. Work & Stress29(1): 32–56.
48.
SemmerNKTschanFMeierLL, et al. (2010) Illegitimate tasks and counterproductive work behavior. Applied Psychology59(1): 70–96.
49.
SequistTDSchneiderECAnastarioM, et al. (2008) Quality monitoring of physicians: linking Patients’ experiences of care to clinical quality and outcomes. Journal of General Internal Medicine23(11): 1784–1790.
50.
Servei Català De LaSalut (2022) Unitat Experiència del Pacient. Pla d'enquestes de satisfacció d'assegurats del CatSalut (PLAENSA): atenció primària 2021.
51.
StanicaCMBalicaDHendersonAC, et al. (2022) The weight of service delivery: administrative and rules burdens in street-level bureaucracy. International Review of Administrative Sciences88(1): 240–257.
52.
StenderupR (2024) Bureaucratic sludge: bureaucratic tasks and procedures leading to experiences of strain. International Journal of Social Welfare33(4): 890–896.
53.
Swarna NanthaY (2013) Intrinsic motivation: how can it play a pivotal role in changing clinician behaviour?Journal of Health Organization and Management27(2): 266–272.
54.
TakHJCurlinFAYoonJD (2017) Association of intrinsic motivating factors and markers of physician well-being: a national physician survey. Journal of General Internal Medicine32(7): 739–746.
55.
ThunSHalsteinliVLøvsethL (2018) A study of unreasonable illegitimate tasks, administrative tasks, and sickness presenteeism amongst Norwegian physicians: an everyday struggle?BMC Health Services Research18(1): 407.
56.
Van LoonNMLeisinkPLMKniesE, et al. (2016) Red tape: developing and validating a new job-centered measure. Public Administration Review76(4): 662–673.
57.
XuXZhouLAsante-AntwiH, et al. (2020) Reconstructing family doctors’ psychological well-being and motivation for effective performance in China: the intervening role of psychological capital. BMC Family Practice21(1): 137.
58.
ZegersMVeenstraGLGerritsenG, et al. (2020) Perceived burden due to registrations for quality monitoring and improvement in hospitals: a mixed methods study. International Journal of Health Policy and Management11(2): 183–196.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
