Agentic Authority Management: How to Govern AI Agents Like Any Other Actor (Q&A)

Q&A on what agentic authority means, why it's different from traditional automation, and how to govern AI agents with clear delegation, limits, and accountability.

Definition: Agentic authority is the delegated permission for an AI agent to perform actions that have business impact — such as initiating purchases, approving exceptions, modifying workflows, or triggering payments — within defined limits, time constraints, and accountability structures.

AI agents are moving from "assist" to "act." When an agent can initiate actions, route work, and even execute decisions, it needs to be governed with the same seriousness as human authority. Gartner predicts that 90 percent of B2B purchases will be AI-agent intermediated by 2028, channeling $15 trillion through AI exchanges. Microsoft's 2025 Work Trend Index found that 98 percent of companies plan to use AI agents — yet 96 percent say they represent a growing security risk. The governance gap is real and widening.

Q: What is "agentic authority"?

A: Agentic authority is the delegated permission for an AI agent to perform actions that have business impact — such as initiating purchases, approving exceptions, modifying workflows, or triggering payments — within defined limits.

The key idea is that an agent can be more than a tool: it can become an actor inside an operational process.

Q: How is this different from traditional automation?

A: Traditional automation tends to be deterministic and narrow: "when X happens, do Y." Agentic workflows are more flexible: the agent can interpret context, plan steps, and take actions across multiple tools.

That flexibility is why governance matters. The agent can "find" actions that a static workflow never would.

DimensionTraditional AutomationAgentic AI
Decision logicDeterministic rules (if X, do Y)Contextual reasoning across multiple inputs
Scope of actionSingle system, predefined stepsMulti-tool, multi-step, adaptive
Governance modelConfiguration review at setupOngoing delegation, monitoring, and recertification
Risk profilePredictable; bounded by designVariable; can discover unintended actions
Authority requirementSystem access controlExplicit delegation with limits, dates, and owner

Q: Who is accountable if an agent makes a bad decision?

A: A human is accountable — because a human (or a governance body) granted the authority, approved the limits, and allowed the agent to operate in the environment.

The governance question is not "can we blame the agent?" It's "can we prove who granted authority, under what constraints, and what evidence existed at decision time?"

Q: What kinds of authority should agents never have?

A: Many organizations start with bright-line restrictions, such as:

These aren't forever rules. They're sensible starting points while the operating model matures.

Q: What is a safe way to grant authority to agents?

A: Think in layers:

  1. Advisory authority: agent can propose actions and route recommendations, but humans approve.
  2. Bounded authority: agent can take actions within tight limits (thresholds, scope, time).
  3. Escalation rules: actions outside bounds must route to human approvals.
  4. Continuous monitoring: exceptions are logged and reviewed.

The fastest path to value is usually "bounded authority" with clear escalation. According to West Monroe's 2026 research, each request for additional analysis adds an average of three weeks of delay — bounded agent authority removes low-risk decisions from the queue entirely while preserving governance over high-impact actions.

Q: What should be included in an agent's delegation record?

A: The same things you would want for a human, plus a bit more:

Our recommendation: Treat agent delegation records exactly like human delegation records — same versioning, same effective dating, same audit trail. Organizations that create a separate, lighter governance track for AI agents inevitably end up with shadow authority that drifts faster than human authority because agents execute at machine speed.

Q: How do you prevent agents from quietly accumulating power?

A: Use the same drift controls as human authority:

In practice, uncontrolled agent authority will drift faster than human authority because agents can execute at scale. The ZDNet/Microsoft research confirms this concern: while 98 percent of companies plan to use AI agents, 96 percent acknowledge they represent a growing security risk — making proactive governance essential rather than optional.

Q: Where does Aptly fit?

A: Aptly can be the system of record for authority — including authority granted to non-human actors — so organizations can define and track agentic authority with explicit constraints, effective dates, and auditable change history.

Next: Read Human Accountability in Agentic Workflows for practical accountability patterns.

Get started with Aptly.

Connect with our team for a discovery session to learn more about how Aptly can help within your organization.  If you are already a client and need support, contact us here.