What Is The Principle-Agent Problem? Principle-agent Problem In A Nutshell

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.

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 financial statements. 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:

  1. Costs incurred by the principle (shareholder) to prevent the agent (management team) from prioritizing their needs over shareholder interests.
  2. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.

Connected Decision-Making Frameworks

Cynefin Framework

The Cynefin Framework gives context to decision making and problem-solving by providing context and guiding an appropriate response. The five domains of the Cynefin Framework comprise obvious, complicated, complex, chaotic domains and disorder if a domain has not been determined at all.

SWOT Analysis

A SWOT Analysis is a framework used for evaluating the business’s Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. It can aid in identifying the problematic areas of your business so that you can maximize your opportunities. It will also alert you to the challenges your organization might face in the future.

Personal SWOT Analysis

The SWOT analysis is commonly used as a strategic planning tool in business. However, it is also well suited for personal use in addressing a specific goal or problem. A personal SWOT analysis helps individuals identify their strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.

Pareto Analysis

The Pareto Analysis is a statistical analysis used in business decision making that identifies a certain number of input factors that have the greatest impact on income. It is based on the similarly named Pareto Principle, which states that 80% of the effect of something can be attributed to just 20% of the drivers.

Failure Mode And Effects Analysis

A failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a structured approach to identifying design failures in a product or process. Developed in the 1950s, the failure mode and effects analysis is one the earliest methodologies of its kind. It enables organizations to anticipate a range of potential failures during the design stage.

Blindspot Analysis

A Blindspot Analysis is a means of unearthing incorrect or outdated assumptions that can harm decision making in an organization. The term “blindspot analysis” was first coined by American economist Michael Porter. Porter argued that in business, outdated ideas or strategies had the potential to stifle modern ideas and prevent them from succeeding. Furthermore, decisions a business thought were made with care caused projects to fail because major factors had not been duly considered.

Comparable Company Analysis

A comparable company analysis is a process that enables the identification of similar organizations to be used as a comparison to understand the business and financial performance of the target company. To find comparables you can look at two key profiles: the business and financial profile. From the comparable company analysis it is possible to understand the competitive landscape of the target organization.

Cost-Benefit Analysis

A cost-benefit analysis is a process a business can use to analyze decisions according to the costs associated with making that decision. For a cost analysis to be effective it’s important to articulate the project in the simplest terms possible, identify the costs, determine the benefits of project implementation, assess the alternatives.

Agile Business Analysis

Agile Business Analysis (AgileBA) is certification in the form of guidance and training for business analysts seeking to work in agile environments. To support this shift, AgileBA also helps the business analyst relate Agile projects to a wider organizational mission or strategy. To ensure that analysts have the necessary skills and expertise, AgileBA certification was developed.

SOAR Analysis

A SOAR analysis is a technique that helps businesses at a strategic planning level to: Focus on what they are doing right. Determine which skills could be enhanced. Understand the desires and motivations of their stakeholders.

STEEPLE Analysis

The STEEPLE analysis is a variation of the STEEP analysis. Where the step analysis comprises socio-cultural, technological, economic, environmental/ecological, and political factors as the base of the analysis. The STEEPLE analysis adds other two factors such as Legal and Ethical.

Pestel Analysis

The PESTEL analysis is a framework that can help marketers assess whether macro-economic factors are affecting an organization. This is a critical step that helps organizations identify potential threats and weaknesses that can be used in other frameworks such as SWOT or to gain a broader and better understanding of the overall marketing environment.

DESTEP Analysis

A DESTEP analysis is a framework used by businesses to understand their external environment and the issues which may impact them. The DESTEP analysis is an extension of the popular PEST analysis created by Harvard Business School professor Francis J. Aguilar. The DESTEP analysis groups external factors into six categories: demographic, economic, socio-cultural, technological, ecological, and political.

Paired Comparison Analysis

A paired comparison analysis is used to rate or rank options where evaluation criteria are subjective by nature. The analysis is particularly useful when there is a lack of clear priorities or objective data to base decisions on. A paired comparison analysis evaluates a range of options by comparing them against each other.

Related Strategy Concepts: Go-To-Market StrategyMarketing StrategyBusiness ModelsTech Business ModelsJobs-To-Be DoneDesign ThinkingLean Startup CanvasValue ChainValue Proposition CanvasBalanced ScorecardBusiness Model CanvasSWOT AnalysisGrowth HackingBundlingUnbundlingBootstrappingVenture CapitalPorter’s Five ForcesPorter’s Generic StrategiesPorter’s Five ForcesPESTEL AnalysisSWOTPorter’s Diamond ModelAnsoffTechnology Adoption CurveTOWSSOARBalanced ScorecardOKRAgile MethodologyValue PropositionVTDF FrameworkBCG MatrixGE McKinsey MatrixKotter’s 8-Step Change Model.

Main Free Guides:

About The Author

Scroll to Top