Principal-agent (PA) scholars usually focus on the difficulty with getting agents to expend more effort, known as the moral hazard problem. Even though agents and principals may share a common goal, agents have personal incentives to increase their own self-interests. These incentives can lead to tension between the goals of the principal and the execution of the task by the agents (Miller 2005). Agents may prefer to shirk and consequently the principal will suffer.
PA scholars may argue that implementation varies because of the amount of effort agents expend. Given this, the presence or absence of solutions to increase the probability of implementation in accordance to the principal’s expectations may explain implementation. Solutions often …show more content…
To outline the range of tactics available, I use a framework found within the work of self-determination theory (SDT). In order to study human motivation, Deci and Ryan (2000, 2008) outline a range of possible variations in human motivation and place them on a continuum that ranges from non-self-determined to self-determined motivation. Broadly speaking, non-self-determined forms of motivation, otherwise known as extrinsic motivation, refer to less internalized forms of motivation. This means that an individual’s motivation is contingent upon external incentives such as compensation. On the opposite side of the spectrum are self-determined forms of motivation, otherwise known as intrinsic motivation. This type of motivation is more internalized, meaning that an individual is motivated by internal reasons such as believing in the tasks themselves (Pelletier and Sharp 2008). Below I outline the different mobilization techniques that principals can use based on the differences in human …show more content…
A lack of information concerning implementation in combination with the number of agents involved in the process can lead to coordination problems amongst agents. Although all agents have a common interest in either reducing the threat of violent extremism or implementing CVE programming, these agents may have different interpretations of how to do so. Agents may disagree not only on the types of programs to implement, but also on deciding where to obtain funding from, deciding what organizations/individuals to include in the implementation of the plan, deciding when and where to actually implement the plan, and deciding how to allocate tasks (Demant et al 2009). Moreover, the agents involved in the process may not have previously worked together, which can complicate coordination efforts. Without prior collaboration, agents are less likely to correctly assess the preferences and working styles of others within the community, which can make coordination more difficult. When decision-makers are unable to coordinate their actions, implementation is
PA scholars may argue that implementation varies because of the amount of effort agents expend. Given this, the presence or absence of solutions to increase the probability of implementation in accordance to the principal’s expectations may explain implementation. Solutions often …show more content…
To outline the range of tactics available, I use a framework found within the work of self-determination theory (SDT). In order to study human motivation, Deci and Ryan (2000, 2008) outline a range of possible variations in human motivation and place them on a continuum that ranges from non-self-determined to self-determined motivation. Broadly speaking, non-self-determined forms of motivation, otherwise known as extrinsic motivation, refer to less internalized forms of motivation. This means that an individual’s motivation is contingent upon external incentives such as compensation. On the opposite side of the spectrum are self-determined forms of motivation, otherwise known as intrinsic motivation. This type of motivation is more internalized, meaning that an individual is motivated by internal reasons such as believing in the tasks themselves (Pelletier and Sharp 2008). Below I outline the different mobilization techniques that principals can use based on the differences in human …show more content…
A lack of information concerning implementation in combination with the number of agents involved in the process can lead to coordination problems amongst agents. Although all agents have a common interest in either reducing the threat of violent extremism or implementing CVE programming, these agents may have different interpretations of how to do so. Agents may disagree not only on the types of programs to implement, but also on deciding where to obtain funding from, deciding what organizations/individuals to include in the implementation of the plan, deciding when and where to actually implement the plan, and deciding how to allocate tasks (Demant et al 2009). Moreover, the agents involved in the process may not have previously worked together, which can complicate coordination efforts. Without prior collaboration, agents are less likely to correctly assess the preferences and working styles of others within the community, which can make coordination more difficult. When decision-makers are unable to coordinate their actions, implementation is