IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rsocec/v74y2016i4p349-368.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Agency theory and social interactions at work

Author

Listed:
  • Helena Lopes

Abstract

The main aim of this paper is to show that even when integrating the findings of behavioral economics, agency theory’s conception of interactions at work does not actually account for cooperative behavior. The paper draws on the distinction between the concepts of individual and person to critically examine this conception and show that, while work is mostly organized on the assumption that workers are self-interested individuals, management rhetoric addresses workers as persons in an attempt to prompt their cooperation and personal commitment. This managerial paradox may partly be due to the prevalent influence of agency theory’s prescriptions and has been contributing to a severe deterioration of the quality of working life. But it also indicates that agency theory has to confront serious theoretical and prescriptive dilemmas.

Suggested Citation

  • Helena Lopes, 2016. "Agency theory and social interactions at work," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 74(4), pages 349-368, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rsocec:v:74:y:2016:i:4:p:349-368
    DOI: 10.1080/00346764.2016.1171381
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00346764.2016.1171381
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00346764.2016.1171381?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dur, Robert & Non, Arjan & Roelfsema, Hein, 2010. "Reciprocity and incentive pay in the workplace," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 676-686, August.
    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. Robert (A.J.) Dur & Ola Kvaloy & Anja Schottner, 2018. "Non-Competitive Wage-Setting as a Cause of Unfriendly and Inefficient Leadership," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 18-094/VII, Tinbergen Institute.
    2. Fuchs, Benjamin, 2016. "The effect of teenage employment on character skills, expectations and occupational choice strategies," Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 14-2016, University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
    3. von Siemens, Ferdinand A., 2013. "Intention-based reciprocity and the hidden costs of control," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 55-65.
    4. Marina Halac & Andrea Prat, 2016. "Managerial Attention and Worker Performance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(10), pages 3104-3132, October.
    5. Sebald, Alexander & Walzl, Markus, 2015. "Optimal contracts based on subjective performance evaluations and reciprocity," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 62-76.
    6. Alessandro De Chiara & Ester Manna, 2019. "Delegation with a Reciprocal Agent," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(3), pages 651-695.
    7. Non, Arjan, 2012. "Gift-exchange, incentives, and heterogeneous workers," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 319-336.
    8. Hattori, Keisuke & Yamada, Mai, 2023. "Closing the Psychological Distance: The Effect of Social Interactions on Team Performance," MPRA Paper 117042, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Robert Dur & Ola Kvaløy & Anja Schöttner, 2022. "Leadership Styles and Labor Market Conditions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 3150-3168, April.
    10. Erin L. Krupka & Stephen Leider & Ming Jiang, 2017. "A Meeting of the Minds: Informal Agreements and Social Norms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(6), pages 1708-1729, June.
    11. Monteiro, Natália P. & Straume, Odd Rune & Valente, Marieta, 2021. "When does remote electronic access (not) boost productivity? Longitudinal evidence from Portugal," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    12. Christiane Bradler & Robert Dur & Susanne Neckermann & Arjan Non, 2013. "Employee Recognition and Performance: A Field Experiment," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 13-038/VII, Tinbergen Institute.
    13. Fuchs, Benjamin, 2015. "The Effect of Teenage Employment on Character Skills and Occupational Choice Strategies," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 113030, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Thomas Cornelissen & John S. Heywood & Uwe Jirjahn, 2010. "Profit Sharing and Reciprocity: Theory and Survey Evidence," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 292, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    15. Almlund, Mathilde & Duckworth, Angela Lee & Heckman, James & Kautz, Tim, 2011. "Personality Psychology and Economics," Handbook of the Economics of Education, in: Erik Hanushek & Stephen Machin & Ludger Woessmann (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Education, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 1-181, Elsevier.
    16. Alita Nandi & Cheti Nicoletti, 2014. "Explaining personality pay gaps in the UK," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(26), pages 3131-3150, September.
    17. Vahé Nafilyan & Stefan Speckesser & Augustin de Coulon, 2020. "The long-term impact of improving non-cognitive skills of adolescents: Evidence from an English remediation programme," CVER Research Papers 028, Centre for Vocational Education Research.
    18. Dur, Robert & Non, Arjan & Roelfsema, Hein, 2010. "Reciprocity and incentive pay in the workplace," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 676-686, August.
    19. Matthias Fahn & Anne Schade & Katharina Schüßler, 2017. "What Drives Reciprocal Behavior? The Optimal Provision of Incentives over the Course of Careers," CESifo Working Paper Series 6635, CESifo.
    20. Dolan, Paul & Galizzi, Matteo M. & Navarro-Martinez, Daniel, 2015. "Paying people to eat or not to eat? Carryover effects of monetary incentives on eating behaviour," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 153-158.

    More about this item

    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:taf:rsocec:v:74:y:2016:i:4:p:349-368. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RRSE20 .

    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.