A team can be accountable for a result and still need discretion over how to achieve it. The practical question is which decisions belong with the team and which need to be shared across the organisation.

The kind of work matters

The researchers analysed 58 studies involving 4,130 teams. Teams with more autonomy tended to work together more effectively on tasks and relationships. Both were linked to performance and team attitudes. The relationship with task coordination was weaker when the work was more routine. The relationship with how colleagues worked together held across the levels of routine the researchers examined. Read the team autonomy meta-analysis.

An average across studies cannot tell a leader how much discretion a particular team needs. It does suggest looking at the work before setting a common rule. A safety check may need the same procedure across sites. The sequence in which a team reviews options and gathers input may benefit from local judgement. A useful distinction is whether variation would put the result at risk or simply allow another way of reaching the same standard.

A team’s discretion and a person’s agency

Team autonomy concerns the decisions a group can make. In their review of motivation at work, Edward Deci, Anja Olafsen and Richard Ryan describe autonomy at the individual level as a sense of willingness and ownership. Someone can take ownership of a requirement once its purpose is clear. A team can also have considerable discretion while one member has little influence over how the group uses it. Read the review of self-determination theory at work.

Consider a team deciding whether a proposal is ready to approve. The standard for approval can be common across the organisation. The team can still agree how members contribute to the review. Some may want to examine the material before the discussion. Others may spot the central issue by talking through the options. Sharing the evidence in advance and using the meeting to test the conclusion allows both contributions to inform the same decision.

Where work preferences matter

Sariio draws on preference data so people can explain what enables their contribution. That information can help a team agree how to prepare, decide and review its work. The review can then look at whether the arrangement served the work, using whatever evidence the decision calls for, such as errors, delays or work that had to be done again.

The distinction matters for leaders. A team needs to know which decisions it owns. Each person needs a way to contribute to those decisions. Team autonomy and work preferences address different parts of that design.