The political left has historically talked about democracy as a value—something good, something we strive toward. It’s often framed ideologically, as a political ideal or social vision. But democracy is more than just a noble aspiration. Science now unequivocally tells us that autonomy—the ability to make choices and have control over our lives—is a basic human psychological need, essential for our well-being.
When we talk about self-managed workplaces today, the conversation often revolves around ideals like democracy, equality, or fairness. These are all important, but the deeper point is often missed: self-management isn’t just a nice idea—it’s a necessity for human flourishing. It’s not only a value; it’s a right and it is grounded in decades of scientific research. And when viewed in the context of human rights, it points toward a major oversight in how we organise our society, particularly our workplaces.
The Science Behind Autonomy: Self-Determination Theory (SDT)
Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is one of the most well-supported theories in modern psychology, developed by researchers Edward Deci and Richard Ryan over more than four decades. It has generated thousands of peer-reviewed studies across domains including education, work, sports, health care, and psychotherapy.
SDT identifies three basic psychological needs:
- Autonomy: The need to feel volitional and self-directed in one’s actions
- Competence: The need to feel effective and capable of achieving desired outcomes
- Relatedness: The need to feel connected and cared for by others
These needs are universal—present across all cultures, ages, and life domains. Research has shown that when these needs are fulfilled, people experience higher motivation, creativity, mental health, physical well-being, and resilience. When these needs are thwarted—especially autonomy—people experience burnout, anxiety, depression, and disengagement.
One of the most robust findings in SDT research is that external control undermines intrinsic motivation. In other words, when people feel forced or micromanaged, their performance and well-being decline. When they feel trusted and empowered, they thrive.
So autonomy isn’t a “nice-to-have.” It is as necessary to psychological health as food and sleep are to physical health. Denying people autonomy is denying a core aspect of their humanity. So when we talk about autonomy, we’re not just talking politics. We’re talking science, and we’re talking human rights.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: A Framework for Freedom
Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a milestone document that enshrines the fundamental rights and freedoms to which all people are entitled. It includes well-known rights like:
- Article 19: The right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Article 20: The right to peaceful assembly and association
- Article 23: The right to work, to free choice of employment, and to just and favourable working conditions
- Article 1: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”
These rights reflect a universal agreement that freedom and dignity are non-negotiable elements of human life. However, what is often left out—especially in workplace settings—is the right to autonomy over one’s own labor and time. Why should the right to express your opinion or choose your religion be considered inviolable, but the right to control your working life be negotiable?
If all rights are meant to protect individual autonomy and dignity, then excluding workplace autonomy is logically inconsistent.
The Case for Workplace Democracy
We already recognise freedoms like freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion as fundamental human rights. These are all expressions of the broader right to autonomy. So why do we leave out the workplace, where most adults spend a huge part of their waking lives?
Imagine someone saying, “You can speak your mind anywhere you want—but not at work.” Or, “You’re free to practice your religion, just not from 9 to 5.” We would call that a violation of human rights. And yet, when it comes to the freedom to make decisions about our labor, our schedules, and our contributions, we accept top-down, command-style workplaces as normal.
This is logically inconsistent. It’s like championing freedom of movement but just for weekends. If autonomy is a basic human need and right, then it must apply everywhere—including the workplace.
The Hidden Violation in Modern Workplaces
Today’s typical workplace is a centrally planned hierarchy. At the top are the owners and executives, followed by layers of management, and finally, the workers, who are expected to carry out decisions they had no role in making. In this structure, workers are treated more like tools than people. They are told what to do, when to do it, and how long to do it for.
This is a systemic denial of autonomy—and yet, it’s so normalised that we rarely even notice. It’s like living in a society that talks about the importance of clean air while making it illegal to open your windows.
Imagine applying this logic elsewhere. It would be like saying:
“You have freedom of speech—except at work.”
“You have the right to dignity—except during office hours.”
“You’re free to make choices—unless you’re on the clock.”
We would never accept this in any other domain. So why do we accept it in the place where we spend most of our adult lives?
Other normalised violations of human rights in history now seem absurd in hindsight—like when women weren’t allowed to vote, or when people were told they couldn’t marry outside their race. We look back and wonder: how did people accept that? One day, we might ask the same question about workplaces.
The Path Forward: Self-Managed Workplaces
A self-managed workplace is one where decision-making is decentralised and shared. People work collaboratively, make choices together, and are trusted to organise their labor. There are many models of this—Sociocracy, Holacracy, worker cooperatives and teal organisations, to name a few. All of them reflect the same core principle: people deserve a say in the decisions that affect their lives.
These workplaces not only respect human rights, they also tend to be more innovative, adaptive, and resilient. Research shows that giving workers more control leads to higher productivity, lower turnover, and greater job satisfaction.
What Now?
So, what do we do with this information? The first step is to recognise that workplace structures are not natural or unchangeable. They are cultural, historical, and political choices—and they can be remade.
- Talk about it. Bring autonomy into conversations about labor rights, democracy, and well-being.
- Challenge the norm. Ask why we’ve accepted command-and-control workplaces for so long.
- Normalise self-management. Treat democratic workplaces not as experiments, but as the new standard.
- Support alternatives. Promote policies and practices that encourage worker ownership and participation.
Final Thought
It’s time we stop treating freedom as something that starts after 5 p.m. Autonomy is not a luxury. It’s not just a progressive talking point or a management style. It is a core human need, backed by science, and should be recognised as a basic human right.
What do you think? Should workplaces become more democratic? How do we start unlearning the idea that being controlled at work is normal? Let’s stop normalising centrally planned workplaces—our humanity depends on it.
Start the discussion at forum.participatoryeconomy.org