Recently came across a detailed technical research on Managing Agents, written and published by Yung Yau and Daniel Chi. Skip the models and calculations if they don’t speak to you.
A few note-worthy excerpts:
“relationship between the board of directors and CEO is vulnerable to the classical principal-agent problems because of the diverse incentives of the two parties. The same also occurs in the case of MOH (Multi-owned homes a.k.a Strata) management. It is very common that PMAs (Property managing agents) act for their own benefits at the homeowners’ expense. Opportunistic PMAs may embezzle fund from the common financial pool (such as sinking fund and maintenance reserve) to their own pockets or make procurement decisions on their own instead of the homeowners. These malpractices of the PMAs have been widely reported in different parts of the world [29, 30, 31, 32].“
“Performance measurement and benchmarking are essential elements of strategic management. While there has been a large body of literature on benchmarking in the field of business management, little attention has been paid to benchmarking of housing or property management performance… various key performance indicators were employed or suggested in the literature for measuring or evaluating a PMA’s performance. These performance indicators or measures can be broadly classified into four types, namely input-based measures, output-based measures, process-based measures, and hybrid measures.”