Year 2020, Volume 8 , Issue 4, Pages 1323 - 1329 2020-08-24

Agency Theory: A Review in Finance
Vekalet Teorisi: Finans Alanında Bir İnceleme

Hasan TEKİN [1] , Ali Yavuz POLAT [2]


Temsil ve risk paylaşımı problemleri büyük firmalarda sahiplik ve kontrolün ayrılmış olmasından dolayı, müvekkil (sahipler) ve vekil (yöneticiler) arasında çıkar çatışması olduğunda ortaya çıkmaktadır. Bu problemler temel olarak bilgi asimetrisinden kaynaklanmaktadır. Bu da müvekkil için vekalet maliyeti ortaya çıkarmaktadır. Halihazırdaki önemli teorilerden biri olan Vekil Teorisi vekalet ilişkilerindeki maliyetleri minimize etmeye odaklanmaktadır. Bu çalışma müvekkil-vekil ilişkilerini daha iyi anlamak için, kurumsal finans alanındaki hissedar-yönetici ve tahvil sahibi-hissedar ilişkilerine odaklanarak, müvekkil-vekil ilişkilerini kritik bir şekilde değerlendirmektedir.
The problems of agency and risk sharing arise due to the separation of ownership and control of a large firm, when conflicts of interest exist between principals (owners) and agents (managers). The main source of these problems is asymmetric information, which implies an agency cost for the principal. Agency theory, which is still one of the fundamental theories in corporate finance, focuses on minimizing costs in agency relations. This study critically evaluates the principal-agent relations, focusing on the interaction between the shareholder-manager and bondholder-shareholder in corporate finance.
  • Akerlof, G. A. (1970). The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(3), 488-500.
  • Arrow, K. J. (1971). Insurance, Risk and Resource Allocation. Essays in the Theory of Risk Bearing, 134-143.
  • Bebchuk , L., Cohen, A., & Spamann, H. (2010). The Wages of Failure: Executive Compensation at Bear Stearns and Lehman 2000-2008. Yale Journal on Regulation, 27, 257-282.
  • Berle, A. A., & Means, G. C. (1932). The Modern Corporation and Private Property. New York: MacMillan.
  • Berzins, J., Bøhren, Ø., & Stacescu, B. (2018). Shareholder Conflicts and Dividends. Review of Finance, 22(5), 1807-1840.
  • Bhagat, S., & Bolton, B. J. (2013). Bank Executive Compensation and Capital Requirements Reform. SSRN Working Paper Series, No: 1781318.
  • Bolton, P., Mehran, H., & Shapiro, J. (2015). Executive Compensation and Risk Taking. Review of Finance, rfu049.
  • Booth, L., Aivazian, V., Demirguc-Kunt, A., & Maksimovic, V. (2001). Capital Structures in Developing Countries. The Journal of Finance, 56(1), 87-130.
  • Brockman, P., Martin, X., & Unlu, E. (2010). Executive Compensation and the Maturity Structure of Corporate Debt. The Journal of Finance, 65(3), 1123-1161.
  • Buck, T., Bruce, A., Main, B. G., & Udueni, H. (2003). Long Term Incentive Plans, Executive Pay and UK Company Performance. Journal of Management Studies, 40(7), 1709-1727.
  • Chen, J., Hill, P., & Ozkan, N. (2014). Financial Distress Risk, Executive Compensation and the Executive Labour Market. SSRN Working Paper Series, No: 2580561.
  • Copeland, T. E., Weston, J. F., & Shastri, K. (2005). Financial Theory and Capital Policy. 4th edn. USA: Pearson Education.
  • Cuevas Rodríguez, G., Gomez Mejia, L. R., & Wiseman, R. M. (2012). Has Agency Theory Run Its Course? Making the Theory more Flexible to Inform the Management of Reward Systems. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 20(6), 526-546.
  • Damodaran, A. (2011). Applied Corporate Finance. 3rd edn. USA: John Wiley & Sons.
  • DeYoung, R., Peng, E. Y., & Yan, M. (2013). Executive compensation and business policy choices at US commercial banks. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 48(01), 165-196.
  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57-74.
  • Fahlenbrach, R., & Stulz, R. M. (2011). Bank CEO Incentives and the Credit Crisis. Journal of Financial Economics, 99(1), 11-26.
  • Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Agency Problems and Residual Claims. Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 327-349.
  • Graham, J. R., Li, S., & Qiu, J. (2012). Managerial Attributes and Executive Compensation. Review of Financial Studies, 25(1), 144-186.
  • Harris, M., & Raviv, A. (1978). Some Results on Incentive Contracts with Applications to Education and Employment, Health Insurance, and Law Enforcement. The American Economic Review, 68, 20-30.
  • Harris, M., & Raviv, A. (1990). Capital Structure and the Informational Role of Debt. The Journal of Finance, 45(2), 321-349.
  • Harris, M., & Raviv, A. (1991). The Theory of Capital Structure. The Journal of Finance, 46(1), 297-355.
  • Jensen, M. C. (1986). Agency Cost of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers. The American Economic Review, 76(2), 323-329.
  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs, and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
  • Lewellyn, K. B., & Muller Kahle, M. I. (2012). CEO Power and Risk Taking: Evidence from the Subprime Lending Industry. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 20(3), 289-307.
  • Myers, S. C. (1977). Determinants of Corporate Borrowing. Journal of Financial Economics, 5(2), 147-175. Myers, S. C. (2001). Capital Structure. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(2), 81-102.
  • Nyberg, A. J., Fulmer, I. S., Gerhart, B., & Carpenter, M. A. (2010). Agency Theory Revisited: CEO Return and Shareholder Interest Alignment. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1029-1049.
  • Pepper, A., Gore, J., & Crossman, A. (2013). Are Long term Incentive Plans an Effective and Efficient Way of Motivating Senior Executives? Human Resource Management Journal, 23(1), 36-51.
  • Pepper, A., & Gore, J. (2014). The Economic Psychology of Incentives: An International Study of Top Managers. Journal of World Business, 49(3), 350-361.
  • Reagan, P., & Stulz, R. (1986). Risk-bearing, Labor Contracts and Capital Markets. Research in Finance, 6, 217-231.
  • Ross, S. A. (1973). The Economic Theory of Agency: The Principal's Problem. The American Economic Review, 63(2), 134-139.
  • Seifert, B., & Gonenc, H. (2016). Creditor Rights, Country Governance, and Corporate Cash Holdings. Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting, 27(1), 65-90.
  • Seifert, B., & Gonenc, H. (2018). The Effects of Country and Firm-Level Governance on Cash Management. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 52, 1-16.
  • Shapiro, S. P. (2005). Agency Theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 31, 263-284.
  • Spence, M. (1973). Job Market Signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355374.
  • Stulz, R. (1990). Managerial Discretion and Optimal Financing Policies. Journal of Financial Economics, 26(1), 3-27.
  • Tekin, H. (2020). How Optimal Cash Changed by the Global Financial Crisis? A Multi-country Analysis. Economics and Business Letters, 9(2), 114-123.
  • Tirole, J. (2006). The Theory of Corporate Finance. Oxford: Princeton University Press.
  • Vo, X. V. (2018). Foreign Ownership and Corporate Cash Holdings in Emerging Markets. International Review of Finance, 18(2), 297-303.
  • Wilson, R. (1968). The Theory of Syndicates. Econometrica, 36(1), 119-132.
Primary Language en
Subjects Social
Journal Section Review Article
Authors

Orcid: 0000-0003-2855-215X
Author: Hasan TEKİN
Institution: KARABÜK ÜNİVERSİTESİ
Country: Turkey


Orcid: 0000-0001-5647-5310
Author: Ali Yavuz POLAT (Primary Author)
Institution: ABDULLAH GÜL ÜNİVERSİTESİ
Country: Turkey


Dates

Publication Date : August 24, 2020

Bibtex @review { anemon712351, journal = {Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi}, issn = {}, eissn = {2149-4622}, address = {}, publisher = {Mus Alparslan University}, year = {2020}, volume = {8}, pages = {1323 - 1329}, doi = {10.18506/anemon.712351}, title = {Agency Theory: A Review in Finance}, key = {cite}, author = {Teki̇n, Hasan and Polat, Ali Yavuz} }
APA Teki̇n, H , Polat, A . (2020). Agency Theory: A Review in Finance . Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi , 8 (4) , 1323-1329 . DOI: 10.18506/anemon.712351
MLA Teki̇n, H , Polat, A . "Agency Theory: A Review in Finance" . Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 8 (2020 ): 1323-1329 <https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/anemon/issue/56374/712351>
Chicago Teki̇n, H , Polat, A . "Agency Theory: A Review in Finance". Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 8 (2020 ): 1323-1329
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - Agency Theory: A Review in Finance AU - Hasan Teki̇n , Ali Yavuz Polat Y1 - 2020 PY - 2020 N1 - doi: 10.18506/anemon.712351 DO - 10.18506/anemon.712351 T2 - Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 1323 EP - 1329 VL - 8 IS - 4 SN - -2149-4622 M3 - doi: 10.18506/anemon.712351 UR - https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.712351 Y2 - 2020 ER -
EndNote %0 Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi Agency Theory: A Review in Finance %A Hasan Teki̇n , Ali Yavuz Polat %T Agency Theory: A Review in Finance %D 2020 %J Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi %P -2149-4622 %V 8 %N 4 %R doi: 10.18506/anemon.712351 %U 10.18506/anemon.712351
ISNAD Teki̇n, Hasan , Polat, Ali Yavuz . "Agency Theory: A Review in Finance". Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 8 / 4 (August 2020): 1323-1329 . https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.712351
AMA Teki̇n H , Polat A . Agency Theory: A Review in Finance. Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2020; 8(4): 1323-1329.
Vancouver Teki̇n H , Polat A . Agency Theory: A Review in Finance. Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2020; 8(4): 1323-1329.