Evaluation of Agency Theory

A main strength of agency theory is that 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.  Moral strain was also evident in Milgram’s study in the way that participants displayed nervousness and tension.  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.  There are also studies from different cultures supporting agency theory such as Meeus and Raajimaker who found that Dutch participants would harass a job applicant because they were told to do so as part of a research study.

The theory also offers a credible explanation for the actions of war criminals who clain 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’.  Similarly 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 – again arguing that they were just doing their jobs.

Following on from this it is possible that the explanations given agency theory could be used to reduce the dangers of people becoming agentic to avoid destructive obedience in the future.  For example as part of training in hierarchical organisations people could be trained to take responsibility for their own actions.  On the other hand, knowledge of agency theory could have negative social implications in that leaders could be trained to manipulate people into an agentic state.

A possible weakness of agency theory is that it does ignore dispositional reasons, such as personality, for why certain people may be more likely to be obedient.  For example, Adorno proposed the theory of authoritarian personality arguing that some people, because of the way they have been socialised will be more likely to be obedient to those in authority.  Similarly the situational approach proposed by 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.