How Individuals Experience Autonomy in Agile Project Teams

Abstract

Autonomy is not the same as independence, but a psychological experience of volition and self-endorsement in one’s actions that drives motivation to work on projects. Agile project environments promote autonomy through self-organization and empowerment. Despite widespread recognition of autonomy's importance, a critical gap exists in understanding how individuals subjectively experience autonomy in agile project teams. By applying Q methodology, this study reveals five perspectives on individuals’ experienced autonomy in agile project teams. This study contributes to project management research by providing a nuanced understanding of autonomy's role for motivation in agile project teams. Instrumental contribution is achieved by providing a set of statements to analyze experienced autonomy. For practice, this research gives agile leaders and managers insights into creating a motivating workplace that considers individual differences in autonomy experiences. Future research could further investigate the contextual dynamics that foster and develop these perspectives.

Keywords

experienced autonomy Q methodology perspectives on autonomy motivation individuals in agile project teams

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alexandrino

Lourenço

P. R.

Rebelo

Dimas

I. D

. (2024). Having each other’s back: The mediating role of supportive behaviours in the relationship between team autonomy and team effectiveness. Organizacija, 57(1), 87–98. 10.2478/orga-2024-0006

Armbruster

Huemann

. (2025). Dynamic tensions of individually experienced autonomy in agile project teams: A conceptual model. Project Leadership and Society, 100202. 10.1016/j.plas.2025.100202

Bal

P. M.

Izak

. (2021). Paradigms of flexibility: A systematic review of research on workplace flexibility. European Management Review, 18(1), 37–50. 10.1111/emre.12423

Bartlett

J. E.

DeWeese

. (2015). Using the Q methodology approach in human resource development research. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 17(1), 72–87. 10.1177/1523422314559811

Bjerre

Leimbach

. (2026). Understanding multilevel paradoxes in agile projects: Between autonomy and control in self-managing teams. Project Leadership and Society, 100213. 10.1016/j.plas.2026.100213

Bourgault

Drouin

Hamel

. (2008). Decision making within distributed project teams: An exploration of formalization and autonomy as determinants of success. Project Management Journal, 39(1_suppl), S97–S110. 10.1002/pmj.20063

Bureau

J. S.

Mageau

G. A.

Morin

A. J. S.

Gagné

Forest

Papachristopoulos

Lucas

Thibault Landry

Parenteau

. (2018). Promoting autonomy to reduce employee deviance: The mediating role of identified motivation. International Journal of Business and Management, 13(5), 61. 10.5539/ijbm.v13n5p61

Choi

Kim

Yang

J.-S

. (2025). Finding the right balance: The impact of individual autonomy on balancing exploration and exploitation. Journal of Business Research, 198, 115483. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115483

Collin

K. M.

Keronen

Lemmetty

Auvinen

Riivari

. (2021). Self-organised structures in the field of ICT: Challenges for employees’ workplace learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 33(2), 95–108. 10.1108/JWL-10-2019-0124

10.

Cuppen

Bosch-Rekveldt

M. G. C.

Pikaar

Mehos

D. C

. (2016). Stakeholder engagement in large-scale energy infrastructure projects: Revealing perspectives using Q methodology. International Journal of Project Management, 34(7), 1347–1359. 10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.01.003

11.

Damar

E. A.

Sali

(2022). Q Methodology: A concise overview. In Zimmerman

A. S.

(Ed.), Advances in knowledge acquisition, transfer, and management (pp. 1–17). IGI Global. 10.4018/978-1-7998-8283-1.ch001

12.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M

. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19(2), 109–134. 10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6

13.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

Schultz

P. P.

Niemiec

C. P

. (2015). Being aware and functioning fully: Mindfulness and interest taking within self-determination theory. In Brown

K.W.

Creswell

J. D.

Ryan

R. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of mindfulness: Theory, research, and practice. (pp. 112–129). The Guilford Press.

14.

Doblinger

Class

. (2023). Does it fit? The relationships between personality, decision autonomy fit, work engagement, and emotional exhaustion in self-managing organizations. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 31(3), 420–442. 10.1111/ijsa.12440

15.

Dong

Dacre

Baxter

Ceylan

. (2024). What is agile project management? Developing a new definition following a systematic literature review. Project Management Journal, 55(6), 668–688. 10.1177/87569728241254095

16.

Ellingsen

I. T.

Størksen

Stephens

. (2010). Q methodology in social work research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 13(5), 395–409. 10.1080/13645570903368286

17.

Gemünden

H. G.

Salomo

Krieger

. (2005). The influence of project autonomy on project success. International Journal of Project Management, 23(5), 366–373. 10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.03.004

18.

George

T. J.

Maneethai

Atwater

L. E.

Madera

J. M

. (2025). When remote work works better: How fit and autonomy shape employee outcomes. Organizational Dynamics, 101175. 10.1016/j.orgdyn.2025.101175

19.

Grabner

Klein

Speckbacher

. (2022). Managing the trade-off between autonomy and task interdependence in creative teams: The role of organizational-level cultural control. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 101, 101347. 10.1016/j.aos.2022.101347

20.

Gustavsson

Berntzen

Stray

. (2022). Changes to team autonomy in large-scale software development: A multiple case study of Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) implementations. International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management, 10(1), 29–46. 10.12821/ijispm100102

21.

Hackman

J. R.

Oldham

G. R

. (1975). Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(2), 159–170. 10.1037/h0076546

22.

Hoda

Murugesan

L. K

. (2016). Multi-level agile project management challenges: A self-organizing team perspective. Journal of Systems and Software, 117, 245–257. 10.1016/j.jss.2016.02.049

23.

Hodgson

Briand

. (2013). Controlling the uncontrollable: ‘Agile’ teams and illusions of autonomy in creative work. Work, Employment and Society, 27(2), 308–325. 10.1177/0950017012460315

24.

Hoegl

Parboteeah

. (2006). Autonomy and teamwork in innovative projects. Human Resource Management, 45(1), 67–79. 10.1002/hrm.20092

25.

Howard

J. L.

Morin

A. J. S.

Gagné

. (2021). A longitudinal analysis of motivation profiles at work. Motivation and Emotion, 45(1), 39–59. 10.1007/s11031-020-09852-4

26.

Jungert

Schattke

Proulx

F. A.

Taylor

Koestner

. (2021). Whose autonomy support is more effective? Managers’ or co-workers’? An experimental comparison of source and occupational context on intrinsic motivation. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne Des Sciences de l’Administration, 38(2), 209–223. 10.1002/cjas.1598

27.

Kakar

A. K. S

. (2018). Engendering cohesive software development teams: Should we focus on interdependence or autonomy? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 111, 1–11. 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.11.001

28.

Koestner

Holding

. (2021). A generative legacy: SDT’s refined understanding of the central role of autonomy in human lives. Motivation Science, 7(2), 111–112. 10.1037/mot0000221

29.

Kunzl

Messner

. (2023). Temporal structuring as self-discipline: Managing time in the budgeting process. Organization Studies, 44(9), 1439–1464. 10.1177/01708406221137840

30.

Lechler

R. C.

Huemann

. (2023). Motivation of young project professionals: Their needs for autonomy, competence, relatedness, and purpose. Project Management Journal, 55(1), 87569728231195587. 10.1177/87569728231195587

31.

J. G.

Brockner

Vardi

Weitz

. (2017). The dark side of experiencing job autonomy: Unethical behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 222–234. 10.1016/j.jesp.2017.05.007

32.

Machiels

Compernolle

Coppens

. (2023). Stakeholder perceptions of uncertainty matter in megaprojects: The Flemish A102 infrastructure project. International Journal of Project Management, 41(1), 102437. 10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102437

33.

Malik

Sarwar

Orr

. (2021). Agile practices and performance: Examining the role of psychological empowerment. International Journal of Project Management, 39(1), 10–20. 10.1016/j.ijproman.2020.09.002

34.

Martinsuo

Lehtonen

. (2009). Project autonomy in complex service development networks. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 2(2), 261–281. 10.1108/17538370910949293

35.

Mazmanian

Orlikowski

W. J.

Yates

. (2013). The autonomy paradox: The implications of mobile email devices for knowledge professionals. Organization Science, 24(5), 1337–1357. 10.1287/orsc.1120.0806

36.

Meier

Kock

. (2023). The human factor in agility: Exploring employee dedication in agile project organizations. International Journal of Project Management, 41(7), 102527. 10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102527

37.

Moe

N. B.

Šmite

Paasivaara

Lassenius

. (2021). Finding the sweet spot for organizational control and team autonomy in large-scale agile software development. Empirical Software Engineering, 26(5), 101. 10.1007/s10664-021-09967-3

38.

Mousa Alriyami

Alneyadi

Alnuaimi

Kampouris

(2024). Employees trust, perceived justice, on task performance: Mediating and moderating role of autonomy and organizational culture. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 104, 103647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2024.103647

39.

Muñiz Castillo

M. R.

Gasper

(2012). Human autonomy effectiveness and development projects. Oxford Development Studies, 40(1), 49–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600818.2011.646975

40.

Newman

Ramlo

(2010). Using Q methodology and Q factor analysis in mixed methods research. In Tashakkori

Teddlie

(Eds.), SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 505–530). SAGE Publications, Inc.

10.4135/9781506335193.n20

41.

Nicklich

Sauer

Pfeiffer

(2021). Antecedents and consequences of agility—On the ungoing invocation of self-organization. In Pfeiffer

Nicklich

Sauer

(Eds.), The agile imperative (pp. 19–38). Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978-3-030-73994-2_2

42.

Papachristopoulos

Arvanitis

. (2024). Autonomy orientation and innovative work behavior: Τhe mediating role of creativity and prosocial motivation. European Journal of Psychology Open, 83(2), 83–88. 10.1024/2673-8627/a000059

43.

Patall

E. A

. (2024). Agentic engagement: Transcending passive motivation. Motivation Science, 10(3), 222–233. 10.1037/mot0000332

44.

Peters

Garrel

J. von

Düben

Dienel

H.-L.

(2016). Arbeit - Zeit - Souveränität: Eine empirische Untersuchung zur selbstbestimmten Projektarbeit [Work - time - autonomy: An empirical study on self-directed project work] (1st edition). Rainer Hampp Verlag.

10.1688/9783957101679

45.

Prommegger

Huck-Fries

Wiesche

Krcmar

(2019). Agile and attached: The impact of agile practices on agile team members’ affective organisational commitment. [Conference paper] 14. Internationale Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik, Siegen, Germany.

46.

Ravn

J. E.

Moe

N. B.

Stray

Seim

E. A

. (2022). Team autonomy and digital transformation: Disruptions and adjustments in a well-established organizational principle. AI & SOCIETY, 37(2), 701–710. 10.1007/s00146-022-01406-1

47.

Reddy

A. R. P

. (2023). Autonomy to project manager: How to design? Procedia Computer Science, 219, 1823–1829. 10.1016/j.procs.2023.01.479

48.

Rowe

K. M.

Whitty

S. J.

Van Der Hoorn

(2024). Creating authority and autonomy: Necessary dialectical tensions in public sector project management. Project Leadership and Society, 5, 100119. 10.1016/j.plas.2024.100119

49.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L

. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

50.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L

. (2006). Self-regulation and the problem of human autonomy: Does psychology need choice, self-determination, and will? Journal of Personality, 74(6), 1557–1586. 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00420.x

51.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(Eds). (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press. 10.1521/978.14625/28806

52.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2019). Brick by brick: The origins, development, and future of self-determination theory. In Elliot

A. J.

(Ed.), Advances in motivation science (Vol. 6, pp. 111–156). Elsevier. 10.1016/bs.adms.2019.01.001

53.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

Vansteenkiste

Soenens

. (2021). Building a science of motivated persons: Self-determination theory’s empirical approach to human experience and the regulation of behavior. Motivation Science, 7(2), 97–110. 10.1037/mot0000194

54.

Sandberg

Löwstedt

. (2025). ‘The happily overworked professional’: Unpacking the autonomy paradox in excessive work regimes amongst construction site managers. Safety Science, 184, 106760. 10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106760

55.

Sastoque-Pinilla

Artelt

Burimova

De Lacalle

Lopez

& Toledo-Gandarias

, N. (2022). Project success criteria evaluation for a project-based organization and its stakeholders—A Q-methodology approach. Applied Sciences, 12(21), 11090. 10.3390/app122111090

56.

Sauer

Nicklich

. (2021). Empowerment and beyond: Paradoxes of self-organised work. Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation, 15(2). 10.13169/workorgalaboglob.15.2.0073

57.

Schwaber

Sutherland

(2020). The scrum guide. https://scrumguides.org/docs/scrumguide/v2020/2020-Scrum-Guide-US.pdf

58.

Silvius

A. J. G.

Kampinga

Paniagua

Mooi

. (2017). Considering sustainability in project management decision making: An investigation using Q-methodology. International Journal of Project Management, 35(6), 1133–1150. 10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.01.011

59.

Slemp

G. R.

Kern

M. L.

Patrick

K. J.

Ryan

R. M

. (2018). Leader autonomy support in the workplace: A meta-analytic review. Motivation and Emotion, 42(5), 706–724. 10.1007/s11031-018-9698-y

60.

Šmite

Moe

N. B.

Floryan

Gonzalez-Huerta

Dorner

Sablis

. (2023). Decentralized decision-making and scaled autonomy at Spotify. Journal of Systems and Software, 200, 111649. 10.1016/j.jss.2023.111649

61.

Suprapto

Koops

Jalali

Bosch-Rekveldt

(2014). The application of Q-methodology to gather practitioners’ perspectives on collaboration in projects [Unpublished manuscript]. Delft University of Technology.

62.

Vansteenkiste

Ryan

R. M.

Soenens

. (2020). Basic psychological need theory: Advancements, critical themes, and future directions. Motivation and Emotion, 44(1), 1–31. 10.1007/s11031-019-09818-1

63.

Watts

Stenner

. (2005). Doing Q methodology: Theory, method and interpretation. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2(1), 67–91. 10.1191/1478088705qp022oa

64.

Watts

Stenner

. (2012). Doing Q methodological research: Theory, method and interpretation. SAGE.

65.

Webler

Danielson

Tuler

. (2009). Using Q method to reveal social perspectives in environmental research. Social and Environmental Research Institute.

66.

Weinstein

Przybylski

A. K.

Ryan

R. M

. (2012). The index of autonomous functioning: Development of a scale of human autonomy. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(4), 397–413. 10.1016/j.jrp.2012.03.007

67.

Willems

Van Marrewijk

Kuitert

Volker

Hermans

(2020). Practices of isolation: The shaping of project autonomy in innovation projects. International Journal of Project Management, 38(4), 215–228. 10.1016/j.ijproman.2020.03.004

68.

Yang

. (2016). A brief introduction to Q methodology: International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology, 7(2), 42–53. 10.4018/IJAVET.2016040104

69.

Yates

. (2023). Developing or degrading young workers? How business strategy and the labour process shape job quality across different industrial sectors in England. Work, Employment and Society, 37(5), 1186–1205. 10.1177/09500170211070447