Download 2015 agency theory strengths and weaknesses

Spot the strengths and weaknesses of Agency Theory
Individuals may feel that they lack
responsibility for the acts they commit as
they have passed from an Autonomous state
to an Agentic state
There is considerable research supporting
this theory. For example Milgram’s own
research found that when ordinary people
were put into a high pressure situation with
an authority figure they would obey orders to
shock another person and two thirds would
continue to obey these orders right up to the
end of the study.
There have been numerous studies conducted from different
cultures. For example,
Kilham and Mann (1974) found…
Agency Theory can be seen to
have wider ethical implications
because it seems to remove
personal responsibility from
those who commit atrocities
under pressure, thus offering
excuses to people who follow
authority even when they know it
is morally wrong to do so.
There are studies, such as Milgram where not all
participants obeyed, suggesting….
Agency Theory can explain the behaviour of
the prison guards at the Abu Ghraib prison in
Iraq when the tortured and humiliated
prisoners of war.
A clear hierarchy often provides the backdrop for an
Agentic Shift meaning as social beings we should all
obey.
Mantell (1971) found….
meaning….
Agency Theory does ignore dispositional reasons, such as
personality, for why certain people may be more likely to be
obedient
Strengths &
Weaknesses
Knowledge of Agency Theory could have
negative social implications in that leaders
could be trained to manipulate people into an
Agentic state.
Moral Strain is present when participants
move from the Autonomous state to the
Agentic State, meaning….
Support also comes from
true to life situations such
as Hofling’s study which
showed that nurses at
work in a hospital would
follow the orders of a
doctor even if it meant
breaking hospital rules and
overdosing a patient.
The theory also offers a credible explanation for
the actions of war criminals who claim that they
were ‘only following orders’ and successfully
explains other horrendous acts such as the Mai
Lai massacre where US troops massacred a
village in Vietnam because they had orders to
‘clear the area’.
Blass and Schmitt (2001) supports this explanation as
they found that legitimate authority was the cause of
obedience