Agency is an indomitable force that shapes the trajectory of our lives. To have agency is to possess not only the conviction that one can act but the audacity to do so.
But what is agency, truly? It is not mere assertiveness, nor is it blind ambition. Rather, it is a mixture of self-efficacy, determination, and ownership over one’s path. A person of high agency does not merely wish, complain, or react, they act. As psychologist Albert Bandura, the godfather of self-efficacy, put it:
“People are producers of their life circumstances, not just products of them.”
The high-agency individual takes this dictum as gospel, forging ahead where others wait for permission or providence.
The Anatomy of Agency
Agency is deeply enmeshed in psychological frameworks, particularly in relation to locus of control. Julian Rotter’s seminal work (1966) posits that individuals with an internal locus of control believe they are the architects of their destiny, while those with an external locus feel like captives of fate. The former is the domain of agency; the latter, its absence.
Viktor Frankl, the Austrian psychiatrist who survived Auschwitz emerged with a strong realization: agency is, at its core, the ability to find meaning and act, even in the face of suffering. In Man’s Search for Meaning, Frankl wrote:
“Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.”
This, in the most harrowing of crucibles, is the apotheosis of agency.
Neuroscience by probing the neural correlates of agency shows its substance. Studies on volition suggest that our brains initiate action before we are consciously aware of deciding, a phenomenon famously outlined in Benjamin Libet’s experiments. The neuroscience of agency is complex, involving an interplay between intention, execution, and conscious awareness, demonstrating that while some impulses may be pre-determined, our capacity to structure environments and responses remains deeply within our control.
The Quiet Power of Figuring it Out
The mantra of the high-agency individual is deceptively simple: “I’ll figure it out.” It is the signature phrase of self-starters, from the Wright brothers, who taught themselves aerodynamics in a bicycle shop, to Maria Skłodowska-Curie, who defied a system that refused to educate women and went on to win two Nobel Prizes.
Yet, “figuring it out” is not an isolated endeavor; it often involves seeking help, adapting to circumstances, and learning from failure. High-agency individuals recognize that they are not omnipotent, they build networks, refine their skills, and embrace the iterative nature of growth.
Contrast this with the low-agency counterpart, the individual who waits, for approval, for luck, for circumstances to change. History is littered with those who could have, should have, but never did.
This is not to say that agency is an inexhaustible well. The psychology of learned helplessness, first demonstrated in Martin Seligman’s experiments, reveals a darker truth: when people are conditioned to believe they have no control, they cease to try. However, learned helplessness does not tell the full story, social structures, systemic barriers, and economic realities can also limit one's ability to exercise agency. Thus, fostering agency requires not just personal resilience, but also a recognition of the societal forces that shape opportunity and constraint.
Agency as a Political Force
Agency is not merely an individual virtue but a political imperative. When Alexis de Tocqueville toured America in the 1830s, he was struck by the nation’s culture of self-reliance. Unlike the rigid hierarchies of Europe, Americans formed civic institutions, took initiative, and governed themselves. He warned, however, of a creeping “soft despotism”, a state of affairs where individuals, having surrendered agency, become infantilized wards of an overbearing state.
Thus, agency must be coupled with ethical responsibility. The question is not just whether one acts, but in what direction and for what purpose.
Cultivating Agency
How, then, does one reclaim agency in an era that nudges us toward passivity? The answer is neither simple nor easy, but it begins with a shift in mindset:
Act before you are ready. Perfectionism is the enemy of agency. High-agency individuals begin before they feel fully prepared, understanding that competence is built through action, not contemplation.
Reframe obstacles as challenges. Carol Dweck’s Growth Mindset research underscores this point—those who see difficulties as problems to be solved, rather than barriers, develop greater resilience and agency.
Embrace discomfort. High-agency individuals recognize that discomfort is the price of growth. As Seneca wrote, “Difficulties strengthen the mind, as labor does the body.”
Design your environment to encourage action. James Clear, in Atomic Habits, emphasizes the importance of structuring one’s surroundings to make good decisions inevitable.
Balance personal agency with collective action. Agency is not a solitary pursuit, collaboration, mentorship, and civic engagement can amplify one’s ability to effect meaningful change.
The Ultimate Human Trait
Agency is, at its core, the defining trait of those who shape history rather than merely witness it. It is the force that propels entrepreneurs, revolutionaries, artists, and scientists to defy convention and carve new paths. Without agency, we are spectators; with it, we are authors of our fate.
Perhaps the final word belongs to Theodore Roosevelt, whose Man in the Arena speech captures the essence of agency:
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly...who, at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly.”
The stage is always set to siege the initiative.
Stay curious
Colin
An excellent article, Colin. I wonder if any research has been done into the difference between those who act with agency working for the Highest Good of All Concerned and those tyrants whose agency is selfishly motivated and seek to abuse and control others? Can the latter even be considered agency if agency is removed from another? In other words does agency need to fulfill the law of Amra “as you give, so shall you receive” in order for it to be true agency?