EXPLAINING FIRM CAPITAL STRUCTURE: THE ROLE OF AGENCY THEORY VS. TRANSACTION COST ECONOMICS

Author(s):  
RAHUL KOCHHAR
2019 ◽  
pp. 22-43
Author(s):  
John Child ◽  
David Faulkner ◽  
Stephen Tallman ◽  
Linda Hsieh

Chapter 2 addresses cooperation from economic perspectives, namely market-power theory, transaction cost economics, agency theory, resource-based theory, transaction value theory, dynamic capabilities theory, real-options theory, and increasing-returns theory. Cooperation can engender market power. Transaction cost economics views cooperation and alliances as potentially cost-reducing methods of organizing business transactions. Agency theory is concerned with the behavior of alliance partners. Both are “agents” of the other and as such systems must be set up to reduce the risk of self-serving opportunism. The resource-based perspective suggests that partners set up alliances to tap into each other’s specialized resources and strategic assets. Transaction value theory focuses on joint value maximization for the collaborative transaction. Alliances can be considered a real option to invest under conditions of uncertainty. Increasing returns are the norm in knowledge-based industries, and the formation of a network of alliances enables companies to operate as significant players in such markets.


Author(s):  
Jongwook Kim

How do firms organize economic transactions? This question can be thought of as a question of firm boundaries or as a decision about a firm’s scope, encompassing the choice along a continuum of governance structures, including spot markets, short-term contracts, long-term contracts, franchising, licensing, joint ventures, and hierarchy (integration). Although there is no unified theory of vertical integration, transaction cost economics, agency theory, and more recently property rights theory have been influential not only in analyzing make-or-buy decisions but also in understanding “hybrid forms” or inter-firm alliances, such as technology licensing contracts, equity alliances, joint ventures, and the like. Before Coase’s work became widely known, whatever theoretical underpinnings there were of vertical integration were provided by applications of neoclassical theory. Here, the firm was viewed as a production function that utilized the most technologically efficient way to convert input into output. In particular, neoclassical theory was concerned primarily with market power and the distortions that it created in markets for inputs or outputs as the main driver of vertical integration. Hence, the boundaries of the firm—that is, where to draw the line between transactions that occur within the firm and those outside the firm—were irrelevant within this framework. It was Coase’s question “Why is there any organization?” that first suggested that price mechanisms in the market and managerial coordination within firms were alternative governance mechanisms. That is, the choice between these alternative mechanisms was driven by a comparative analysis of the costs of implementing either mechanism. Oliver Williamson built on Coase to provide the theoretical foundations for vertical integration by joining uncertainty and small numbers with opportunism in defining exchange hazards, and consequently established comparative analysis of alternative governance forms as the way to analyze vertical integration. More recently, property rights theory brought attention to ownership of key assets as a way to distinguish between the governance of internal organizations and those of market transactions, where ownership confers the authority to determine how these assets will be utilized. And lastly, agency theory also provides important building blocks for understanding contractual choice by placing the emphasis on the different incentives that vary with different contractual arrangements between a principal and its agent. Transaction cost economics, property rights theory, and agency cost theory complement one another well in explaining vertical integration in terms of alternative governance forms in a world of asymmetric information, bounded rationality, and opportunism. These theories have also been utilized in analyzing “hybrid” organizational forms, in particular strategic alliances and joint ventures. Together, vertical integration and alliances account for a significant part of corporate strategy decisions, and more research on the theoretical foundations as well as novel ways to apply these theories in empirical analyses will be productive avenues for a better understanding of firm behavior.


2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 189
Author(s):  
Sarah A. Hinchliffe

Transaction cost economics and contingency research in managerial accounting currently are approached largely as two formally distinct fields of study.  This brief review paper aims to reconcile the literature on both subjects in so far as possible, by examining broadly their underlying assumptions and reported conclusions with the view towards identifying differences and similarities.  An important integration is achieved by showing that transaction cost economics and the ‘decision influencing’ role of management accounting concentrate essentially on different aspects to a shared concern with organisational control.  However, it additionally is revealed that transaction cost economics does not account adequately for the existence of management accounting’s ‘decision facilitating’ function, and that in comparison to the former the latter’s relatively stronger empirical focus is more suited towards finding potential solutions to the actual control problems which confront real organisations.  The paper concludes by observing that both paradigms presently to a large extent do not pay attention to a particular principal-agent situation in which control may need to be exercised.


Author(s):  
David A Spencer

Abstract The performative power of mainstream economic theories (notably agency theory and transaction cost economics) has been criticised by researchers within management studies. The latter blame these theories for creating ‘bad’ management in real-world organisations and call for their removal from business schools. This paper questions this line of criticism. It argues that mainstream economic theories have condoned more than created ‘bad’ management. It also questions whether ‘bad’ management can be negated by ousting these theories from business schools. Rather it is argued that ‘bad’ management has deep roots within organisations—specifically, it reflects on how organisations are run by and in the interests of capital owners. The possibilities for securing comparatively enlightened or ‘good’ forms of management are seen as necessarily limited by capitalist ownership relations. The paper argues that the transformation of management will require wider reforms in—and importantly beyond—business schools.


2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrienne Heritier ◽  
Anna K. Mueller-Debus ◽  
Christian R. Thauer

With increasing fragmentation of worldwide production chains and the corresponding contracting relations between companies, the “firm as an inspector” has become a frequent phenomenon. Buyer firms deploy supervising activities over their suppliers' products and production processes in order to ensure their compliance with regulatory standards, thereby taking on tasks commonly performed by public authorities. Why would a firm engage in such activities? In this article we will analyze the conditions under which firms play the role of an inspector vis-à-vis their sub-contractor firms to guarantee compliance with quality and environmental regulations. We develop a theoretical argument based on transaction cost economics and institutionalism to offer hypothetical answers to this question and provide an empirical assessment of our hypotheses.


Author(s):  
Ron Harris

This chapter surveys institutional and organizational theories that are used for studying the statics and dynamics of the development of institutions in interaction with their environment. It outlines the theoretical frameworks on the development of institutions and particularly of trade organizations. The chapter also discusses theories that are useful for static analysis. It examines theories that can be deployed for the dynamic development of institutions within their environment and assert that the theoretical framework for the study of institutional migration is lacking. The chapter talks about the proliferation of academic research activity over the last half a century in areas including transaction-cost economics, theories of the firm, property-rights theories, and contract and agency theory.


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sven Modell

ABSTRACT This paper reviews emerging attempts to bridge the gap between economics- and sociology-based research on management accounting and discusses how such research may be advanced. Particular attention is paid to research combining insights from various economic theories such as agency theory and transaction cost economics, and institutional theory. This body of research has made important contributions by opening up a discussion of how different kinds of institutions constrain as well as enable economic agency. However, I argue that the two dominant approaches in this area of research still display strong, paradigmatic legacies of economics- and sociology-based research, respectively, and that they have not yet produced a unified, socio-economic perspective on management accounting. I advance a third research approach, rooted in critical realism, that transcends the paradigmatic constraints of these approaches. I discuss the paradigmatic premises of this approach and how it may be applied in empirical research.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document