Not only are they dealing with a financial crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic, which is threatening their very existence in the most extreme cases, but they are also undertaking a considerable reshuffle of event calendars that have been decimated as a result of COVID-19.

Add the fallout to the first postponement of an Olympic Games, coupled with fears over whether the event will be held at all, to the mix and you have a recipe for apprehension, concern and trepidation.

Another issue being tackled by several IFs, as highlighted by my colleague David Owen in a column last month, and National Olympic Committees (NOCs), especially those scheduled to hold elections in 2020, is what to do with their Congresses, Annual General Meetings and General Assemblies.

Organisations with elective or ordinary meetings of their supreme decision-making bodies this year have chosen two routes thus far - postponement or going virtual.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) last week confirmed its Session in July will be held entirely online, joining a list of those to have opted for a remote meeting which also includes FIFA and the International Rowing Federation.

World Sailing, among those scheduled to have a Presidential election in 2020, seem set to follow suit as the governing body is considering a virtual AGM later this year.

The International Hockey Federation and two of its winter counterparts - the organisations governing luge and skiing - have postponed their elections in response to the global health crisis, while another, the International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF), is mulling over a similar course of action.

Others, such as the International Gymnastics Federation, the International Canoe Federation and the International Modern Pentathlon Union, have not yet decided either way.

The South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC) is one of the NOCs scheduled to have elections, including for the President, this year but their plans to stage a remote vote have been met with resistance from the IOC. More on that later.

Both options have their limitations and drawbacks. Postponement allows the incumbent an extension to their term at the helm and means Presidents can continue beyond their mandates, even if they were facing an uphill battle in their bid for re-election.

In the case of the IIHF, the International Luge Federation (FIL) and the International Skiing Federation (FIS), this prevents them from entering a new era.

The Presidents of the IIHF, FIL and FIS have been in their positions for a combined total of 76 years and postponing the elections delays what some within those organisations believe is a desperately needed refresh of personnel and governance.

But pushing back elections is an expected consequence of the pandemic, which has forced a near total shut down of international travel and prompted Governments to ban mass gatherings, and allows for some form of stability at a time of huge uncertainty.

While even some of the worst-hit countries have started, however tentatively, to turn the corner on coronavirus, it still seems unlikely large groups of sporting officials - a considerable amount of whom fall into the more vulnerable age bracket - will be permitted anytime soon.

With that in mind, organisations which are constitutionally obliged to have elections before December 31 have little choice but to tread the lesser-known path of holding a virtual vote, not dissimilar to the recent World Rugby Presidential contest.

Federations, the NOCs and the IOC have become increasingly reliant on technology to conduct business during the coronavirus crisis but using it to elect a figurehead is new territory for most.

The logistics are particularly intriguing. While it has enabled organisations to restore a semblance of normality to their operations, technology such as video conferencing is not completely dependable. What happens if there is suddenly a major problem during the vote, as has even occurred during in-person Congresses and meetings before?

How will those who are struggling to connect ensure their vote is cast safely and securely? And what about those in lesser-developed countries, where technology is not as advanced as in the nations they might be sharing a conference call with?

A lot of faith will have to be placed by Federations and NOCs in the company they choose to oversee proceedings, such as an auditing firm, while there will inevitably be concerns over the integrity of virtual voting.

But if they can be conducted fairly and if risks are limited to a minimum, there are benefits to virtual elections as they would enable Federations and NOCs to lessen the impact of coronavirus on their governance and ensure they can press ahead with a core aspect of their democracy.

The role of the IOC is also interesting here. The IOC told insidethegames that it is advising Federations and NOCs on virtual elections on a "case-by-case" basis, a sensible approach given the differences in how each organisation operates but one which also throws up several questions.

In the case of the SASCOC, the IOC told the embattled NOC it "discourages the hosting of a virtual elective conference" following well-documented issues with the nomination process, which had been plagued by disputes and legal challenges.

Acting SASCOC chief executive Ravi Govender informed members of the troubled body that the IOC had said it was "preferable if the meeting is not a virtual one but rather be physically convened when it is safe and permitted to do so".

Cutting through the parlance and bluster, essentially the IOC does not trust SASCOC to get it right.

It would be fascinating to learn what criteria governing bodies in this position need to meet in order to be given the green light to go ahead with a virtual vote by the IOC. As with other issues created by the pandemic, clarity from the IOC has not exactly been forthcoming.

The choice between postponement or holding the election virtually may feasibly be taken out of their hands, depending on the stance taken by the IOC - which publicly insists it does not interfere with its stakeholders while simultaneously doing so behind the scenes.

It is clear that this decision will weigh on the minds of Federations and NOCs as the coronavirus crisis continues to affect practically every area of sport.