Dear Mahfuz,

I think it is important that people have autonomy to be motivated. But of course for every situation and decision there are costs and benefits. Who is responsible when there is a mistake or error when the task is realized? The supervisor that gave freedom?

Dear Mahfuz

Task Autonomy provides the employee with a certain degree of freedom with actions as well as decision-making. It helps a lot

1. By giving a sense of responsibility to the employee

2. By increasing the motivation and job satisfaction of the employee

3. Reduces the bureaucracy

4. Recognizes the employee’s skills, and experience

Here is a good paper on the subject.

http://mason.gmu.edu/~clangfre/Effectsoftaskautonomy.pdf

Dear Mahfuz,

I guess it depends on the personality of individuals. The main advantage of being a researcher, if not unique, is to have autonomy. I have observed that some persons, if there is no pressure, always will find excuses for doing almost nothing. I believe that the correct thing is to choose well the employee and then to thrust that he will perform in the best form.

Dear Mahfuz,

I think autonomy is one of one of the most important motivations, autonomy is able to free inhibited capacities. (Carefully controlled) Autonomy may improve performance.

I agree with you Andras. Task autonomy is one of the most important motivators at work.

Task autonomy and task interest have been studied in the organizational literature as main effects, demonstrating positive effects on productive work behavior and goal-setting behavior. Providing high task autonomy or an interesting task may stimulate goal setting, but the interaction of these two variables may significantly increase goal level and consequently task performance.

http://velocoaching.com.au/doc/Crane_Megan_E.pdf

Depends on type of worker that you have.

For those who are creative and skilled,task autonomy will motivated them more to productive work as well as generating new idea on solving or giving solution or in decision making.

While other type need to be motivated more than giving autonomy specially for routine worker, as task autonomy give them confusion or reason to be lazy.

I fully support autonomy.

@Nageswara Rao Posinasetti, thanks for adding to our knowledge once again and for the link of a very relevant paper. I love that paper.

@András Bozsik, It is true that autonomy is one of the most important motivations in a carefully controlled environment. It stimulates performance but @Dony Saputra has triggered in a very important direction, I agree with him, it works best if employees are skilled and well motivated.

@Adel M. Aladwani, I support your argument that if employees are not motivated then nothing will work.

As far as we as employees work in a solid system that contains memory then autonomy would work, otherwise does not. Also, with respect to developing countries, I don't think autonomy will work well in the public sectors. Yours,

Dear Nageswara,

Thank you for attching the file of the paper of Claus W. Langfred and Neta A. Moye. It is really interesting.

Dear Mahfuz

It will depend on how the employee concerned looks at autonomy. It will positively motivate the employee if s/he is motivated by autonomy and is doing a task that can be done independently. But if the employee does not have enough knowledge about a complex inter-dependent task, then granting autonomy is not desirable as in that case autonomy will adversely affect performance.

Attaching a fine paper on the subject where similar vi has been taken.

http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=4&sid=0bb5ef3b-cf7c-42c4-be2c-c2e2da16071c%40sessionmgr4004&hid=4101&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=bth&AN=15280770

It highly depends on the degree of disconnect between the supervisor and the work the employee performs. In science, it is often the case that the lab worker has the expertise in things never performed by the P.I./supervisor. Autonomy is an absolute reality/necessity by default in those situations. In other cases, the supervisor is an absolute expert in all techniques and serves as mentor to the worker - elbow to elbow. In order for many [research laboratories] to stay afloat so supervisors can scan the horizon for what is coming down the pike, what grants to write, what conferences to attend, it is almost an absolute necessity to expect autonomy from the lab help so that continuous funding can be obtained from governmental or private sources by the supervisor. Some supervisors swear by the theory that grad students and post-docs are mushrooms that should be left alone to grow in the dark. By that modus, they learn their way and in turn, become ripe prospects for becoming supervisors themselves.

Underpaying lab help and post-docs is also a very popular way for P.I.'s and supervisors to keep talent in the lab. Learned helplessness then cleverly sets in with the workers, and they continue to offer their rare expertise to the lab for dirt-cheap without hope of finding employment elsewhere - especially when the job-market is very tight like it has been since 2005. Wolves will be wolves, and lambs will continue to be food. Autonomy, when looked at the right way, is being given the opportunity to educate one's self in one's present situation. For every bear, there is a bear hunter, so learn and do your job better than anyone else so that only you can credit yourself for your job security, or lack thereof should you choose not seize the opportunity to learn.

Task autonomy has to be connected with a decentralised system, where the decentralised groups have a coordinator, and when problems arise the group can consult the center for advice and discussion. Under these conditions I thing task performance is OK. Notice that the members og the groups are experts in what they are doing.

Task autonomy gives a sense of responsibility and faith so is preferable. Just give them an assignment, with a dead line, without telling them how to do it, it will fetch better results.

There are three types of job autonomy: work method, work scheduling and work criteria. All these types of job autonomy can positively influence job satisfaction.

Dear All,

Interestingly, the positive impact of autonomy can be well demonstrated by the negative consequences of the lack of autonomy. Unfortunately, these negative impacts are well known for many of us…

I agree with Dr. Mahfuz and Andras about the positive impact of autonomy

Yes, but not with arbitrary degrees of freedom, because then the specific department will probably decide to produce something against the main company!

Would it be better to give low degree of autonomy or high degree of autonomy at work.

I've always choose to work with people under my supervision by objectives and deadlines. I never imposed working hours and give them the freedom to manage their own time. Science should not be subjected to classical working labour hours, weekends or even vacation since this is not a common employement but a profession and a way of life.

So far, things go perfectly this way.

Cheers,

JP

João Pedro Barreiros - YES~!

Thank you Jack.

Cheers,

JP

Truely, task autonomy shows to bring about very good cerative result in my students' work, too.

Do you think there is any disadvantages in giving high degree of autonomy at work.

Task autonomy provides the employees with a certain degree of freedom with respect to actions as well as related decision-making. It helps employees to show their potential. Employees feel responsible, motivated, and satisfied. So, autonomy results in comparatively better task performance. But it is a matter of cultural context. Are employees belong to an individualist culture? Or a collectivist one? Autonomy comparatively better works in individualist culture than collectivist one. Specifically, high power distance of collectivist culture undermines the importance of autonomy, where direction, instructions, and motivation by bosses are more important. India is one of the popular example, this is collective society where high power distance works.

Dear Mahfuz, may I make a lyrical digression in your interesting theme, please? It's a brightest example of "task autonomy and performance" I.A.Krylov

"When partners can't agree

Their dealings come to naught

And trouble is their labor's only fruit.

____________

Once Crawfish, Swan and Pike

Set out to pull a loaded cart,

And all together settled in the traces;

They pulled with all their might, but still the cart refused to budge!

The load it seemed was not too much for them:

Yet Crawfish scrambled backwards,

Swan strained up skywards, Pike pulled toward the sea.

Who's guilty here and who is right is

not for us to say-

But anyway the cart's still there today"

With clear objectives and deadlines, people are more creative. Freedom in the task provides less stress and more conviviality. Scientists are naturally autonomic thinkers and need freedom in their job.

You are right, dear Fairouz,

really talented personalities can create only in free circumstances. Really talented leader is avoid of revenge. The great master is not envious.Hatred, envy are traits of mediocre people. A true master encourages every human accomplishment.

Thank you for your thoughts dear Irina "Hatred, envy are traits of mediocre people. A true master encourages every human accomplishment."

Excellent remarks, perfect.

Task autonomy will positively affect performance when task is either very simple or very complex . Performance is likely to decline if the nature of the task is between simple and complex when supervision is preferred

Well said man, "Performance is likely to decline if the nature of the task is between simple and complex when supervision is the preferred". I support it.

The upshot from everything being said here is that task autonomy is desirable for some but not for all.  The criterion could be creativity, and ideally the degree of autonomy could be made proportional to the degree of creativity.  However, in circumstances where the enterprise is too large to proportion autonomy, perhaps a middle ground could be struck between full autonomy and none at all.  I have often thought that nations are like enterprises, and while some are too small to undertake great enterprises, others grow too large to undertake them, diminishing creativity.

Dear Nelson, "The upshot from everything being said here is that task autonomy is desirable for some but not for all". Nicely said.

I think task autonomy can positively affect the creativity, since it gives employee the freedom to perform the work in her/his way.

Task autonomy is possible through an appropriate decentralised organisational system. In such a system autonomy results   into more productive and qualitative ones.  It goes without saying that autonomy outside of such organisational system is not possible. 

Yes my dear Costas. Decentralization may lead to task autonomy.

Yes, task autonomy will enhance performance of the people who are dependable and proven performer. Both over-supervision  and under- supervision are generally not desirable in a work situation. Hence, a selective decision is required to be taken in respect of task autonomy, which is stimulating, motivational and recognition for the deserving people.

Dear Jaharkanti and Kamal. I agree with both of you.

So do I -agree!

Thyank you, dear Janina.

You are right, Anna. i fully agree with you! Regards.

My answer to the posed question is : yes task autonomy gives more opportunity of autonomy in performance.

Regards,

Janina

yes task autonomy affects task performance as it allows employees to put in their initiatives in performing a particular task

Both positively and negatively

Yes it does in very complex tasks