Agency Excellence Scale

Five-level scale measuring problem ownership from reporting issues to autonomously solving and shipping solutions.

9 min read

Executive summary

  • Agency measures how much ownership someone takes over problems — from reporting issues to shipping solutions autonomously
  • This is a 1-5 scale that is contextual and observable, not a personality trait
  • High agency (4-5) dramatically reduces management overhead and increases delivery predictability
  • Most hiring mistakes happen when someone interviews at level 4 but operates at level 2
  • Use behavioral examples, not resumes, to assess agency accurately

Definitions

Agency Excellence: The degree of ownership someone takes over problems, ranging from identifying and escalating issues (level 1) to autonomously designing, implementing, and shipping solutions (level 5).

What it includes: Problem ownership, solution design autonomy, execution capability, communication of outcomes.

What it does NOT include: Personality traits (introversion/extroversion), communication style preferences, technical skill depth, or management responsibilities.

Key distinction: Agency is contextual — someone can be high-agency in a familiar domain and low-agency in an unfamiliar one. This is not a fixed personality trait.

Why this matters

Business impact

High-agency talent:

  • Reduces management overhead — managers spend time on strategy, not hand-holding
  • Increases delivery predictability — problems get solved before they escalate
  • Improves client satisfaction — clients see proactive problem-solving, not excuse-making
  • Enables scale — you can grow revenue without proportionally growing management layers
  • Improves — clients value autonomous problem-solvers, making high-agency talent easier to place on engagements

Low-agency talent:

  • Consumes leadership attention — constant need for direction and validation
  • Creates delivery risk — problems escalate because they wait for permission
  • Frustrates clients — perception of "just doing tasks, not solving problems"
  • Blocks scale — requires tight supervision that doesn't scale economically

Cost reality

A level 5 (Solves and ships) engineer at $150K/year creates less management cost than three level 2 (Identifies causes) engineers at $90K/year each.

Why: The level 5 requires 2-3 hours of management time per week. The three level 2s require 15-20 hours of management time per week — nearly a full-time manager.

The Scale (1-5)

How it works

The agency progression

Agency develops in a predictable pattern:

Key mechanism: Information + autonomy

Agency is the product of:

  1. Domain knowledge — understanding the problem space
  2. Constraints awareness — knowing boundaries and trade-offs
  3. Trust earned — track record of good judgment
  4. Permission granted — explicit or implicit authorization to act

Example: A junior engineer might be level 2 on a new codebase but level 5 on a system they built. Agency is contextual.

Example: CaseCo Mid

json
{
  "canonical_block": "case_scenario",
  "version": "1.0.0",
  "case_ref": "caseco.mid.v1",
  "updated_date": "2026-02-16",

  "scenario_title": "API Performance Issue",
  "scenario_description": "Client reports checkout API is slow during peak hours. CaseCo Mid has three engineers available with different agency levels.",

  "context": {
    "business_impact": "Client threatening to pause contract renewal",
    "time_pressure": "Must resolve within 48 hours",
    "complexity": "Multi-service architecture, unclear root cause"
  },

  "responses_by_agency_level": [
    {
      "level": 2,
      "role": "Software Engineer (Level 2 Agency)",
      "response": "Investigates and reports: 'Database queries on checkout service are taking 3+ seconds. I traced it to the order_history table. What should I do?'",
      "outcome": "Manager must decide approach and assign implementation",
      "time_to_resolution": "24+ hours (waiting on manager availability)"
    },
    {
      "level": 4,
      "role": "Tech Lead (Level 4 Agency)",
      "response": "Investigates and recommends: 'Database query performance issue on order_history table. I recommend adding an index on user_id + created_at. Risk: 5-minute deployment window. Approved to proceed?'",
      "outcome": "Quick approval, Tech Lead implements",
      "time_to_resolution": "6 hours (including testing and deployment)"
    },
    {
      "level": 5,
      "role": "Cloud Architect (Level 5 Agency)",
      "response": "Investigates, implements, communicates: 'Fixed checkout API performance. Root cause: missing index on order_history. Added composite index, tested on staging, deployed to prod. Performance improved from 3.2s to 0.1s. Monitoring for 24h.'",
      "outcome": "Problem solved autonomously, stakeholders informed",
      "time_to_resolution": "4 hours (no approval loops)"
    }
  ],

  "business_impact": {
    "level_2_cost": "Manager consumed 4+ hours directing solution. Client escalation required COO involvement.",
    "level_4_cost": "Manager consumed 30 minutes on approval. Resolution fast enough to avoid escalation.",
    "level_5_cost": "Zero management overhead. Client saw proactive problem-solving."
  }
}

What this example shows

  • Level 2 identified the cause but created a management bottleneck
  • Level 4 recommended a solution but needed approval (appropriate given deployment risk)
  • Level 5 shipped autonomously because the fix was within understood boundaries

Key insight: Level 5 doesn't mean "never ask permission." It means understanding when to ask vs. when to act.

Action: Agency Assessment Scorecard

Use this scorecard during interviews or performance reviews:

BehaviorL1L2L3L4L5Evidence
Identifies problems✓✓✓✓✓Ask: "Tell me about a recent bug you found"
Analyzes root causes—✓✓✓✓Ask: "How did you diagnose it?"
Proposes multiple options——✓✓✓Ask: "What alternatives did you consider?"
Recommends specific solution———✓✓Ask: "What did you recommend and why?"
Ships autonomously————✓Ask: "Did you need approval to proceed?"

How to use:

  1. Ask behavioral questions (past examples, not hypotheticals)
  2. Mark highest consistent level observed
  3. Look for anti-signals (claims vs. reality mismatches)
  4. Validate with reference checks for levels 4-5

Copy-paste interview prompts:

Level 2-3 probe: "Walk me through a recent problem you solved. What was broken? How did you figure out the cause?"

Level 3-4 probe: "When you understood the problem, what did you do next? Did you propose solutions? What options did you consider?"

Level 4-5 probe: "Did you need approval to implement your solution? If yes, what did you need approval for? If no, how did you decide you could act autonomously?"

Anti-signal check: "Tell me about a time you solved a problem without asking for permission. What gave you confidence to do that?"

Pitfalls

Pitfall 1: Confusing agency with extroversion

Early warning: Someone is quiet in meetings but ships consistently; you assume they lack agency.

Why this happens: Extroverts are more visible, so they appear higher-agency even when they're not.

Fix: Measure agency by shipped outcomes, not meeting behavior. Introverts can be extremely high-agency.

Pitfall 2: Hiring for claimed agency (interviews) vs. demonstrated agency (references)

Early warning: Candidate interviews at level 4 ("I recommend solutions") but references describe them as "needs direction."

Why this happens: People know the "right answer" in interviews. Past behavior is more predictive.

Fix: Ask references: "On a scale of 1-5, how much direction did they need? Can you give an example of a problem they solved autonomously?"

Pitfall 3: Expecting level 5 agency in unfamiliar contexts

Early warning: New hire who was level 5 at their previous company operates at level 2 for the first 3 months.

Why this happens: Agency requires context. In a new codebase or domain, even high-agency people need ramp time.

Fix: Expect 2-3 months of ramping before agency normalizes. Don't mistake "learning mode" for low agency.

Pitfall 4: Punishing autonomous action when it fails

Early warning: Someone ships a solution that causes a regression. Manager says "you should have asked first."

Why this happens: Managers want agency when it works, but retroactively want approval loops when it fails.

Fix: If someone operated within understood boundaries, the lesson is "improve testing," not "reduce agency."

Next

FAQs

Q: Is high agency the same as being a "self-starter"?

A: No. "Self-starter" is vague and often personality-based. Agency is about how far someone takes problems toward resolution, which is observable and contextual.

Q: Can someone be too high-agency?

A: Yes, if they ship without understanding constraints or communicating impact. Level 5 without judgment is chaos. Level 4 with good judgment is often better than level 5 with poor judgment.

Q: How long does it take to grow from level 2 to level 4?

A: Depends on the domain. In a familiar system: 6-12 months with good mentorship. In a new domain: 12-24 months. Some people plateau at level 3 and need role changes to progress.

Q: Should I hire level 5 for all roles?

A: No. Junior roles often need tight feedback loops (level 2-3 is fine). Senior roles (architects, tech leads) need level 4-5. Match agency requirements to role complexity and client exposure.

Q: How do I develop agency in my team?

A: Progressively expand autonomy boundaries:

  1. Start with "identify problems" (level 1)
  2. Add "explain root causes" (level 2)
  3. Add "propose options with trade-offs" (level 3)
  4. Add "recommend a solution" (level 4)
  5. Add "ship within boundaries" (level 5)

Give feedback at each stage before expanding.