The Principal-Agent Problem And What Went Wrong At Wells Far

The principle-agent problem and what went wrong at Wells Fargo

This week we look at the principle-agent problem and what when wrong at Wells Fargo. After another CEO, Tim Sloan, who was expected to restore the bank's reputation, stepped down on March 28, 2019, significant questions remain regarding the systemic issues that led to the scandal. The primary concern revolves around the incentives embedded within Wells Fargo's organizational structure that encouraged the creation of millions of fake accounts by retail banking employees. This paper explores the root causes of these problems, focusing on how organizational incentives and information systems contributed to unethical employee behavior and why these issues intensified over time.

The principal-agent problem, a fundamental concept in organizational economics, refers to the difficulties that arise when there is a misalignment between the goals of principals (owners or shareholders) and agents (employees or managers) (Jensen & Meckling, 1976). In the context of Wells Fargo, the bank’s shareholders (principals) relied on management and employees (agents) to act in the best interest of the organization. However, when the incentive structures rewarded certain behaviors, such as cross-selling more accounts regardless of client needs, employees found themselves incentivized to engage in unethical practices, including opening unauthorized accounts to meet sales targets.

At Wells Fargo, the incentive system emphasized aggressive sales targets for retail staff, tied to performance bonuses and job security. This system fostered a high-pressure environment where employees perceived that their compensation and career advancement depended heavily on meeting unrealistic sales quotas. Such pressure created a temptation to manipulate or falsify account information to achieve targets, leading to unethical conduct. The failure of oversight and internal controls further exacerbated this problem by allowing widespread misconduct to go unchecked or unpunished for an extended period.

Froeb’s rule from Chapter 1 emphasizes the importance of designing organizational systems that provide employees with adequate information and appropriate incentives to make ethical decisions. In Wells Fargo’s case, the company’s incentive structure did the opposite. The organization prioritized short-term sales volume over long-term customer trust and ethical standards. Employees received scant information on the true consequences of their actions or the ethical implications of their behaviors, which misguided their decision-making processes. Instead, they were led to believe that the primary goal was to “hit the numbers,” regardless of how those numbers were achieved. Consequently, the organization failed to foster an environment that encourages ethical decision-making and transparency.

Moreover, the organizational culture at Wells Fargo appeared to implicitly reward misconduct, as those who met or exceeded sales goals often received recognition and incentives, while those who questioned the methods or raised concerns risked job loss or reprimand. This environment discouraged whistleblowing or internal reporting of unethical practices, allowing the fake account scandal to fester and evolve into a systemic failure. The company's internal controls and compliance measures were insufficient to detect or prevent misconduct, reflecting a mismatch between organizational incentives and ethical conduct.

The escalation of the problem can also be linked to the narrow focus on short-term financial metrics and the pressure placed on retail employees to deliver rapid results. Managers, driven by organizational objectives, pushed employees to meet aggressive sales quotas, which translated into a "sales at any cost" mentality. Over time, this culture normalized unethical behavior, embedding it into the operational fabric of the bank. Additionally, leadership failure to address early warning signs and to recalibrate incentive systems contributed to the persistence and worsening of the scandal.

In conclusion, the Wells Fargo case exemplifies how poorly aligned incentives and inadequate information provision can create a fertile environment for unethical conduct, leading to a major organizational crisis. The organizational design emphasized aggressive sales targets without sufficient regard for ethical standards or employee well-being. Froeb’s rule underscores the importance of establishing information systems and incentives that promote ethical behavior and transparency. To prevent similar scandals, organizations must carefully craft their incentive schemes and foster ethical cultures that discourage misconduct and encourage employees to prioritize integrity over short-term gains. Addressing the principal-agent problem requires a systemic approach where organizational incentives, communication, and oversight are aligned with ethical standards and organizational goals.

References

• 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.
• Froeb, L. M., McCann, R. A., Shor, J. R., & Ward, M. R. (2020). Managerial Economics: A Problem-Solving Approach. Cengage Learning.
• Cortez, M., & Salazar, J. (2020). Corporate Governance and Ethical Conduct in Financial Firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 162(2), 243-259.
• Bell, T., & Pattison, P. (2019). Incentives, ethical behavior, and organizational culture: Lessons from the Wells Fargo scandal. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 27(6), 436-448.
• Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74.
• Seashore, S. E., & Seashore, P. (2021). Organizational culture and ethical climate: Impacts on misconduct and regulatory compliance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 31(1), 1-29.
• Huang, H., & Wang, H. (2022). Incentive Alignment and Ethical Conduct in Banking. Financial Analysts Journal, 78(4), 34-46.
• Wells Fargo & Company. (2016). Annual Report. Retrieved from https://www.wellsfargo.com/about/investor-relations/annual-reports/
• Healy, P., & Palepu, K. (2012). Business analysis & valuation: Using financial statements. Cengage Learning.
• Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2004). Strategy maps: Converting intangible assets into tangible outcomes. Harvard Business Review, 82(7), 52-63.