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.
AguinisH.GottfredsonR. K.CulpepperS. A. (2013). Best-practice recommendations for estimating cross-level interaction effects using multilevel modeling. Journal of Management, 39(6), 1490–1528. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313478188
2.
AikenL. S.WestS. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
3.
AnandS.MeuserJ.D.VidyarthiP.R.LidenR.C.RousseauD.M.EkkiralaS. (2021). A multi-level model of i-deals in workgroups: Employee and coworker perceptions of leader fairness, i-deals and group performance. Journal of Management Studies, 59(2), 489–517. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12750
4.
AnandS.VidyarthiP. (2016). Idiosyncratic deals in the context of workgroups. In BalM.RouseauD. M. (Eds.), Idiosyncratic deals between employees and organizations (pp. 92–103). New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi:10.4324/9781315771496-1
5.
AnandS.VidyarthiP. R.LidenR. C.RousseauD. M. (2010). Good citizens in poor- quality relationships: Idiosyncratic deals as a substitute for relationship quality. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 970–988. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.54533176
6.
BalP. M. (2017). Why do employees negotiate idiosyncratic deals? An exploration of the process of i-deal negotiation. New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 42(1), 2-18.
7.
BalP. M.BoehmS. A. (2019). How do i-deals influence client satisfaction? The role of exhaustion, collective commitment, and age diversity. Journal of Management, 45(4), 1461–1487. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317710722
8.
BalP. M.DorenboschL. (2015). Age-related differences in the relations between individualised HRM and organisational performance: A large-scale employer survey. Human Resource Management Journal, 25(1), 41–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748–8583.12058
9.
BarclayP.BenardS. (2013). Who cries wolf, and when? Manipulation of perceived threats to preserve rank in cooperative groups. Plos One, 8(9), Article e73863. 1371/journal.pone.0073863
10.
BeersmaB.HollenbeckJ. R.ConlonD. E.HumphreyS. E.MoonH.IlgenD. R. (2009). Cutthroat cooperation: The effects of team role decisions on adaptation to alternative reward structures. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(1), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.07.002
11.
BiemannT.KearneyE. (2010). Size does matter: How varying group sizes in a sample affect the most common measures of group diversity. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 582–599. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2009.44246463
BrewerM. B. (2001). Ingroup identification and intergroup conflict: When does ingroup love become outgroup hate? In AshmoreR. D.JussimL.WilderD. (Eds), Social identity, intergroup conflict, and conflict reduction. Rutgers Series on Self and Social Identity (3, pp. 17–41). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
14.
BrislinR. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. In TriandisH. C.BerryJ. W. (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
15.
BrouwerR. (2016). When competition is the loser: The indirect effect of intra-team competition on team performance through task complexity, team conflict and psychological safety. In Paper presented at the 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Koloa, HI, 5–8 January 2016. https://doi.org/10.1109/hicss.2016.170
16.
BrykA. S.RaudenbushS. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
17.
CarronA. V.BrawleyL. R.WidmeyerW.N. (1992). The measurement of cohesiveness in sport groups. In J.L. Duda (Ed.), Advances in sport and exercise psychology measurement (pp 213–226). Morgantown, WV Fitness Information Technology.
18.
ChanD. (1998). Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 234–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021–9010.83.2.234
19.
ChoiJ. N. (2009). Collective dynamics of citizenship behaviour: What group characteristics promote group‐level helping?Journal of Management Studies, 46(8), 1396–1420. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00851.x
20.
ClausL.VloeberghsD.PichaultF. (2002). Belgian-style human resource management: A case of mistaken identity. European Management Journal, 20(4), 438-446. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-2373(02)00067-1
21.
ColeM. S.CarterM. ZZhangZ. (2013). Leader-team congruence in power distance values and team effectiveness: The mediating role of procedural justice climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(6), 962–973. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034269
22.
DecarufelA. (1981). The allocation and acquisition of resources in times of scarcity. In M.J. Lerner & S.C. Lerner (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior(pp. 317–341). New York: Plenum Press.
23.
EhrhartM. G.NaumannS. E. (2004). Organizational citizenship behavior in work groups: a group norms approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 960–974. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.960
24.
EisenhardtK. M.KahwajyJ. L.BourgeoisL. J.III (1997). How management teams can have a good fight. Harvard Business Review, 75(4), 77–85.
25.
FarmerSMVan DyneLKamdarD (2015). The contextualized self: How team–member exchange leads to coworker identification and helping OCB. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(2), 583–595. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037660
GarciaSMTorASchiffTM (2013). The psychology of competition: A social comparison perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(6), 634–650. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613504114
28.
GargS.FulmerI. (2017). Ideal or an ordeal for organizations? The spectrum of co-worker reactions to idiosyncratic deals. Organizational Psychology Review, 7(4), 281–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386617733136
29.
GoodmanP. S.HaisleyE. (2007). Social comparison processes in an organizational context: New directions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102(1), 109–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.10.005
30.
GrantA. M.MayerD. M. (2009). Good soldiers and good actors: prosocial and impression management motives as interactive predictors of affiliative citizenship behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4), 900–912. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013770
31.
GreenbergJ.Van RobergeM.HoV. T.RousseauD. M (2004). Fairness in idiosyncratic work arrangements: Justiceas an i-deal. In J. J. Martocchio (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 23, pp. 1–34. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
32.
GreerL. L.Van BunderenL.YuS. (2017). The dysfunctions of power in teams: A review and emergent conflict perspective. Research in Organizational Behavior, 37(6), 103–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2017.10.005
33.
GundlachM.ZivnuskaS.StonerJ. (2006). Understanding the relationship between individualism–collectivism and team performance through an integration of social identity theory and the social relations model. Human Relations, 59(12), 1603–1632. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726706073193
34.
HarrisonD. A.KleinK. J. (2007). What's the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1199–1228. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.26586096
35.
HoV. T. (2005). Social influence on evaluations of psychological contract fulfillment. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 113–128. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159098
36.
HofmannD. A.GavinM. B. (1998). Centering decisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research in organizations. Journal of Management, 24(5), 623–641. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639802400504
37.
HoV. T.KongD. T. (2015). Exploring the signaling function of idiosyncratic deals and their interaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 131(2015), 149-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.08.002
38.
HoV. T.LevesqueL. L. (2005). With a little help from my friends (and substitutes): Social referents and influence in psychological contract fulfillment. Organization Science, 16(3), 275–289. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0121
39.
HomanA. C.GreerL. L. (2013). Considering diversity: The positive effects of considerate leadership in diverse teams. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16(1), 105–125. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1368430212437798
40.
HornungSRousseauDMGlaserJ (2008). Creating flexible work arrangements through idi-osyncratic deals. Journal of Applied Psychology. 93(3), 655–664.
41.
HuoW.LuoJ.TamK. L. (2014). Idiosyncratic deals and good citizens in China: The role of traditionality for recipients and their coworkers. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(22), 3157–3177. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2014.919949
42.
KabanoffB. (1991). Equity, equality, power, and conflict. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 416–441. https://doi.org/10.2307/258869
43.
LaiLRousseauDMChangKT (2009). Idiosyncratic deals: Coworkers as interested third parties. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 547–556. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013506
LawlerE. J.YoonJ. (1998). Network structure and emotion in exchange relations. American Sociological Review, 63(6), 871. https://doi:10.2307/2657506
46.
LeeK.AllenN. J. (2002). Organizational citizenship behavior and workplace deviance: The role of affect and cognitions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021–9010.87.1.131
47.
LiaoC.WayneS. J.LidenR. C.MeuserJ. D. (2017). Idiosyncratic deals and individual effectiveness: The moderating role of leader-member exchange differentiation. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(3), 438–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.10.014
48.
LiaoC.WayneS. J.RousseauD. M. (2016). Idiosyncratic deals in contemporary organizations: A qualitative and meta-analytical review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(S1), S9–S29. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1959
49.
LittleT. D.CunninghamW. A.ShaharG.WidamanK. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 151–173. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_1
50.
LittleT. D.RhemtullaM.GibsonK.SchoemannA. M. (2013). Why the items versus parcels controversy needn’t be one. Psychological Methods, 18(3), 285–300. https://doi: 10.1037/a0033266
MorrisonE. W. (2011). Employee voice behavior: Integration and directions for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 373–412. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2011.574506
53.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2005). Mplus: Statistical analysis with latent variables: User's guide (pp. 1998–2012). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
54.
NgT. W. H. (2017). Can idiosyncratic deals promote perceptions of competitive climate, felt ostracism, and turnover?Journal of Vocational Behavior, 99, 118–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.01.004
NgT. W. H.LucianettiL. (2016). Goal striving, idiosyncratic deals, and job behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(1), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2023
57.
OlsonJ. M.RossM. (1984). Perceived qualifications, resource abundance, and resentment about deprivation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 20(5), 425–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(84)90036-2
58.
OrganD. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
59.
OrganD. W.PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
60.
PodsakoffN. P.PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.MaynesT. D.SpoelmaT. M. (2014). Consequences of unit-level organizational citizenship behaviors: A review and recommendations for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(S1), S87–S119. https://doi:10.1002/job.1911
61.
PodsakoffN. P.WhitingS. W.PodsakoffP. M.BlumeB. D. (2009). Individual- and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta- analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 122–141. https://doi:10.1037/a0013079
62.
RofcaninY.Las HerasM.BalP. M.Van der HeijdenB. I.Taser ErdoganD. (2018). A trickle-down model of task and development i-deals. Human Relations, 71(11), 1508–1534. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726717751613
63.
RousseauD. M. (2005). I-deals, idiosyncratic deals employees bargain for themselves. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315703589
RouxC.GoldsmithK.BonezziA. (2015). On the psychology of scarcity: When reminders of resource scarcity promote selfish (and generous) behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(4), 615–631. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucv048
67.
SalasE.GrossmanR.HughesA. M.CoultasC. W. (2015). Measuring team cohesion: Observations from the science. Human Factors, 57(3), 365–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720815578267
68.
SeashoreS.E. (1954). Group cohesiveness in the industrial work group. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
69.
SelsL.JanssensM.BrandeI. V. d.OverlaetB. (2000). Belgium: a culture of compromise. In RousseauD. M.SchalkR. (Eds.), Psychological contractsin employment: Cross-national perspectives (pp. 47–66). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452231273.n3
70.
SelsL.Van HootegemG. (2001). Seeking the balance between flexibility and security: a rising issue in the low countries. Work, Employment and Society, 15(2), 327–352. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950017001000186
71.
SherfE. N.VenkataramaniV. (2015). Friend or foe? The impact of relational ties with comparison others on outcome fairness and satisfaction judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 128(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.02.002
72.
SimosiM.RousseauD. M.WeingartL. R. (2021). Opening the black box of i-deals negotiation: Integrating i-deals and negotiation research. Group & Organization Management, 46(2), 186–222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601121995379
73.
SirolaN.PitesaM. (2017). Economic downturns undermine workplace helping by promoting a zero-sum construal of success. Academy of Management Journal, 60(4), 1339–1359. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.0804
74.
SpitzmullerM.Van DyneL. (2013). Proactive and reactive helping: Contrasting the positive consequences of different forms of helping. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(4), 560–580. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1848
75.
StewartG.L.CourtrightS. H.BarrickM. R. (2012). Peer-based control in self-managing teams: Linking rational and normative influence with individual and group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 435–447. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025303
76.
TekleabA. G.QuigleyN. R.TeslukP. E. (2009). A longitudinal study of team conflict, conflict management, cohesion, and team effectiveness. Group & Organization Management, 34(2), 170–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601108331218
77.
Van BunderenL.GreerL. L.Van KnippenbergD. (2018). When interteam conflict spirals into intrateam power struggles: the pivotal role of team power structures. Academy of Management Journal, 61(3), 1100–1130. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.0182
78.
VidyarthiP. R.SinghS.ErdoganB.ChaudhryA.PosthumaR.AnandS. (2016). Individual deals within teams: Investigating the role of relative i-deals for employee performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(11), 1536–1552. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000145
79.
VossaertL.AnseelF.CollewaertV.FossN. J. (2021). ‘There’s many a slip “twixt the cup and the lip”’: HR Management practices and firm performance. Journal of Management Studies, 59(3), 660–694. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12781
