Autonomy in the workplace, often misunderstood, is a powerful tool that drives individual fulfilment and organisational success when applied correctly. In this article, we explore the role of autonomy through the lens of self-determination theory, its benefits, and common misconceptions. Drawing from real-world examples, including Google’s 20% innovation time and W.L. Gore’s “lattice” structure, we demonstrate how autonomy enhances creativity, job satisfaction, and retention.
Stay tuned for Part B, where we’ll dive deeper into real-world examples from sport and their parallels in broader industries. We’ll explore how lessons from high-performing teams can inform leadership practices, offering practical insights into creating thriving, autonomy-supportive environments.
AUTONOMY IN THE WORKPLACE
Autonomy, one of self-determination theory’s three basic psychological needs, refers to self-regulation rather than mere independence (1). It’s about individuals feeling empowered to make choices that align with their values and interests. From my experience in elite sport, athletes with high autonomy demonstrate greater physical effort, concentration, and accuracy in both preparation and execution—echoing academic findings (2).
BENEFITS
Creating autonomy-supportive environments can lead to outstanding results. Research shows that autonomy in the workplace is a strong predictor of job performance (3,4), innovation and creativity (4,5), work passion (6), well-being (7), emotional fatigue (8) quality of life (7) and job satisfaction (9). At Spark Intent, we emphasise how autonomy contributes to fulfilment, productivity, innovation, and retention—a formula for individual and organisational success.
Consider companies like Google, where employees are granted 20% of their time to pursue innovative projects. This level of trust has led to some of their most successful products, including Gmail. At W.L. Gore, the company behind GORE-TEX, autonomy is central to its “lattice” organizational structure. There are no formal hierarchies or titles, and associates are empowered to take ownership of projects and roles based on their skills and interests. This system fosters a culture of trust and innovation, as individuals are not limited by rigid job descriptions but instead can lead initiatives that align with their strengths.
Atlassian, another standout, gives teams “ShipIt Days” to work autonomously on problem-solving and innovation. These examples highlight how autonomy fuels passion and leads to high-performance outcomes.
CULTURES OF HIGH AUTONOMY
From my own experiences, cultures with high autonomy foster team members who might say:
“I’m putting in effort because I want to.”
“I follow this line of thinking because I believe in it.”
“I work hard because I know it matters to the company and aligns with our goals.”
Combining experience with academic know-how (2), Autonomy support truly shines when cultures provide clarity and rationale, education, open platforms, value alignment, choice, and authentic guidance.
Figure 1 – Characteristics of Autonomy-Supportive environments
Clarity and rationale are foundational in these cultures. Team members need a clear understanding of not only the value and objectives they are working toward but also the values and beliefs that guide their leaders. When the organisational mission and individual roles are well understood, autonomy flourishes. Clarity serves as a roadmap, allowing individuals to navigate their responsibilities with purpose and direction.
Education is essential. Without the right skills or understanding, autonomy becomes overwhelming. By equipping individuals with the knowledge and tools necessary to perform their roles, leaders instil confidence and competence. This education doesn’t stop at training; it’s an ongoing process of skill refinement and learning opportunities that empower employees to make informed, autonomous decisions.
Choice plays a critical role in fostering autonomy. By offering flexibility in how work is approached and completed, leaders give employees a sense of control. Even within structured tasks, the power to choose one’s path enhances motivation and satisfaction, leading to greater engagement and effort. Choice can come in different forms, with one author suggesting that “worktime and workplace autonomy are more likely to have negative effects on employee well-being than methods autonomy” (10). More in Part B.
Another key element is value alignment. When individuals perceive that their personal values are not only acknowledged, but aligned with those of the organisation, they are more likely to feel empowered to take ownership of their actions. This creates a unique form of autonomy where following a leader’s guidance feels self-endorsed because it resonates with their own beliefs and desires.
High-autonomy environments also feature open platforms—spaces where employees can voice their ideas, be heard, and engage in reflective dialogue. These platforms foster psychological safety and create an environment where people feel valued and are encouraged to innovate. Open communication channels ensure that feedback flows both ways, reinforcing a culture of growth and continuous improvement.
Finally, autonomy-supportive leaders provide authentic guidance. They don’t merely offer freedom for the sake of it; they mentor, coach, provide high-quality feedback and remove barriers while trusting their teams to act in alignment with shared goals. Guidance in these environments is about fostering growth and self-awareness, rather than micromanaging, and it includes regular reflection and change-oriented feedback to ensure the individual is supported in their autonomous journey.
MISCONCEPTIONS OF AUTONOMY
In the workplace, autonomy is often misunderstood, leading to ineffective practices or overcorrection. Let’s dispel a few common myths:
Figure 2 – Misconceptions of Autonomy
“Autonomy = Independence” Autonomy is frequently confused with independence. Autonomy encompasses a perception of control and self-endorsement, while independence implies working entirely on your own. For instance, in a highly collaborative tech startup, team members may have autonomy in how they tackle their tasks but still rely on others for input, guidance, and cross-functional work. Independence without collaboration risks isolating team members and stifling creativity.
“Autonomy is the provision of complete freedom” Employees with total freedom and no guidelines or structure can lead to chaos. For example, a manager might allow an employee to choose their project direction but neglect to set clear goals or expectations. While this might feel empowering at first, the lack of structure often leaves employees feeling unsupported and overwhelmed. In contrast, companies like Google balance freedom with accountability through their “20% Time” policy, allowing employees to explore side projects while still holding them to the company’s larger objectives. Warr (1994) and Baltes et al (2002) suggest autonomy is viewed on an inverted U-Curve (Figure 3), to explain the cost of overt control or overt neglect (11,12).
Figure 3 – Inverted U of Autonomy-Support
“Choice is always effective” Choice is a powerful tool for engagement, but more choice doesn’t always equate to better outcomes. In fact, too much choice can overwhelm employees through what is termed ‘passive pressure’ (12) and is again a reference to the inverted U-curve (Figure 3). Imagine an engineering team that’s given too many options on how to allocate their time, leading to decision paralysis and reduced focus on critical priorities. Effective leaders know when to limit options to drive clarity, ensuring that autonomy supports, rather than hinders, decision-making.
“High autonomy should be a given” Leaders sometimes assume that autonomy is something you can offer uniformly, but this isn’t the case. Optimal autonomy differs depending on situation and personnel. New hires, for example, often need more guidance until they understand the company culture, processes, and expectations. Furthermore, ‘trust’ and ‘monitoring’ are important considerations for autonomy-provision in high performing teams (13). Companies like Toyota blend autonomy with their “Kaizen” (continuous improvement) practices, allowing for high worker input once teams demonstrate competence and alignment with company values. Too much autonomy may create a culture of counterproductive behaviour, reduced work efficiency and unethical behaviour (12), especially if combined with few guidelines, feedback or open platforms to voice concern.
As we’ve seen, autonomy, when correctly applied, is an engine for innovation, engagement, and growth. But like any powerful tool, it must be wielded carefully to avoid pitfalls. By understanding and addressing the common misconceptions, organisations can create environments where autonomy leads to both individual fulfilment and collective success.
In Part B, we’ll explore real-world examples from elite sport and apply those lessons to broader industries. We’ll examine how sports teams master the balance between autonomy and accountability and discuss practical steps that businesses can take to foster autonomy-supportive cultures.
What does autonomy look and feel like to you? Get in touch.
REFERENCES
1. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness. Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness. New York: Guildford Press; 2017.
2. Mageau GA, Vallerand RJ. The coach-athlete relationship: A motivational model. Vol. 21, Journal of Sports Sciences. 2003.
3. Johari J, Yean Tan F, Tjik Zulkarnain ZI. Autonomy, workload, work-life balance and job performance among teachers. International Journal of Educational Management. 2018;32(1).
4. Maryle` M, Gagné M, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior J Organiz Behav [Internet]. 2005 [cited 2024 Oct 30];26:331–62. Available from: www.interscience.wiley.com
5. Kpinpuo SD, Akolgo IG, Naimi L. Leading change and innovation in Ghana’s banking sector: the mediating role of work autonomy. Industrial and Commercial Training. 2023;55(1).
6. Nie T, Tian M, Cai M, Yan Q. Job Autonomy and Work Meaning: Drivers of Employee Job-Crafting Behaviors in the VUCA Times. Behavioral Sciences. 2023;13(6).
7. Lu Z, Wang S, Li Y, Liu X, Olsen W. Who Gains Mental Health Benefits from Work Autonomy? The Roles of Gender and Occupational Class. Appl Res Qual Life. 2023;18(4).
8. Farfán J, Peña M, Fernández-Salinero S, Topa G. The moderating role of extroversion and neuroticism in the relationship between autonomy at work, burnout, and job satisfaction. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(21).
9. Lopes H, Lagoa S, Calapez T. Work autonomy, work pressure, and job satisfaction: An analysis of European Union countries. Economic and Labour Relations Review. 2014;25(2).
10. Bipp T, OBERLÄNDER M, Walczok M. The dark side of autonomy: The role of autonomy facets and work intensification. https://doi.org/105465/AMBPP202111153abstract [Internet]. 2021 Jul 26 [cited 2024 Nov 1];2021(1):11153. Available from: https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/AMBPP.2021.11153abstract
11. Baltes BB, Bauer CC, Bajdo LM, Parker CP. The use of multitrait-multimethod data for detecting nonlinear relationships: The case of psychological climate and job satisfaction. J Bus Psychol. 2002;17(1):3–17.
12. Warr P. A conceptual framework for the study of work and mental health. Work Stress [Internet]. 1994 [cited 2024 Oct 31];8(2):84–97. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02678379408259982
13. Langfred CW. Too Much of a Good Thing? Negative Effects of High Trust and Individual Autonomy in Self-Managing Teams. https://doi.org/105465/20159588 [Internet]. 2017 Nov 30 [cited 2024 Oct 31];47(3):385–99. Available from: https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/20159588