Individualized HR Practices and Idiosyncratic Deals (I-Deals) and the Expected Positive Individual and Organizational Outcomes

Year 2019, Volume: 48 Issue: 1, 36 - 63, 29.05.2019

Eda Caliskan , Alev Torun

Abstract

Idiosyncratic deals (I-deals), which can be defined as individualized work agreements between an employee and a manager, have emerged as one of the most important tools of differentiation perspective in Human Resource Management Practices. In this study, the positive contribution of individualized human resources practices and more specifically, the contribution of I-deals to individual and organizational outcomes were examined through a qualitative research carried out with employees working in private sector, Turkey. Findings revealed that propositions of past research on I-deals mainly hold in Turkey. As a result of the qualitative analysis, agile and authentic leadership styles are proposed to be required for successful I-deal negotiations. From the employee side, self-esteem and self-efficacy are also proposed to have a positive impact on I-deals. It is recommended that through a Team Deal, team members may set their own team dynamics with the leader and can have an agreement with other team members on supporting each other when schedules are tough, or they can also strike different agreements. Employee resilience is suggested as a positive outcome of I-deals, and Team Deal is recommended as a solution to co-workers’ reactions. 

Keywords

I-Deals, Individualized HR Practices, Resilience, Authentic leadership, Agile leadership

References

• Anand, S., Vidyarthi, P. R., Liden, R. C., & Rousseau, D. M. (2010). Good citizens in poorquality relationships: Idiosyncratic deals as a substitute for relationship quality. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 970–988.
• Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F., & May, D. R. (2004). Unlocking the mask: A look at the process by which authentic leaders impact follower attitudes and behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 801 – 823.
• Avolio, B. J. & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315 – 338.
• Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY, US: W H Freeman/ Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co.
• Bonanno, G. A. (2005). Clarifying and extending the construct of adult resilience. American Psychologist, 60, 265-267.
• Cashman, J., Dansereau, F., Graen, G., & J. Haga, J. W. (1976). Organizational understructure and leadership: A longitudinal investigation of the managerial role-making process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 15, 278– 296. DOI: 10.1016/0030-5073(76)90042-8.
• Chiaburu, D. S. & Harrison, D. A. (2008). Do peers make the place? conceptual synthesis and metaanalysis of co-workers effects on perceptions, attitudes, ocbs, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(5), 1082–103. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.1082
• Collyer, S., & Warren, C. (2009). Project management approaches for dynamic environments. International Journal of Project Management, 27(4), 355–364.
• Conway, N., & Coyle-Shapiro, J. (2015). Not so I-deal: A critical review of idiosyncratic-deals theory and research. In P. M. Bal & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), Idiosyncratic deals between employees and organizations: Conceptual issues, applications, and the role of coworkers (pp. 201–245). London, UK: Psychology Press.
• Ferreira, P. G. S., de Lima, E. P., & da Costa, S. E. G. (2012). Developing a methodology for assessing virtual teams’ performance perception. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 61(7), 710–729.
• Foa, U. G., & Foa, E. B. (1974). Societal structures of the mind. Oxford, England: Charles C Thomas.
• Gibbs, G. R. (2014). Computer assisted qualitative data analysis: NVivo, MAXQDA, Atlas.ti, QDAMiner, HyperResearch. In: IfM’s 21st Annual Research.
• Graen, G. & Cashman, F. J. (1975). A Role-making model of leadership in formal organizations: A developmental approach. Organization and Administrative Sciences, 6.
• Greenberg, J., Roberge, M. E., Ho, V. T., & Rousseau, D. (2004). Fairness in idiosyncratic work arrangements: Justice as an I-deal. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 22, 1–34.
• Guillon, V., Dosnon, O., Esteve, M., & Gosling, P. (2004). Self-efficacy and behavioral intention: A mediational analysis of the effects of commitment on career counseling. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 19(3), 315–332.
• Ho, V. T. & Tekleab, A. G. (2016). A model of idiosyncratic deal-making and attitudinal outcomes. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31(3), 642–56.
• Hornung, S., Rousseau, D. M., & Glaser, J. (2008). Creating flexible work arrangements through idiosyncratic deals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 655–664.
• Innocenti, L., Sammarra, A. & Amp; Profili, S. (2017). From control to commitment work systems: The role of HRM in the postbureaucratic transition. in Evolution of the PostBureaucratic Organization, pp. 274-296. Hershey,PA:IGI Global, DOI: 10.4018/978-1- 5225-1983-6.ch013.
• Judge, T. A., Jackson, C. L., Shaw, J. C., Scott, B. A., & Rich, B. L. (2007). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: The integral role of individual differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 107–127.
• Kahn, W.A. (1992). To be full there: Psychological presence at work. Human Relations, 45, 321–349.
• Keup, L., Bruning, N. S., & Seers, A. (2004). Members, leaders and the team: extending LMX to co-worker relationships. The Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 1–14.
• Kim, P. & Lee, J. (2012). The influence of collectivism and rater error on organizational citizenship and impression management behaviors. Social Behavior and Personality, 40(4), 545–556.
• Kozlowski, S. W. J. & Bell, B. S. (2003). Work groups and teams in organizations. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology (12): Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 333–375). New York: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Kreiner, G. E., Hollensbe, E. C., & Sheep, M. L. (2006). Where is the “me” among the “we”? Identity work and the search for optimal balance. Academy of Management Journal, 49(5), 1031– 1057.
• Lee, C., & Hui, C. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of idiosyncratic deals: A frame of resource exchange. Front. Bus. Res. China, 5(3), 380–401.
• Lemmon, G., Westring, A., Michel, E.. J., Wilson, M. S., & Glibkowski, B. C. (2016). A crossdomain exploration of performance benefits and costs of idiosyncratic deals. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 23(4), 440–455.
• Lewins, A. & Silver, C. (2008). Using software in qualitative research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
• Liden, R. C.,Wayne, S. J., & Sparowe, R. T. (2000). An examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 407–416.
• Luthans, F., Youssef, C. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2007). Psychological capital: Developing the human competitive edge. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Mannix, E. & Neale, M. A. (2005). What differences make a difference? The promise and reality of diverse teams in organizations. Psychology in the Public Interest, 6(2), 31–55.
• Masten, A. S., & Reed, M. J. (2002). Resilience in development. In C. R. Snyder & S. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 74-88). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Maynard, D. C. (2011). Directions for future underemployment research: Measurement and practice. In D. C. Maynard & amp; D. C. Feldman (Eds.), Underemployment: Psychological, economic, and social challenges (pp. 253–276). New York, NY: Springer.
• Maynard, D. C. & Parfnoya, N. M. (2013). Perceived overqualification and withdrawal behaviours: Examining the roles of job attitudes and work values. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86, 435–455.
• Miniotaite, A., & Buciuniene, I. (2013). Explaining authentic leadership work outcomes from the perspective of a self-determination theory. Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 65, 63–75.
• Murphy, C., Klotz, A. C., & Kreiner, G. E. (2017). Blue skies and black boxes: The promise (and practice) of grounded theory in human resource management research. Human Resource Management Review, 27(2), 291–305.
• Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2010). Idiosyncratic deals and organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76, 419–427.
• Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D.C. (2012). Idiosyncratic Deals and Voice Behavior. Journal of Management, 41(3), 893-928. DOI: 10.1177/0149206312457824.
• Ng, T.W.H., & Sorensen, K.L. (2008). Toward a further understanding of the relationships between perceptions of support and work attitudes: A meta-analysis. Group Organization Management, 33, 243–268.
• Ng, T. W. (2017). Can idiosyncratic deals promote perceptions of competitive climate, felt ostracism, and turnover? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 99, 118–131.
• Parker, D. W., Holesgrove, M., & Pathak, R. (2015). Improving productivity with selforganised teams and agile leadership. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 64(1), 112–128.
• Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
• Pierce, J. L., & Gardner, D. G. (2004). Self-esteem within the work and organizational context: A review of the organizational-based self-esteem literature. Journal of Management, 30, 591–622.
• Rosen, C. C., Slater, D. J., Chang, C. H., & Johnson, R. E. (2013). Let’s make a deal: Development and validation of the ex post I-deals scale. Journal of Management, 39(3), 709–742.
• Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Rousseau, D. M. (2001). The idiosyncratic deal: Flexibility versus fairness? Organizational Dynamics, 29, 260–273.
• Rousseau, D. M. (2005). I-Deals: Idiosyncratic deals employees bargain for themselves. New York: M. E. Sharpe.