Examples of idiosyncratic deals
The key thing is that the future favour is not defined. In the present study the initial favour is the granting of an i-deal with the expectation of future positive attitude that results in affective commitment from the employee. But that future positive attitude and the resulting affective commitment is not expressed. Since social exchange is enacted by people and people are described by individual characteristics, a variety of conditions affect the exact nature of the relationship.
Blau notes that for every relationship forged between two people, other possible relationships have remained undeveloped. This illustrates the special value in a particular social exchange. The parties will have forgone other relationships that might have cost less and given more. This emphasis on individual characteristics means that the social setting in which the exchange is developed is also significant. There are two aspects highlighted by Blau. Firstly, the ability to enter social relations and the rewarding services provided is conditioned by the social position of the parties.
Secondly, any single exchange relationship exists within a plethora of other exchange relationships experienced by all parties.
Social exchange exists within a plurality of pairs of social exchanges entered into by all parties, the numbers and strength of which depends on the complexity and size of the society. The problem is however that as rewards come to be expected, they will also be taken for granted. Reference standards become established and certain groups within the society come to expect certain normal exchange behaviour between members.
Conversely, new and unusual exchange relations are highly regarded simply because they have no such norms.
Special Work Arrangement (Employee): Best Ways to Request Your I-Deal
Social exchange theory assumes that individuals engaging in exchange have free choice and can reallocate their resources as they see fit in order to maximise their pleasure. This reallocation relies on the parties having full information about all alternatives. In the manager-employee relationship, managers would need to know which employees to invest in whilst employees would need to know all managers likely to provide the rewards they desire, including managers in other organisations.
Perfect information is impractical and this imperfection distorts the system. The parties also have choice about who to enter exchange relations with. This choice means that participants will seek those with particularly impressive qualities. This results in competition for attractive partners who can yield desirable rewards at acceptable cost. The number of partners is also constrained by the society size. Ideally, for perfect competition, a large homogenous population is needed. This indicates that in small organisations, there is a real limit as to the number and nature of social exchange relations that can exist.
In larger organisations, greater choice is possible. That obligation does not specify what will be given in return or when it will be given. The manager hopes that it will give them what they want from the employee — positive attitudes and behaviours. Those positive attitudes and behaviours are also not specified and the manager can only hope that they include positive affective commitment towards the organisation. Research of this kind follows a prescribed lifecycle. Theory is used to develop hypothesis or claims.
Investigation using questionnaires and the like then provides evidence to support or refute these claims. Blau suggests that context is key to social exchange function. He suggests that for social exchange to work, the players must have the ability to develop a large number of exchanges.
This suggests that the relationship between i-deals and affective commitment should be strongest in large organisations. Managers act as the primary interface between organisation and employee. But managers in small commercial organisations are typically also the owner. As owner manager they will arguably have the executive power needed to grant i-deals. There are two primary styles of large organisation. On the one hand large organisations are sub-divided into units and groups with the organisation mimicking a plethora of connected small organisations.
On the other, managers and employees are in multiple dyadic relationships with each employee getting supervision of some aspect of their employment from different managers. This latter case resembles a network structure. In both styles, hierarchy and diffusion of power mixed with organisational policy make it difficult to establish who has the executive power to agree to i-deals. In the small organisation the dyadic relationship arguably has clarity. In the large organisation it exhibits confusion. Conceivably therefore, it ought to be easier to set up i-deals between manager and employee in small organisations.
This leads to the third hypothesis: that the granting of task and work responsibilities i-deals is more prevalent in small organisations. The argument above suggests that social exchange exists between manager and employee. They build trust through successful exchange of valuable commodities. Logically therefore social exchange should be more successful when the target manager is known and worked with daily. This leads to the final hypothesis: that when task and work responsibilities i-deals are granted in small organisations, the effect on employee affective commitment is higher than in large firms.
PTypes - Idiosyncratic Personality Type
The aim of the present study is to determine if organisation size matters in the relationship between the granting of task and work responsibilities i-deals by a manager and the experiencing of affective commitment in employees. This requires a sample across many organisations categorised as micro, small, medium and large with roughly equal numbers of respondents in each.
Some researchers for example, Hornung et al note that idiosyncratic deals are always specific to the organisation context, hence many respondents within any sample from the same organisation will likely give similar outcomes and hence cause a distortion. A list of LinkedIn contacts was readily available to the author. To include non-UK nationals and those working under non-UK employment arrangements would have demanded consideration of different cultures in the employment relationship. Whilst culture would be an interesting extension of the present project, these data were excluded in search of reduced complexity.
The final on-line questionnaire was sent to people. Six were employed by one organisation. No other organisation had more than 3 possible respondents. Of the , people responded and completed the survey and gave useful data. The responses were received between February and May The mean age category was years. The mean tenure was in the category years. They developed three dimensions of i-deals: work flexibility, reduction in workload and career development opportunities.
Since this present study seeks to investigate the link between i-deals and affective commitment, the interest here is on career development. Logically therefore this study could simply ask questions about the degree to which managers have agreed to develop staff and this would tend to focus on training. A well-established principle however in staff development is the granting of work that is, by its nature, developmental. Change in job done as a form of development adds job design to the definition. Developmental opportunities can also come from taking on increased responsibility, taking ownership and accountability for action and learning from this.
This measure involved seeking responses on a five-point Likert scale indicating the degree to which each of six statements apply.
Get FREE access by uploading your study materials
Factor analysis of the affective commitment scale has illustrated that the three components of the TCM measure distinct constructs. The component of interest to the present study is affective commitment. The final measure for each respondent was arrived at by averaging the six discrete Likert-scale values. Use of the EU definitions of organisation size failed to reveal useful results. Correlation and regression analyses on the survey data showed that there was a significant effect in the large organisation category.
Tests of each of the smaller sets — for micro, small and medium sized organisations — were completed to investigate effects in each category. No significant effects were found. To make sense of the data it was therefore necessary to aggregate to create a super-set for comparison with the effect in the large organisation category. Further tests were done in search of effects for combinations of the categories.
A single statistically significant effect was found by combining the micro, small and medium categorical data. A small organisation was therefore re-defined as one with less than employees whilst a large organisation is one with more than and this has also been used below. Places where the original 4-category and the new 2-category organisational size variables have been used are indicated.
Four forms of analysis were completed in pursuit of evidence to support hypotheses. Correlation was done to investigate relationships between the variables. A t-test was completed to investigate the difference in means between the two categories of organisation size. Multiple regression was used to focus on one pair of variables, controlling for others.
Finally the data was re-coded and split and multiple regression was done on constructed moderator variables to investigate moderation effects. This suggests that the granting of i-deals does have a moderate effect on engendering a feeling of affective commitment in employees. Affective commitment increases with increasing tenure with the organisation. This study is particularly interested in the effect that organisation size has on the relationship between task and work responsibilities i-deals and affective commitment.
The relationship between i-deals and organisation size shows no statistical significance. The third hypothesis posits that task and work responsibilities i-deals are more prevalent in small organisations than in large. Non-significant results nullify the analysis: the granting of task and work responsibilities is no more or no less prevalent in small organisations than in large. Since the relationship between task and work responsibilities i-deals and affective commitment may be made up of several interacting variables, a multiple regression was conducted to isolate the central relationship proposed in the first hypothesis.
These other effects do modify the relationship but there is still a moderate positive relationship when all are controlled for. The correlation for this is 0. Both are statistically significant. This correlation suggests that in both small and large organisations there is a statistically significant relationship between task and work responsibilities i-deals and affective commitment. In large organisations, however, there is a significantly greater effect than in small.
This means that in large organisations, managers benefit from having to put less effort in to the granting of task and work responsibilities than do their colleagues in small and medium sized organisations. Specific predictor, criterion and moderator variables were selected based on social exchange theory and past research. The unit of analysis was the employee. The use of a questionnaire was in line with past research.
The variables and their item design made use of previous work and this fitted with calls by previous researchers for standardisation. Use of previously developed items means that this research builds on past peer-reviewed work. A single questionnaire took a cross sectional sample at one point in time. The use of a questionnaire was expedient, permitting the researcher to be isolated from the data gathering.
This isolation avoided researcher-introduced bias and ethical conflict. The captured data was analysed using IBM SPSS v20 and analysis focussed on correlation, regression and descriptive statistics to develop support for four hypotheses. The data represented a sample of a population with inference made from sample to population with associated confidence. The sample N was The results also suggest that despite arguments made from social exchange theory, there is no significant difference in the incidence of task and work responsibilities i-deals in small and large organisations.
The third hypothesis, that the granting of task and work responsibilities i-deals is more prevalent in small organisations, is not supported. Considering that the sample means of task and work responsibilities are around 3. Previous researchers suggested that it is this rarity that enhances the value of i-deals and that it is this rarity that drives affective commitment. It seems very possible that social exchange theory may be less of an explanation that originally thought. A core attribute of the social exchange theory is value placed by the employee in the medium of exchange, in this case the i-deals granted.
The theory holds that the greater the value in the exchange, the greater the outcome. The results here imply that there is some other characteristic that differentiates small and large organisations that gives rise to greater effect in large over small. The key hypothesis, the fourth, that when task and work responsibilities i-deals are granted in small organisations, the effect on employee affective commitment is higher than in large organisations, is not supported — the result is the converse. It is in large organisations that the relationship between i-deals and affective commitment is stronger.
Of major significance is the apparent inability of social exchange theory to provide the single explanation.
- macys coupons labor day.
- morrisons coupons ebay!
- irepair coupon code.
- cheap airport parking san diego coupon;
- Special Work Arrangement (Employee): Best Ways to Request Your I-Deal - CoeticHR.
This is counter to the earlier argument developed here from social exchange theory. Liu et al considered a model in which organisation-based self-esteem moderates in the relationship between developmental i-deals and affective commitment. This does offer a possible explanation with self-enhancement theory a direction for future theorising. Perhaps in large organisations there is more scope for self-esteem stemming from task and work responsibilities i-deals than in small organisations. Despite this, the work done here does add to the understanding of how to gain performance in staff.
Performance is the most sought after factor in management. If staff are committed, they are more likely to stay with an organisation. Once committed, other management and leadership interventions can be used to achieve motivation. The results in this and earlier studies arguably position the granting of i-deals as an essential part of a basket of measures that might be applied by managers to achieve motivation. Motivation is well established as an antecedent to performance.
The granting of i-deals is a simple concept for managers to work with. They need only let it be known that they are open to requests for i-deals. Assuming that staff are keen to enhance their capability, negotiations can begin. In principle this process can be turned into a heuristic for gaining commitment and potentially performance. Psychologists work with theories and models; managers work with heuristics. If enhanced by further empirical work, this study has practical application to support heuristics.
How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 55 6 , — A New Framework of Employee Engagement. Work at home arrangements, flexible hours, special projects - personally negotiated arrangements like these can be a valuable source of flexibility and personal satisfaction, but at the risk of creating inequality and resentment by other employees.
This book shows how such individual arrangements can be made fair and acceptable to coworkers, and beneficial to both the employee and the employer. Written by the world's leading expert on the subject, I-deals: Idiosyncratic Deals Employees Bargain for Themselves challenges traditional notions that standardization is the way to create workplace justice. The book is filled with real examples, cases, and supporting data. It expands conventional ideas of workplace fairness, provides details on the power that workers influence over their employment conditions, and spells out how employees and employers can channel this influence into mutually beneficial innovations.
The book is "must reading" for students and scholars in the fields of human resource management and organizational behavior, and for managers and employees everywhere. Preface and Acknowledgments; Introduction; 1. What Is an Idiosyncratic Deal? Everyday Idiosyncrasy and Its Many Forms; 3. Signs of I-deals in Organizational Research; 5. Employees and the Negotiation Process; 7. Cross-National Factors and Idiosyncratic Deals;