Abstract
Despite the movement toward post-new public management in western countries, the new public (NPM) management model is still a popular managerialism adopted in many countries where the history of neoliberal governance is relatively short. While the principal-agent theory has been primarily used for analyzing education policy within the NPM context, previous studies have called for a better understanding of the principal-agent relationship when multiple agents behave strategically and consider other agents' behaviors. With an emphasis on the principal's role in designing a mechanism to generate desired outcomes using gamification, this article explores concepts for further research on policy evaluation in higher education. By contextualizing a theory-based evaluation of South Korean college admissions reform, I present a conceptual framework that better represents the dynamic relationship between a single principal and multiple agents and draws implications from the government’s policy modification in obtaining the intended outcomes. This conceptual framework opens up new directions for research on educational policy, which calls for an alternative account of the responsibility of a principal in avoiding policy failure.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Adapted from Eisenhardt (1989)
Adapted from Osborne, 2000
Adapted from Garg et al. (2008)
Similar content being viewed by others
References
An, J., & Bae, S. A. (2013). Investigation on the change of national curriculum and college admission system. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(3), 95–120. https://doi.org/10.15708/kscs.31.3.201309.005
Baiman, S., & Demski, J. S. (1980). Economically optimal performance evaluation and control systems. Journal of Accounting Research. https://doi.org/10.2307/2490338
Berdahl, R. (1990). Academic freedom, autonomy and accountability in British universities. Studies in Higher Education, 15(2), 169–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079012331377491
Bergen, M., Dutta, S., & Walker, O. C., Jr. (1992). Agency relationships in marketing: A review of the implications and applications of agency and related theories. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252293
Bowles, S., & Hwang, S. H. (2008). Social preferences and public economics: Mechanism design when social preferences depend on incentives. Journal of Public Economics, 92(8–9), 1811–1820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2008.03.006
Braun, D., & Merrien, F. X. (1999). Governance of universities and modernisation of the state: Analytical aspects. Towards a New Model of Governance for Universities? A Comparative View, 15, 9–33.
Burton-Chellew, M. N., El Mouden, C., & West, S. A. (2016). Conditional cooperation and confusion in public-goods experiments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(5), 1291–1296. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1509740113
Byun, K. (2008). New public management in Korean higher education: Is it reality or another fad? Asia Pacific Education Review, 9(2), 190–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03026499
Carroll, C., Patterson, M., Wood, S., Booth, A., Rick, J., & Balain, S. (2007). A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity. Implementation Science, 2(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-2-40
Cho, H. (2013). Evaluation on policy formation phase of the admission officer system in universities. Korean Journal of Educational Administration, 31(3), 233–254.
Choi, S., & Chun, Y. H. (2021). Accountability and organizational performance in the public sector: Analysis of higher education institutions in Korea. Public Administration, 99(2), 353–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12683
Chu, H. (2014). Analyzing influencing factors on adoption of college admissions officer policy system for higher education. Korean Journal of Educational Administration, 32(3), 209–233.
Chubb, J. E. (1985). The political economy of federalism. American Political Science Review, 79(4), 994–1015. https://doi.org/10.2307/1956245
Clark, B. R. (1986). The higher education system: Academic organization in cross-national perspective. Univ of California Press.
Cox, J. C., Kreisman, D., & Dynarski, S. (2020). Designed to fail: Effects of the default option and information complexity on student loan repayment. Journal of Public Economics, 192, 104298.
Demski, J. S., & Sappington, D. (1984). Optimal incentive contracts with multiple agents. Journal of Economic Theory, 33(1), 152–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104298
Desjardins, S. L. (2001). Assessing the effects of changing institutional aid policy. Research in Higher Education, 42(6), 653–678. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012249427051
Dooley, K. J. (1997). A complex adaptive systems model of organization change. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 1(1), 69–97. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022375910940
Dubnick, M. (2005). Accountability and the promise of performance: In search of the mechanisms. Public Performance & Management Review, 28(3), 376–417.
Dynarski, S. M. (2003). Does aid matter? Measuring the effect of student aid on college attendance and completion. American Economic Review, 93(1), 279–288. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803321455287
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Agency theory: A review and assessment. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4279003
Feiock, R. C., & West, J. P. (1993). Testing competing explanations for policy adoption: Municipal solid waste recycling programs. Political Research Quarterly, 46(2), 399–419. https://doi.org/10.2307/448895
Ferris, J. M. (1991). Contracting and higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 62(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00137245
Furuta, J. (2017). Rationalization and student/school personhood in US college admissions: The rise of test-optional policies, 1987 to 2015. Sociology of Education, 90(3), 236–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040717713583
Garg, D., Narahari, Y., & Gujar, S. (2008). Foundations of mechanism design: A tutorial part 1-key concepts and classical results. Sadhana, 33(2), 83–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-008-0008-3
Gear, C., Eppel, E., & Koziol-Mclain, J. (2018). Advancing complexity theory as a qualitative research methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918782557
Gjesdal, F. (2007)."Moral hazard with hidden information. In Essays in Accounting Theory in Honour of Joel S. Demski, Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30399-4_5
Guri-Rosenblit, S., Šebková, H., & Teichler, U. (2007). Massification and diversity of higher education systems: Interplay of complex dimensions. Higher Education Policy, 20, 373–389. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.hep.8300158
Hendry, C. (1996). Understanding and creating whole organizational change through learning theory. Human Relations, 49(5), 621. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679604900505
Hermans, L., Cunningham, S., & Slinger, J. (2014). The usefulness of game theory as a method for policy evaluation. Evaluation, 20(1), 10–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389013516052
Hill, H. C. (2007). Mathematical knowledge of middle school teachers: Implications for the No Child Left Behind policy initiative. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29(2), 95–114. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373707301711
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014
Itoh, H. (1991). Incentives to help in multi-agent situations. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society. https://doi.org/10.2307/2938221
Jackson, M. O. (2011). A brief introduction to the basics of game theory. Available at SSRN 1968579.
Jang, D. H. (2009). A study on the analysis of the institutionalization process of college admission officer system: Application of the isomorphism theories of neo-institutionalism. The Journal of Educational Administration, 27(3), 121–144.
Jon, J. E., Lee, J. J., & Byun, K. (2014). The emergence of a regional hub: Comparing international student choices and experiences in South Korea. Higher Education, 67, 691–710. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9674-0
Joo, Y. H., & Kim, S. C. (2017). A study on the comprehensive school report policy for the university admission in Korea. Korean Journal of Educational Administration, 35(1), 141–168.
Kang, G. (2018). Analysis of performance of projects to support universities that contribute to normalization of high school education. Journal of Educational Innovation Research, 28(1), 25–53. https://doi.org/10.21024/pnuedi.28.1.201803.25
Kaplan, D. (2009). Causal inference in non-experimental educational policy research. Handbook on Education Policy Research,, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-016-0022-6
Karabel, J. (2005). The chosen: The hidden history of admission and exclusion at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Kim, H. Y. (2011). A study on the analysis of fairness concept and searching for the ways to ensure the fairness of admission official system. Korean Educational Idea Association, 25(1), 21–50. https://doi.org/10.17283/jkedi.2011.25.1.21
Kim, P. (2018). A study on the improvement of the comprehensive school report based on teachers’ perceptions of fairness about the university admission in Korea. Journal of Education & Culture, 24(3), 105–126. https://doi.org/10.24159/joec.2018.24.3.105
Kim, S. (2009). The performance evaluation of admission officer system. Public Policy Review, 23(4), 169–196. https://doi.org/10.17327/ippa.2009.23.4.007
Korean Council for University Education. (2010). 입학사정관제 운영 공통기준 [Standard Guideline for the Operation of Admissions Officer System]. http://www.kcue.or.kr/bbs/view.php?gb=notice&page=1&idx=850&kind=&culm=bbs_title&word=%C0%D4%C7%D0%BB%E7%C1%A4%B0%FC%C1%A6%20%BF%EE%BF%B5%20%B0%F8%C5%EB%B1%E2%C1%D8.
Korean Educational Development Institute. (2013). 대학입학전형 정책의 성과와 개선 방안 연구 [The outcomes of college admission policies under Lee, Myung-bak Administration]. https://www.kedi.re.kr/khome/main/research/selectPubForm.do?plNum0=9554.
Korean Council for University Education. (2019). 2020학년도 대학입학전형시행계획 [2020 College Admissions Plan]. https://moe.go.kr/boardCnts/view.do?boardID=294&boardSeq=74084&lev=0&searchType=null&statusYN=W&page=1&s=moe&m=0503&opType=N.
Lambert, R. A. (2001). Contracting theory and accounting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 32(1–3), 3–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4101(01)00037-4
Lane, J. E., & Kivisto, J. A. (2008). Interests, information, and incentives in higher education: Principal-agent theory and its potential applications to the study of higher education governance. In Higher education (pp. 141–179). Springer.
Lee, H. S. (2011). Analysis of cases of holistic assessment and application in screening of university admission officer. Journal of Holistic Education, 15(2), 93–111.
Lee, Y. H., Kim, K. S., & Lee, K. H. (2020). The effect of tuition fee constraints on financial management: Evidence from Korean private universities. Sustainability, 12(12), 5066. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12125066
Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14(1), 319–338. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.14.080188.001535
Leyton-Brown, K., & Shoham, Y. (2008). Essentials of game theory: A concise multidisciplinary introduction. Synthesis Lectures on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, 2(1), 1–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-01545-8
Ludwig, J., Kling, J. R., & Mullainathan, S. (2011). Mechanism experiments and policy evaluations. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 25(3), 17–38. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.25.3.17
Malen, B., & Knapp, M. (1997). Rethinking the multiple perspectives approach to education policy analysis: Implications for policy-practice connections. Journal of Education Policy, 12(5), 419–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268093970120509
Maskin, E. S. (2008). Mechanism design: How to implement social goals. American Economic Review, 98(3), 567–576. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.98.3.567
McConnell, A. (2015). What is policy failure? A primer to help navigate the maze. Public Policy and Administration, 30(3–4), 221–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076714565416
McPherson, M., & Schapiro, M. (2021). The student aid game. Princeton University Press.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.
Ministry of Education. (2007). 2007 입학사정관제 세부시행 계획 대학안내 [2007 Admissions officer system detailed plan].
Mitnick, B. M. (2019). Origin of the theory of agency: an account by one of the theory's originators. Available at SSRN 1020378.
Mitnick, B. M. (1975). The theory of agency: The policing “paradox” and regulatory behavior. Public Choice, 24(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01718413
Ness, E. C. (2010). The role of information in the policy process: Implications for the examination of research utilization in higher education policy. In Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 1–49). Springer.
Park, S. Y., & Kim, J. Y. (2016). High school students’ preparation for college admission under college admission simplification policy. Korean Journal of Educational Administration, 34(5), 69–95.
Park, Y. (2016). Optimal incentive contracts, common uncertainty, and intrinsic value. American Journal of Management, 16(2), 46.
Picard, R. R., & Reis, P. (2002). Management control systems design: A metaphorical integration of national cultural implications. Managerial Auditing Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/02686900210429632
Pulse, (2022). South Korea universities in massive restructuring amid plummeting birth rates. Bangkok Post. https://www.bangkokpost.com/world/2393513/south-korea-universities-in-massive-restructuring-amid-plummeting-birth-rates
Putt, A. D., & Springer, J. F. (1989). Policy Research: Concepts, Methods, and Applications. Prentice Hall.
Salazar, J. M., & Leihy, P. S. (2017). The long journey: Perspectives on the coordination of chilean higher education. Education Policy Analysis Archives. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.25.2550
Sappington, D. E. (1991). Incentives in principal-agent relationships. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(2), 45–66. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.5.2.45
Shoham, Y., & Leyton-Brown, K. (2008). Multiagent systems: Algorithmic, game-theoretic, and logical foundations. Cambridge University Press.
Tavoletti, E. (2009). Governance shifts in higher education: Across national comparison. Governance Shifts in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2006.5.1.18
Vedung, E. (2017). Public policy and program evaluation. Routledge.
Waterman, R. W., & Meier, K. J. (1998). Principal-agent models: An expansion? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8(2), 173–202. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024377
Waterman, R., Rouse, A. A., & Wright, R. (2004). Bureaucrats, politics, and the environment. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Yeung, J. & Bae, G. (2023). South Korea breaks its own record for world’s lowest fertility rate. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/22/asia/south-korea-lowest-fertility-rate-record-2022-intl-hnk/index.html
Yonezawa, A., & Kim, T. (2008). The future of higher education in the context of a shrinking student population: Policy challenges for Japan and Korea. In Higher Education to 2030, 1, Demography, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264040663-en
Funding
The author received Rackham International Research Awards from Horace H. Rackham Graduate School and SeAh Haiam Arts and Sciences Scholarship from the University of Michigan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author has no conflicts of interest to report.
Ethical approval
ID: HUM00214463-IRB approval is not required as the data cannot be tracked to a human subject.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Kim, H. Bridging principal-agent and mechanism design theories: an integrated conceptual framework for policy evaluation. Asia Pacific Educ. Rev. 25, 329–342 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-023-09844-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-023-09844-2