Category: Leiderschap

Autonomy for less stress and better performance

Work stress
Work stress causes more than personal suffering. It increasingly leads to loss of productivity and it is costly (see factsheet). It affects the performance of organizations and reduces their capacity to change. For organizations that want to be able to respond effectively to developments and events in their environment, it is important to understand the possible causes of work stress and what can be done about it.

The week of work stress
In November it is the Week of Work stress. This annual event was initiated in 2014 by the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment. Every year the work stress statistics are – unfortunately – impressive. What is most striking is that 1.3 million workers in the Netherlands suffer from burnout complaints. That is 14% of our nine million workers, or one in seven. What is further striking: employees experience low autonomy as the main cause of work stress. More than 43% in 2020. This percentage has been fairly constant in recent years.

Responsive Organizations
An analogous picture emerges in the analysis of responsive organizations. They have an optimal capacity for change: they respond well to changes and anticipate effectively on new needs and developments in their environment. Responsive organizations come in many shapes and sizes, but what they have in common is that autonomy is invested as low as possible in the organization. In other words, employees have a high degree of autonomy.

Autonomy, work stress and change capacity
So it seems that autonomy, work stress and change capacity have a relationship with each other, as shown in the following graph:

Autonomy levels affect both the wellbeing of employees as well as the organizational capacity to change

A higher degree of autonomy is good for the well-being of employees and for the change capacity of organizations. Time to take a closer look at autonomy…

Autonomy is a basic need
People experience autonomy when they can determine the way they do their work. The degree to which autonomy is possible depends on the type of work. But even if a task is clearly defined, there are still plenty of opportunities to give employees autonomy. For example, by letting them make certain decisions themselves, giving them room for their own (improvement) initiatives and being open about the developments of the entire organization. In all kinds of studies, ‘autonomy’ emerges as one of the basic needs of employees.

Netflix: Freedom, Responsibility and Trust
A good example in which autonomy leads to more well-being of employees and contributes to the ability to change is given by Netflix. The company gives the ultimate interpretation to the concept of autonomy: to optimize the innovative capacity of the fast-growing company, there is a culture of ‘no rules’. The management recognized that (rapid) growth of organizations often comes at the expense of the freedom of individuals: in order to cope with the increasing complexity, more and more processes and procedures are being introduced in larger organizations. But it also comes at the expense of employees. Especially those who make significant contributions to success and are less comfortable with the curtailment of their freedoms in the workplace.

Netflix wanted to turn this around: can we continue to grow fast and continuously attract sufficient talent, without increasing complexity? Therefore, the company introduced a values-driven culture without rules. Full freedom for the employees, in the confidence that they take their responsibility and make decisions in the interest of the organization. This means, for example, that people do not have to ask for approval on travel or expenses. There is also no maximum number of vacation days, which are not recorded anyway.

Netflix’s continuous growth and creative achievements show that a high degree of autonomy contributes to a high intrinsic motivation of employees and to the innovative capacity of a company.

Win win
In the history of management, employers and employees have always been pitted against each other. This is partly due to deep-seated prejudices and assumptions that lie at the root of traditional management thinking. In it, workers were seen primarily as a factor of production, an extension of machines, rather than people with individual needs.
In the present time there is no more room for this schism. Because statistics – worldwide – make it clear time and again that the social, organizational and personal sacrifices no longer outweigh the benefits of employees with little autonomy.

It is time for entrepreneurs, directors and managers to work towards maximum autonomy among employees. That benefits all stakeholders. It is therefore a win-win situation: employers, managers and employees have an interest in the highest possible level of autonomy. The Netflix case is one of many, in which it is consistently proven that giving trust, responsibility and autonomy leads to more agility, resilience and innovation capacity. As a bonus, it benefits the employer brand. And that is worth a lot in this time of talent scarcity!

How to create more buy-in

Change which is ignited by motivated employees goes better and faster than change which is ‘imposed’. How can you tap into the intrinsic motivation of your employees so that it matches the ambition or priorities of the organization?

Support base
Lack of support is one of most the important causes of frictions that hinder change. Differences in understanding of priorities exist between management and teams (in 40% of the cases, see graph) and within teams (70%). They lead to resistance. How can you convert that into support?

Source: dissertation by Dr. J.M. van de Poll,
Ambition Patterns in Strategic Decision-Making.

The trench of one’s own right
We live in a highly opinionated society with an abundance of information. We only need a little information to form our opinion and we are strongly inclined to hold on to it.

We have all experienced it: you have a discussion about a problem and you are convinced of your opinion. But… the better you put forward your arguments and supporting facts, the harder your conversation partner seems to cling to his or her conviction. Instead of coming together, it seems that everyone is digging themselves in the trench of their own right.

Trying to convince others of your opinion often leads to more resistance and controversy

Persuasion leads to resistance
This is a well-known phenomenon in clinical psychology: people are well aware of their behavior – and the improvement it needs – but when you want to convince them that they have to change, resistance arises. What if we don’t try to convince others but instead let people find the motivation to change themselves?

Change by listening
That’s exactly what motivational interviewing is about: it’s a technique, developed by Bill Miller and Stephen Rollnick1, that originated in addiction treatment.

1 Motivational interviewing: helping people change, William R. Miller en Stephen Rollnick, third edition, 2013

In motivational interviewing, the interviewer – or: the manager, the colleague, the parent, the coach… – mainly asks questions and listens, with the aim of finding out what would motivate someone to change. Not by telling people what to do, but by letting them discover alternatives themselves2.

2 The results of this method of interviewing in mental health care are good: 75% of the studies on this method report positive results and psychologists and doctors who use it report a success rate of 80%. Source: Think again: the power of knowing what you don’t know, Adam Grant, 2021, page 149. 

Suppose a manager has an employee on his team who often delivers his work too late. That is annoying for colleagues because they depend on it. The manager would like the employee to plan his work better so that the team can rely more on him. When the manager tries to convince him to change his behavior, the start of the conversation could go like this:

Manager: I notice that you often deliver your work late. You need to plan your work better.
Employee: Oh, what’s wrong with it?
Manager: The people who depend on your numbers get in trouble if you deliver late. They must be able to rely on you to keep your promises.
Employee: Well, I keep my promises allright…
Manager: But your numbers are often too late.
Employee: If different things are asked of me all the time, it becomes difficult to keep everyone happy.

This does not seem to be going in a direction that leads to motivation and agreement. What if the manager is eager to find out what would motivate the employee to organize his work differently? That conversation could go like this:

Manager: Could you explain to me how you plan your work?
Employee: Of every request that comes in, I note when it has to be finished.
Manager: So you have a good overview of all deadlines?
Employee: Yes.
Manager: And that works well?
Employee: The problem is that people come up with additional questions very often. As a result, I lose the overview and some activities will be delayed.
Manager: I understand that’s difficult. What could you do to keep the overview and meet the expectations of your colleagues?
Employee: I could schedule activities for each deadline and stick to it more closely when new requests come in.

Now an open conversation arises in which the manager understands the nature of the problem better – ‘planning’ is not so much the problem, but what the employee does when shifts occur. The employee, in turn, feels safe to think along about changing his behaviour. Now the door opens to a structural solution.

Change from within
Motivational interviewing enables the other person to find his or her motivation for change. Such motivation is always stronger than when behavioral change is imposed. It also leads to greater mutual understanding and support. It enables you and your team to become more responsive because dilemmas and problems are solved faster and more effectively, with more creativity and in greater harmony.

Moving As One Logo