IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bng/wpaper/13013.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Poverty of Agency Theory and Poverty of Managerial Practice: The Royal Bank of Scotland Fiasco

Author

Listed:
  • Shanti Chakravarty

    (Bangor University, UK)

  • Anthony Dobbins

    (Bangor University, UK)

  • Lynn Hodgkinson

    (l.hodgkinson@bangor.ac.uk)

Abstract

The divergence of ownership and management in modern capitalism gave rise to agency theory as a framework for analysing corporate governance. There is now an emerging body of literature questioning the wisdom of the focus on agency theory in business schools. We argue that the poverty of agency theory is compounded by the culture of deference to authority entailed in reliance on technocratic advice. By reference to the concept of hegemony, we conjecture that hegemonic pressures have produced a homogeneous managerial class with similar preference for maximizing short-term profit. The argument is illustrated empirically by the case example of the collapse of The Royal Bank of Scotland, where shareholder representatives followed management advice in pursuing a course of action that led to the demise of the bank.

Suggested Citation

  • Shanti Chakravarty & Anthony Dobbins & Lynn Hodgkinson, 2013. "Poverty of Agency Theory and Poverty of Managerial Practice: The Royal Bank of Scotland Fiasco," Working Papers 13013, Bangor Business School, Prifysgol Bangor University (Cymru / Wales).
  • Handle: RePEc:bng:wpaper:13013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.bangor.ac.uk/business/research/documents/BBSWP13013.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Locke, Robert, 2009. "Managerialism and the Demise of the Big Three," MPRA Paper 18996, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    3. Peter Skott, 2010. "The Great Detour," UMASS Amherst Economics Working Papers 2010-07, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Economics.
    4. Michael C. Jensen & Kevin J. Murphy, 2010. "CEO Incentives—It's Not How Much You Pay, But How," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 22(1), pages 64-76, January.
    5. Jensen, Michael C. & Ruback, Richard S., 1983. "The market for corporate control : The scientific evidence," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1-4), pages 5-50, April.
    6. Scherer, F M, 1988. "Corporate Takeovers: The Efficiency Arguments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 69-82, Winter.
    7. Shorey Peterson, 1965. "Corporate Control and Capitalism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 79(1), pages 1-24.
    8. Leech, Dennis, 2002. "Shareholder Voting Power and Ownership Control of Companies," Economic Research Papers 269335, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    9. Olivier Blanchard, 2000. "What Do We Know about Macroeconomics that Fisher and Wicksell Did Not?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(4), pages 1375-1409.
    10. Chakravarty, S. P., 1993. "Why are bosses incompetent?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 293-302, May.
    11. Tett, G., 2010. "Silos and silences. Why so few people spotted the problems in complex credit and what that implies for the future," Financial Stability Review, Banque de France, issue 14, pages 121-129, July.
    12. Engelen, Ewald & Erturk, Ismail & Froud, Julie & Johal, Sukhdev & Leaver, Adam & Moran, Mick & Nilsson, Adriana & Williams, Karel, 2011. "After the Great Complacence: Financial Crisis and the Politics of Reform," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199589081.
    13. Dennis Leech, 2002. "Shareholder Voting Power and Ownership Control of Companies," Homo Oeconomicus, Institute of SocioEconomics, vol. 19, pages 345-371.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. A. Cole, Rebel & Mehran, Hamid, 1998. "The effect of changes in ownership structure on performance: Evidence from the thrift industry," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 291-317, December.
    2. Hamadi, Malika & Heinen, Andréas, 2015. "Firm performance when ownership is very concentrated: Evidence from a semiparametric panel," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 172-194.
    3. Mike Burkart & Samuel Lee, 2008. "One Share - One Vote: the Theory," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 12(1), pages 1-49.
    4. Renneboog, L.D.R. & Trojanowski, G., 2005. "Patterns in Payout Policy and Payout Channel Choice of UK Firms in the 1990s," Discussion Paper 2005-002, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.
    5. Jeffrey M. Lacker & John A. Weinberg, 1990. "Takeovers and stock price volatility," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, vol. 76(Mar), pages 29-44.
    6. Renneboog, L.D.R. & Trojanowski, G., 2005. "Control Structures and Payout Policy," Other publications TiSEM a82281ef-f247-479f-a0e3-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Martynova, M., 2006. "The market for corporate control and corporate governance regulation in Europe," Other publications TiSEM 8651e281-4914-41f2-ac14-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Manry, David & Stangeland, David, 2003. "The United Shareholders Association Shareholder 1000 and firm performance," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 353-375, June.
    9. T. Biebuyck & Ariane Chapelle & Ariane Szafarz, 2002. "Les leviers de contrôle des actionnaires majoritaires," Working Papers CEB 03-001.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    10. Jorge Farinha & Francisco Miranda, 2003. "Run-up, toeholds, and agency effects in mergers and acquisitions: evidence from an emerging market," CEF.UP Working Papers 0311, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    11. Gérard Charreaux, 2004. "Michael Jensen-la théorie positive de l’agence et ses applications à l’architecture et à la gouvernance des organisations," Working Papers CREGO 1041203, Université de Bourgogne - CREGO EA7317 Centre de recherches en gestion des organisations.
    12. Szilagyi, P.G., 2007. "Corporate governance and the agency costs of debt and outside equity," Other publications TiSEM 9520d40a-224f-43a8-9bf9-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Wenxia Ge & Jeong-Bon Kim, 2014. "Boards, takeover protection, and real earnings management," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 651-682, November.
    14. Davis, E. Philip, 2002. "Institutional investors, corporate governance and the performance of the corporate sector," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 203-229, September.
    15. Fu, Fangjian & Lin, Leming & Officer, Micah S., 2013. "Acquisitions driven by stock overvaluation: Are they good deals?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 24-39.
    16. Renneboog, L.D.R. & Simons, T., 2005. "Public-to-Private Transactions : LBOs, MBOs, MBIs and IBOs," Other publications TiSEM 3b76799c-591c-4d22-b126-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Sheikh, Shahbaz, 2018. "The impact of market competition on the relation between CEO power and firm innovation," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 36-50.
    18. Wu, Jianfeng & Tu, Rungting, 2007. "CEO stock option pay and R&D spending: a behavioral agency explanation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(5), pages 482-492, May.
    19. Matthias Kiefer & Edward Jones & Andrew Adams, 2016. "Principals, Agents and Incomplete Contracts: Are Surrender of Control and Renegotiation the Solution?," CFI Discussion Papers 1603, Centre for Finance and Investment, Heriot Watt University.
    20. Manhwa Wu & Paoyu Huang & Yensen Ni, 2020. "The Impact of Institutional Shareholdings on Price Limits," Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, Springer;Japanese Association of Financial Economics and Engineering, vol. 27(3), pages 343-361, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agency theory; Bank collapse; Corporate governance; Hegemony; Management and ownership; Royal Bank of Scotland; Technocracy.;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bng:wpaper:13013. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Alan Thomas (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sabanuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.