The theory behind the principle-agent problem was developed by Harvard Business School Professor Michael Jensen and economist and management professor William H. Meckling. The principle-agent problem describes a conflict in priorities between a person or group and the representative authorized to make decisions on their behalf.
Table of Contents
Understanding the principle-agent problem
In a 1976 paper titled Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure, Jensen and Meckling proposed an ownership structure theory to avoid what they defined as the separation of ownership and control.
This separation occurs when the interests of the agent and the principle diverge. When one person (the agent) is allowed to make decisions on behalf of another person (the principle), a conflict of interest can sometimes result. The agent may have more information than the principle, which means the principle cannot predict how the agent will act. As such, the agent tends to pursue their own goals instead of prioritizing the goals of the principle.
This scenario is often problematic for the principle, who typically retains ownership of assets and are liable for losses incurred despite delegating some degree of control and authority to the agent.
Agency costs in the principle-agent problem
Agency costs are incurred when the interests of the agent and the principle diverge and need to be resolved.
For example, a traveling sales executive may prefer to stay in expensive hotels or eat at fancy restaurants. In so doing, the individual is looking after their own interests while adding little value to the company or its shareholders.
The agency cost of this behavior then decreases the financial performance of the company. In addition to paying high expense bills, the company may also incur costs from hiring an external auditor to analyze its financialstatements. It may also be forced to terminate the employee in question and engage in an expensive and exhaustive recruitment process.
To that end, there are two categories of agency costs:
Costs incurred by the principle (shareholder) to prevent the agent (management team) from prioritizing their needs over shareholder interests.
Costs incurred by the principle (company) when the agent (management team) uses company resources for their own benefit.
How can the principle-agent problem be addressed?
The solution to the principle-agent problem revolves around aligning the interests of both parties.
Here is how this might be achieved:
Contract design– or the creation of a contract framework between the principle and the agent. This ensures potential sources of information asymmetry are clearly defined, meaning the agent is less likely to act in a way that furthers their own interests. Furthermore, the contract should stipulate how the actions of the agent will be monitored to increase compliance.
Performance evaluation and compensation – while monitoring is important, performance compensation provides extra motivation for the agent to act in a way that aligns with the principle’s interests. Performance should be evaluated subjectively because this is a more flexible and balanced method for complex tasks or arrangements. Depending on the situation, the principle may offer the agent deferred compensation, stock options, or profit-sharing.
Key takeaways:
The principle-agent problem describes a conflict in priorities between a person or group and the representative authorized to make decisions on their behalf. It was first introduced by Michael Jensen and William H. Meckling in 1976.
The principle-agent problem states that when the interests of the agent and principle diverge, agency costs are incurred. These costs result when the principle tries to prevent the agent from prioritizing their needs over the needs of shareholders. Costs are also incurred when an agent misuses company funds for their own benefit without adding value to the bottom line.
The principle-agent problem can be rectified by smart contract design. Contracts should identify potential sources of information asymmetry and include a plan for monitoring the actions of the agent. What’s more, the agent should be financially motivated to act in a way that benefits the principle.
Key Highlights
Introduction to the Principle-Agent Problem:
The Principle-Agent Problem was developed by Michael Jensen and William H. Meckling.
It addresses a conflict between a representative (agent) making decisions on behalf of another person or group (principal).
Understanding the Problem:
The problem arises when the interests of the agent and the principal diverge.
The agent, who makes decisions, may prioritize personal goals over those of the principal.
Information asymmetry, where the agent possesses more information than the principal, can lead to this conflict.
Agency Costs:
Agency costs emerge when the agent’s behavior deviates from the principal’s interests.
Examples include agents incurring excessive expenses without contributing value or misusing company resources.
These costs negatively impact the company’s financial performance and may lead to additional expenses, such as hiring auditors or recruitment.
Addressing the Problem:
Alignment of interests is key to solving the principle-agent problem.
Smart contract design is crucial, defining roles and monitoring mechanisms to mitigate information asymmetry.
Performance evaluation and compensation motivate agents to act in the principal’s interests.
Subjective performance evaluation provides flexibility for complex tasks, and compensation may involve deferred payments, stock options, or profit-sharing.
Key Takeaways:
The Principle-Agent Problem involves conflicts between agents making decisions and principals on whose behalf they act.
Divergent interests between the two parties lead to agency costs.
Solutions involve well-designed contracts, monitoring mechanisms, and performance-based compensation to align agent and principal interests.
The idea of a market economy first came from classical economists, including David Ricardo, Jean-Baptiste Say, and Adam Smith. All three of these economists were advocates for a free market. They argued that the “invisible hand” of market incentives and profit motives were more efficient in guiding economic decisions to prosperity than strict government planning.
Positive economics is concerned with describing and explaining economic phenomena; it is based on facts and empirical evidence. Normative economics, on the other hand, is concerned with making judgments about what “should be” done. It contains value judgments and recommendations about how the economy should be.
When there is an increased price of goods and services over a long period, it is called inflation. In these times, currency shows less potential to buy products and services. Thus, general prices of goods and services increase. Consequently, decreases in the purchasing power of currency is called inflation.
Asymmetric information as a concept has probably existed for thousands of years, but it became mainstream in 2001 after Michael Spence, George Akerlof, and Joseph Stiglitz won the Nobel Prize in Economics for their work on information asymmetry in capital markets. Asymmetric information, otherwise known as information asymmetry, occurs when one party in a business transaction has access to more information than the other party.
Autarky comes from the Greek words autos (self)and arkein (to suffice) and in essence, describes a general state of self-sufficiency. However, the term is most commonly used to describe the economic system of a nation that can operate without support from the economic systems of other nations. Autarky, therefore, is an economic system characterized by self-sufficiency and limited trade with international partners.
Creative destruction was first described by Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter in 1942, who suggested that capital was never stationary and constantly evolving. To describe this process, Schumpeter defined creative destruction as the “process of industrial mutation that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one.” Therefore, creative destruction is the replacing of long-standing practices or procedures with more innovative, disruptive practices in capitalist markets.
Happiness economics seeks to relate economic decisions to wider measures of individual welfare than traditional measures which focus on income and wealth. Happiness economics, therefore, is the formal study of the relationship between individual satisfaction, employment, and wealth.
An oligopsony is a market form characterized by the presence of only a small number of buyers. These buyers have market power and can lower the price of a good or service because of a lack of competition. In other words, the seller loses its bargaining power because it is unable to find a buyer outside of the oligopsony that is willing to pay a better price.
The term “animal spirits” is derived from the Latin spiritus animalis, loosely translated as “the breath that awakens the human mind”. As far back as 300 B.C., animal spirits were used to explain psychological phenomena such as hysterias and manias. Animal spirits also appeared in literature where they exemplified qualities such as exuberance, gaiety, and courage. Thus, the term “animal spirits” is used to describe how people arrive at financial decisions during periods of economic stress or uncertainty.
State capitalism is an economic system where business and commercial activity is controlled by the state through state-owned enterprises. In a state capitalist environment, the government is the principal actor. It takes an active role in the formation, regulation, and subsidization of businesses to divert capital to state-appointed bureaucrats. In effect, the government uses capital to further its political ambitions or strengthen its leverage on the international stage.
The boom and bust cycle describes the alternating periods of economic growth and decline common in many capitalist economies. The boom and bust cycle is a phrase used to describe the fluctuations in an economy in which there is persistent expansion and contraction. Expansion is associated with prosperity, while the contraction is associated with either a recession or a depression.
The paradox of thrift was popularised by British economist John Maynard Keynes and is a central component of Keynesian economics. Proponents of Keynesian economics believe the proper response to a recession is more spending, more risk-taking, and less saving. They also believe that spending, otherwise known as consumption, drives economic growth. The paradox of thrift, therefore, is an economic theory arguing that personal savings are a net drag on the economy during a recession.
In simplistic terms, the circular flow model describes the mutually beneficial exchange of money between the two most vital parts of an economy: households, firms and how money moves between them. The circular flow model describes money as it moves through various aspects of society in a cyclical process.
Trade deficits occur when a country’s imports outweigh its exports over a specific period. Experts also refer to this as a negative balance of trade. Most of the time, trade balances are calculated based on a variety of different categories.
A market type is a way a given group of consumers and producers interact, based on the context determined by the readiness of consumers to understand the product, the complexity of the product; how big is the existing market and how much it can potentially expand in the future.
Rational choice theory states that an individual uses rational calculations to make rational choices that are most in line with their personal preferences. Rational choice theory refers to a set of guidelines that explain economic and social behavior. The theory has two underlying assumptions, which are completeness (individuals have access to a set of alternatives among they can equally choose) and transitivity.
The peer-to-peer (P2P) economy is one where buyers and sellers interact directly without the need for an intermediary third party or other business. The peer-to-peer economy is a business model where two individuals buy and sell products and services directly. In a peer-to-peer company, the seller has the ability to create the product or offer the service themselves.
The term “knowledge economy” was first coined in the 1960s by Peter Drucker. The management consultant used the term to describe a shift from traditional economies, where there was a reliance on unskilled labor and primary production, to economies reliant on service industries and jobs requiring more thinking and data analysis. The knowledge economy is a system of consumption and production based on knowledge-intensive activities that contribute to scientific and technical innovation.
In a command economy, the government controls the economy through various commands, laws, and national goals which are used to coordinate complex social and economic systems. In other words, a social or political hierarchy determines what is produced, how it is produced, and how it is distributed. Therefore, the command economy is one in which the government controls all major aspects of the economy and economic production.
How do you protect your rights as a worker? Who is there to help defend you against unfair and unjust work conditions? Both of these questions have an answer, and it’s a solution that many are familiar with. The answer is a labor union. From construction to teaching, there are labor unions out there for just about any field of work.
The bottom of the pyramid is a term describing the largest and poorest global socio-economic group. Franklin D. Roosevelt first used the bottom of the pyramid (BOP) in a 1932 public address during the Great Depression. Roosevelt noted that – when talking about the ‘forgotten man:’ “these unhappy times call for the building of plans that rest upon the forgotten, the unorganized but the indispensable units of economic power.. that build from the bottom up and not from the top down, that put their faith once more in the forgotten man at the bottom of the economic pyramid.”
Glocalization is a portmanteau of the words “globalization” and “localization.” It is a concept that describes a globally developed and distributed product or service that is also adjusted to be suitable for sale in the local market. With the rise of the digital economy, brands now can go global by building a local footprint.
Market fragmentation is most commonly seen in growing markets, which fragment and break away from the parent market to become self-sustaining markets with different products and services. Market fragmentation is a concept suggesting that all markets are diverse and fragment into distinct customer groups over time.
The L-shaped recovery refers to an economy that declines steeply and then flatlines with weak or no growth. On a graph plotting GDP against time, this precipitous fall combined with a long period of stagnation looks like the letter “L”. The L-shaped recovery is sometimes called an L-shaped recession because the economy does not return to trend line growth. The L-shaped recovery, therefore, is a recession shape used by economists to describe different types of recessions and their subsequent recoveries. In an L-shaped recovery, the economy is characterized by a severe recession with high unemployment and near-zero economic growth.
Comparative advantage was first described by political economist David Ricardo in his book Principles of Political Economy and Taxation. Ricardo used his theory to argue against Great Britain’s protectionist laws which restricted the import of wheat from 1815 to 1846. Comparative advantage occurs when a country can produce a good or service for a lower opportunity cost than another country.
The Easterlin paradox was first described by then professor of economics at the University of Pennsylvania Richard Easterlin. In the 1970s, Easterlin found that despite the American economy experiencing growth over the previous few decades, the average level of happiness seen in American citizens remained the same. He called this the Easterlin paradox, where income and happiness correlate with each other until a certain point is reached after at least ten years or so. After this point, income and happiness levels are not significantly related. The Easterlin paradox states that happiness is positively correlated with income, but only to a certain extent.
In Economics, Economies of Scale is a theory for which, as companies grow, they gain cost advantages. More precisely, companies manage to benefit from these cost advantages as they grow, due to increased efficiency in production. Thus, as companies scale and increase production, a subsequent decrease in the costs associated with it will help the organizationscale further.
In Economics, a Diseconomy of Scale happens when a company has grown so large that its costs per unit will start to increase. Thus, losing the benefits of scale. That can happen due to several factors arising as a company scales. From coordination issues to management inefficiencies and lack of proper communication flows.
An economy of scope means that the production of one good reduces the cost of producing some other related good. This means the unit cost to produce a product will decline as the variety of manufactured products increases. Importantly, the manufactured products must be related in some way.
Price sensitivity can be explained using the price elasticity of demand, a concept in economics that measures the variation in product demand as the price of the product itself varies. In consumer behavior, price sensitivity describes and measures fluctuations in product demand as the price of that product changes.
Gennaro is the creator of FourWeekMBA, which reached about four million business people, comprising C-level executives, investors, analysts, product managers, and aspiring digital entrepreneurs in 2022 alone | He is also Director of Sales for a high-tech scaleup in the AI Industry | In 2012, Gennaro earned an International MBA with emphasis on Corporate Finance and Business Strategy.
