Idiosyncratic deals and good citizens in China: the role of traditionality for recipients and their coworkers

How do developmental I-deals promote team creativity: the role of team creative-efficacy and error management atmosphere

Purpose

As a new human resource management practice, developmental idiosyncratic deals (developmental I-deals) play an important role in attracting, retaining and motivating employees to promote creativity. Based on the social cognitive theory, the purpose of this study is to examine the impact of developmental I-deals on team creativity through team creative-efficacy and the moderating role of error management atmosphere in this process.

Design/methodology/approach

To reduce the effects of common method biases and causal lag effect, this study was divided into three stages for data collection, with a time interval of a month. A total of 365 employee samples (72 team samples) from seven internet enterprises in Shanghai and Wuhan were selected, and Bootstrap method and Johnson-Neyman method were used to test the hypothesis.

Findings

The results of this study show that developmental I-deals positively affect team creativity, and team creative-efficacy mediates the relationship between developmental I-deals and team creativity. Error management atmosphere strengthens the impact of developmental I-deals on team creative-efficacy and further strengthens the indirect effect of developmental I-deals on team creativity through team creative-efficacy.

Originality/value

Based on the social cognitive theory, this study examines the impact of developmental I-deals on team creativity through team creative-efficacy and the moderating role of error management atmosphere in this process. First, the study of I-deals category was further refined. The existing research defines the concept of I-deals in a general way and does not classify it in detail. Second, the internal mechanism of I-deals is revealed. Third, it expands the multi-level research of I-deals.

How do idiosyncratic deals influence innovation performance? From the perspective of coworker

In the hypercompetitive marketplace, contemporary organizations incorporate the diversity of talents into job design (i.e., offering idiosyncratic deals), in order to meet the unique needs of talented employees and achieve the purpose of attracting, motivating, and retaining them. Based on the cognitive-affective processing system framework, this study aims to explore the effect of coworkers' perceptions of employees' idiosyncratic deals (CPEID) on coworker innovation performance, the mediating role of thriving at work, and the moderating role of humility. Two-wave data were obtained from 248 employees of 15 China firms. The findings suggest that (a) CPEID increase coworker innovation performance by fostering coworker learning; (b) CPEID decrease coworker innovation performance by undermining coworker vitality; (c) Coworker humility not only positively moderates the relationship between CPEID and coworker learning, but also positively moderates the indirect effect of coworker learning between CPEID and coworker innovation performance; and (d) the moderating role of coworker humility is not significant in the relationship between CPEID and coworker vitality. This study provides a theoretical explanation for whether CPEID have both positive and negative effects on coworker innovation performance, and extends boundary conditions of idiosyncratic deals (i-deals). Besides, the findings inspire managers to make reasonable use of the positive role of i-deals.

An analysis of the trickle-down effect of supervisor knowledge hiding on subordinate knowledge hiding based on displaced aggression theory

The harm of horizontal knowledge hiding behavior (colleague-colleague) to individuals and organizations has been discussed and confirmed by many studies. The negative consequences of top-down (supervisor-subordinate) knowledge hiding have now emerged as a new focus of research. This study aims to enrich the understanding of the consequences of supervisor knowledge hiding by exploring its trickle-down effect and mechanism. Based on the displaced aggression theory in psychology, this paper analyses and examines the cognitive psychological process and mechanism informing employee knowledge hiding from colleagues when faced with their supervisor's malicious knowledge hiding behavior. Using a three-stage time-lag questionnaire survey strategy, we collect 233 valid samples of full-time employees from representative provinces and cities in China, covering multiple industries. The following findings are observed: (1) Supervisor knowledge hiding from subordinates (SKHS) positively affects subordinate knowledge hiding from colleagues (SKHC); (2) Revenge motivation plays a mediating role; (3) Traditionality weakens the influence of supervisor knowledge hiding on a subordinates' revenge motivation. This study confirms the trickle-down effects of supervisor knowledge hiding behavior, extends research on the consequences of top-down knowledge hiding and its mechanism and provides new insights for organizational practice.

Team idiosyncratic deals and team breakthrough innovation: Based on the perspective of input-process-output model

Purpose

As a new human resource management practice, idiosyncratic deals are personalized employment arrangements negotiated between employees and employers and intended to benefit them both. It plays an important role in attracting, retaining and motivating employees to promote breakthrough innovation. Based on the input-process-output (I-P-O) model, this paper examines the relationship between team idiosyncratic deals and team breakthrough innovation, the mediating role of team exploratory-exploitative knowledge sharing, and the moderating roles of team transactive memory systems and team cognitive flexibility.

Participants and methods

In order to reduce the effects of common method biases and causal lag effect, this study is divided into three stages for data collection, with a time interval of 1 month. Eighty teams (406 employees) from six enterprises in Shanghai and Hangzhou were selected as samples, and the hypothesis test was carried out by hierarchical regression analysis, bootstrap, and Johnson-Neyman method.

Results

The results show that higher team idiosyncratic deals are associated with higher team breakthrough innovation through higher team exploratory-exploitative knowledge sharing, and that team transactive memory systems and team cognitive flexibility positively moderate the mediating effect of team exploratory-exploitative knowledge sharing in the relationship between team idiosyncratic deals and team breakthrough innovation in the first stage and the second stage, respectively. Under the joint effect of high team transactive memory systems and high team cognitive flexibility, the mediating effect of team exploratory-exploitative knowledge sharing is stronger.

Conclusion

The research results break through the previous research framework of social exchange theory, and I-P-O model to explore the influence mechanism of team idiosyncratic deals, in order to promote the sustainable growth of team breakthrough innovation through this non-standard work arrangement. It is hoped that this research can inspire modern enterprises to create team idiosyncratic deals for valuable teams engaged in breakthrough innovation, which are more conducive to give full play to their heterogeneous talents, and finally help enterprises break through the industry bottleneck and win the market competition.

Uncovering Missing Voices: Invisible Aspects of Idiosyncratic Deals (I-Deals)

To provide context for this special issue’s eight articles, we review the lenses adopted in i-deals research and its findings and then address under-studied aspects of i-deals. Part of the societal trend toward customization of employment arrangements, the i-deals workers negotiate for themselves are the subject of a growing body of research. We observe that i-deals research investigates both antecedents and consequences of i-deals at levels from the individual and dyad to team and organization. Numerous theories have been applied to explain i-deal phenomena beginning with social exchange theory in its initial research to social comparison and diverse theories regarding human needs and values. Employers are known to use i-deals to attract, motivate, and retain workers, while employees pursue i-deals to better their work lives and career opportunities. Although the positive effects of i-deals for organizations and i-dealers alike are well-documented, potential negative effects are under-studied. Moreover, white collar workers in developed countries are the recurrent focus in i-deals research to the neglect of other occupations and societies. In this article and special issue, we seek insights regarding understudied aspects of i-deals to deepen investigation into their myriad manifestations and effects.

Moral disengagement mediates the relationship between idiosyncratic deals and core employees' prosocial rule breaking

The majority of past studies on employees' prosocial rule breaking have focused on the effects of individual traits, work characteristics, or leadership behavior. We used social cognitive theory to examine the effect of idiosyncratic deals on core employees' prosocial rule breaking from the perspective of employee–organization relations. Using a longitudinal design, we conducted a survey with 395 Chinese core employees. The results show that idiosyncratic deals were positively related to core employees' prosocial rule breaking, and that moral disengagement played a partial mediating role in this relationship. This study gives new insight into the processes through which idiosyncratic deals increase core employees' prosocial rule breaking, and provides important suggestions for how to reduce prosocial rule breaking in organizations. Theoretical and practical implications and future research prospects are discussed.

Do Multiple I-Deals in a Team Help or Hinder Team Outcomes? A Resource Scarcity Perspective

Idiosyncratic deals (i-deals) are individualized employment arrangements negotiated and agreed upon by individual employees and their organization. This study addresses an emerging conundrum in i-deals research—whether the prevalence of i-deals in teams helps or hinders team outcomes. Because teams in which i-deals are prevalent receive more resources and status, they may be more cohesive and engage in more supportive behaviors. On the other hand, because i-deals differentiate among team members, teams in which i-deals are prevalent may be less cohesive and less inclined to engage in OCB. To solve this puzzle, we draw from a resource scarcity perspective to posit that understanding intra-team i-deal dynamics requires taking into account both organizational-level (i.e., organizational i-deal scarcity) and team-level (i.e., team power structure) factors. Using data from 40 organizations, 166 teams, and 1016 employees, we disentangle the complex interplay among the prevalence of i-deals in a team, organizational i-deal scarcity, and intra-team power structure in predicting both team cohesion and intra-team OCB.

What Does Your I-deal Say About Me? A Social Comparison Examination of Coworker Reactions to Flexibility I-deals

We focus on the implications of flexibility i-deals, that is, individually negotiated employment conditions regarding when, where and/or how to work, for i-dealers’ coworkers. Drawing on social comparison theory, we examine how coworkers’ attributions regarding the basis for flexibility i-deals (i.e., needs or performance) and perceptions of procedural fairness concerning the allocation of flexibility i-deals predict the display of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) via feelings of competence. The results, based on two independent and complementary studies ( n 1 =260; n 2=211), are consistent with our hypothesized moderated-mediation model. Whereas need attributions are positively related to competence feelings and subsequent OCB, performance attributions are negatively related to these variables. The effects are more pronounced at high than at low levels of procedural fairness. This suggests that fair procedures do not always benefit coworker reactions as they can enlarge the negative impact of performance attributions on feelings of competence and subsequent OCB. Furthermore, we provide evidence for the explanatory mechanisms by revealing that the attribution (needs vs. performance) drives opposing social comparisons (downward vs. upward, respectively) and that procedural fairness can increase coworkers’ felt personal accountability for these comparisons, thereby triggering a matching emotional response. Our results show that flexibility i-deals can have a bright side, but also a dark side, depending upon the basis and fairness of the allocation. As such, they enrich the academic conversation about the effectiveness of flexibility i-deals and guide practitioners.

Distributed Leadership and New Generation Employees' Proactive Behavior: Roles of Idiosyncratic Deals and Meaningfulness of Work

New generation employees have become the main force of the organization, and their proactive behavior directly affects the organization’s future development. How to effectively stimulate the proactive behavior of new generation employees has become a hot topic in the field of organizational management. Based on the integrated perspective of social exchange and self-enhancement, we constructed a multistep mediation model to explore the influence mechanism of distributed leadership on the proactive behavior of new generation employees. We designed a three-stage research method of supervisor-employee pairing to collect data from 26 supervisors and 304 new generation employees in a new energy vehicle company in East China. Results indicated that (a) distributed leadership is positively related to proactive behavior of new generation employees; (b) idiosyncratic deals and meaningfulness of work mediated the linkage between distributed leadership and new generation employees’ proactive behavior; (c) idiosyncratic deals and meaningfulness of work play a multistep mediation role between distributed leadership and new generation employees’ proactive behavior. These findings have theoretical implications for the proactive behavior literature and managerial implications for practitioners.

The effects of coworkers' development idiosyncratic deals on employees' cooperation intention

Idiosyncratic deals (i-deals) are individualized agreements of a nonstandard nature negotiated between employers and employees regarding employment terms, which are regarded as being beneficial for the organization. On the bases of social comparison theory and equity theory, we hypothesized that witnessing the development i-deals of their coworkers would trigger employees' feeling of unfairness, causing lower cooperation intention. We further hypothesized that perceived future i-deals and task interdependence would play moderating roles in this reduction. Participants were 284 employees in China. The results show that feelings of unfairness mediated the relationship between witnessing development i-deals and the witnesses' cooperation intention. The positive relationship between witnessing development i-deals and feelings of unfairness was weaker when employees perceived a stronger possibility of themselves obtaining a future i-deal, and a high level of task interdependence weakened the negative effect of feelings of unfairness on employees' cooperation intention.

Employability Paradox: The Effect of Development Idiosyncratic Deals on Recipient Employees' Turnover Intention

Applied social cognitive theory, this study built a moderated mediation model to explain how and when development idiosyncratic deals (i-deals) affect recipients' turnover intention. Specifically, this study proposed two paths that linked development i-deals with the recipients' turnover intention. One path was a retention path via perceived internal employability and another path was a turnover path via perceived external employability. This study tested the hypotheses with a sample of 337 employees from three companies in China. The results showed that development i-deals improved recipients' perception of internal and external employability both. Perceived internal employability predicted low risk of turnover, but perceived external employability predicted high risk of turnover. And perceived internal and external employability played mediating roles in the relationship between development i-deals and turnover intention. Furthermore, the recipients' perception of opportunity to perform in current organization strengthened the relationship between perceived internal employability and turnover intention, but weakened the relationship between perceived external employability and turnover intention. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings were discussed.

Are your gains threat or chance for me? A social comparison perspective on idiosyncratic deals and coworkers' acceptance

Idiosyncratic deals (i-deals) refer to customized work arrangements and employment conditions employees negotiate with employers. Significant scholarly attention has been paid to understand the responses of i-deals' recipients. However, little attention has been paid to coworkers' reactions to the i-deals. This study examines how coworkers react to focal employees' i-deals. We tested our hypotheses with a sample of 253 employee–coworker pairs and found that coworkers are more likely to accept focal employees' flexibility i-deals than development i-deals. Specifically, we found that coworkers view focal employees' development i-deals as more threatening to their status than flexibility i-deals, and status threat mediates the relationship between development i-deals and coworkers' acceptance. In addition, flexibility i-deals increase coworkers' perception of obtaining future i-deals more than development i-deals, and this perception mediates the relationship between flexibility i-deals and coworkers' acceptance. Furthermore, the results show that coworkers' relative leader–member exchange moderates the above relationships.

Ideal or an ordeal for organizations?

Idiosyncratic deals (i-deals) are individualized employment arrangements negotiated between organizations and particular employees (“i-dealers”). Most prior research has focused on the two parties to the i-deal, but in the current work, we focus on the co-workers of i-dealers who are often affected by the i-deals of others in ways that have additional and sometimes unexpected implications for organizations. We present a theoretically grounded framework that integrates cognitive, affective, and contextual processes to better understand when and why co-workers develop positive, neutral, or negative reactions to such arrangements. We predict that a range of reactions can occur, and may vary in valence (positive, neutral, or no reaction, or negative), degree of activation (active or passive), and target of the reaction (the organization, the i-dealer, or self). The nature of the reaction mirrors the emotions of the co-worker in response to self- and other-oriented cognitive appraisals of the i-deal by the co-worker. The nature of the reaction is also shaped by the consistency of the i-deal with the organization’s norms for differential treatment of employees. In the concluding section, we discuss future extensions and research implications of our model, and a number of potential managerial considerations that derive from our theorizing.