How to understand the Agile Mindset model
How Agile is the mindset in your team(s), and how does it impact team effectiveness? This evidence-based model assesses the attitudes typical to an Agile mindset and investigates to what extent a foundation is present to foster such a mindset. This model is based on research by Eilers, Peters & Leimester (2022). Eilers & Verwijs (2025) adapted the questionnaire to the team level.
IMPORTANT: This model is in the first stage of validation. Once sufficient teams have participated (~100), we will validate fit and improve where possible. Stage two validation involves a re-test with a larger sample (~500), and the final validation step is to publish it to an academic peer-reviewed journal.
We consider a team effective when it has satisfied stakeholders (customers, users, internal stakeholders, etc) and when team morale is high. This definition doesn't cover everything (like ROI), but it works across many teams. It is also common in team research.
In the model visualization, team effectiveness is represented with the blue sphere. Its score is calculated from team morale, stakeholder happiness, and team value measures. The first two are measured from the perspective of team members, and the last is measured from the perspective of stakeholders. This means that we include the evaluation of both team members and stakeholders. Team performance is included as another indicator.
Many factors influence team effectiveness. This model focuses on how the presence of an "Agile Mindset" in teams shapes their effectiveness and, by extension, that of the broader organization. An agile mindset is an essential strategic capability in a globalized and rapidly changing market. The notion of Agile mindset was coined by Peters et. al. (2020) and expanded by Eilers, Peters & Leimester (2022), an Agile mindset plays a pivotal role in determining organizational agility and the adoption of digital tools. The Agile Mindset model was adapted to the team level by Eilers & Verwijs (2025).
An Agile mindset is composed of four sub-factors identified by Eilers, Peters & Leimester (2022) but adapted to the team-level: customer co-creation, learning spirit, empowered self-guidance and collaborative exchange.
Cunha et al. (2020) highlighted that organizations often struggle to accurately interpret changes in the market environment, leading to a lack of the necessary strategic sensitivity (Doz and Kosonen, 2010; Morton et al., 2018). They argued that addressing this challenge requires adopting a new mindset. In this context, the "attitude towards customer co-creation" dimension of the agile mindset plays a crucial role.
The theory of strategic agility capabilities (Doz and Kosonen, 2010) suggests that individuals with a strong “attitude towards customer co-creation” are more closely connected to their customers—and consequently to market dynamics. Organizations can better interpret dynamic market developments by continuously reflecting on and integrating customer feedback.
This perspective reinforces the importance of external knowledge in driving innovation (Ferraris et. al., 2017), improving firm performance, and maintaining competitiveness (Dezi et al., 2021).
By emphasizing continuous learning, employees enhance their strategic sensitivity—an essential capability for achieving agility (Doz and Kosonen, 2010; Morton et al., 2018; Shams et al., 2021). Through an ongoing pursuit of new knowledge, employees develop a heightened awareness of their environment and market dynamics, enabling them to respond effectively.
Eilers, Peters & Leimester, 2022 and Miler and Gaida (2019) identified an "open mind" as a key component of the agile mindset, and thereby going along with Senapathi and Srinivasan (2013), who highlighted the importance of seizing learning opportunities.
Agility capabilities (Doz and Kosonen, 2010; Morton et al., 2018; Debellis et al., 2021) can be enhanced through a self-organized and data-driven approach, which is characteristic of agile mindset of employees. By proactively seeking the most value-driven work processes, they contribute to strengthening strategic sensitivity. In this context, being value-oriented also involves making resources—identified through self-reflection—readily available, thereby promoting resource fluidity.
A strong "attitude towards empowered self-guidance" emphasizes the importance of making informed decisions within the scope of one's work processes to achieve the highest sustainable value contribution. This dimension of the Agile Mindset is closely linked to leadership unity, effectively translating strategic agility capabilities to the individual level.
Furthermore, the ability to experiment and view mistakes as opportunities for self-directed improvement aligns with existing research on VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity) (Bresciani et al., 2021).
The "attitude towards collaborative exchange" expands on existing theories of strategic agility capabilities. By making work processes transparent, engaging openly with others, and facilitating knowledge exchange, resources can be more efficiently allocated within an organization. This, in turn, enhances the strategic agility capability of "resource fluidity" (Doz and Kosonen, 2010; Morton et al., 2018; Debellis et al., 2021).
Research has further emphasized the importance of knowledge sharing and explored the individual and interpersonal factors that can prevent knowledge sabotage (Perotti et al., 2022). Additionally, previous studies have demonstrated that innovation is driven by interactions between IT personnel and key promoters (Kettinger and Lee, 2002; Fink and Neumann, 2007; Panda and Rath, 2017), as well as by combining internal and external knowledge sources (Ferraris et al., 2017).
To foster collaborative exchange, organizations could consider implementing elements of organizational democracy, which has been shown to positively impact knowledge sharing (Rezaei, Khalilzadeh & Soleimani, 2021).
The Agile Mindset model also includes three groups of antecedents that we expect to influence the Agile mindset based on existing scientific knowledge. Although there is existing research to support these effects (see below), they are still hypotheses until we can confirm them with data from teams (stage 2 and 3 validation).
For an Agile mindset to form, teams must operate in environments that encourage continuous learning. Such learning is essential to deal with the inherent unpredictability of complex environments (VUCA) (Bennett & Lemoine, 2014. New knowledge and experience can help teams adjust how they work and set goals (Argyris, 1999). Learning can be encouraged through proper knowledge impulses. First, Berntzen et. al. (2022) recognize the need for inter-team learning to support change and increase knowledge transfer (Argote, 1993). Second, teams benefit from on-the-job training, meetups and conferences as a way to expand their skills (Kozlowski & Bell, 2007). However, such impulses alone will not act as learning triggers when teams don't feel sufficient safety to learn (Edmondson & Lei, 2014).
Parker (2014) describes work design as "the content and organization of one's work tasks, activities, relationships and responsibilities". Work design is typically studied in relationship to motivation and job satisfaction (Campion, 1988; Campion, Medsker & Higgs, 1993). It captures how work is coordinated (i.e. meetings, management styles), executed (i.e. methodologies, procedures) and constrained (i.e. autonomy, skills). A good work design, according to Hackman and Oldham (1976), includes feedback opportunities, autonomy in choosing procedures, the use of specialized skills for different tasks, and a sense of task identity and significance. Many studies have shown that such factors are strongly associated with job motivation, learning and commitment (Parker, 2014; Parker, Morgeson & Johns, 2017), less absenteism and lower turnover intention (Hackman and Oldham, 1976).
Work design also influences the growth of an Agile mindset in teams because it constrains or enables how work is done (Eilers, Peters & Leimester, 2022). What this influence looks like is the focus of on-going research. But we hypothesize that autonomy and a focus on customer value are important predictors. This is consistent with existing research on team autonomy (Junker et. al., 2021) and value focus (Verwijs & Russo, 2022).
One important aspect of leadership is the facilitation of group efforts (Yukl, 2012). The self-managing nature of Agile teams requires a different style of leadership from management. Manz et. al. (1987) describe this as "leading others to lead (themselves)". The authority to make work-related decisions shifts from external managers to the teams themselves. So rather than taking the lead, managers have to take a more supporting role and ask teams where they need their help and to create conditions in which teams can prosper.
How leadership influences Agile mindset is still under study. Schreiter et al. (2025 in press) show that leaders can act as a role model in agile mindset development, and support in building good conditions for making positive experiences with agile mindset behavior. However, many studies have emphasized the need for clear and stronger support from management to ensure effective (Agile) teams (Verwijs & Russo, 2022, Van Waardenburg & Van Vliet, 2013, de Souza Bemerjo et. al., 2014, Young & Jordan, 2008). We hypothesize that leaders can show by example and help shape an environment that is conducive to an Agile mindset (Schreiter et al., 2025 in press).
Our model covers the areas that we found to be most relevant to the effectiveness of most teams. This is a great starting point to diagnose and improve teams. However, every model is inherently a simplification of a complex reality. Models are also a generalization. So don't limit your diagnosis to just our model. your team may be influenced strongly by factors that we didn't include in our model. So interpret the results and identify improvements together. And let us know at info@columinity.org what you think is missing.
We calculate the score for each factor through psychometric scales. Each factor is measured by one or more questions designed to measure the same factor but from a slightly different angle. This reduces bias due to various interpretations and provides more statistical variance. We carefully developed the scales and their questions through our research.
Learn more about how we calculate the results here.