Why do idiosyncratic deals engage employees? Investigating their role in addressing employment concerns

Thomas van Waeyenberg, Sophie de Winne, Lieven Brebels and Elise Marescaux
Additional contact information
Thomas van Waeyenberg: Open Universiteit Nederland [Heerlen]
Sophie de Winne: Department of Work and Organisation Studies (WOS) - Leuven
Lieven Brebels: Department of Work and Organisation Studies (WOS), KU Leuven
Elise Marescaux: LEM - Lille économie management - UMR 9221 - UA - Université d'Artois - UCL - Université catholique de Lille - ULCO - Université du Littoral Côte d'Opale - Université de Lille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: Purpose Drawing on conservation of resources (COR) theory, this study explores two resource dynamics underlying the relationship between personalized employment arrangements and work engagement. Specifically, we investigate whether idiosyncratic deals (i-deals) mitigate perceptions of job insecurity (resource conservation) and alleviate feelings of overqualification (resource acquisition). Design/methodology/approach Study 1 analyzes survey data from 4,803 employees to examine the indirect effects of various types of i-deals on work engagement through job insecurity and overqualification perceptions. Study 2 employs a vignette-based experimental design to establish causal evidence regarding the effects of granting versus denying i-deals on these perceptions. Findings Study 1 demonstrates that task, responsibility and developmental i-deals are positively associated with work engagement through both mediators. Study 2 complements these findings, revealing that granting desired i-deals reduces anticipated job insecurity, whereas denying them exacerbates feelings of overqualification. Originality/value This research advances understanding of the dual role of i-deals in fostering work engagement by simultaneously addressing resource threats and enhancing resource alignment. It sheds light on the complex dynamics of i-deal negotiations and their implications for employees' resource perceptions.

Date: 2025-06-24
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published in Personnel Review, 2025, 54 (7), pp.1829-1846. ⟨10.1108/PR-06-2024-0560⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05373061

DOI: 10.1108/PR-06-2024-0560

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().