Idiosyncratic deals to employee outcomes: Mediating role of social exchange relationships and social comparison and moderating role of unit climate

The individualized work related agreements known as idiosyncratic deals (i-deals), that are negotiated between the employee and the employer has been shown to affect employee outcomes. Researchers have used social exchange theory to explain the relationship between i-deals and outcomes. In this study, I suggest that social comparison theory, in addition to social exchange theory, can be used to explain the effect of i-deals on employee outcomes. Because i-deals are different for each employee, the social comparisons employees make, affect their work attitudes and behaviors. This study explains the process through which i-deals lead to positive employee outcomes in the form of increased employee job satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), job performance, and reduced employee turnover. Drawing on social exchange and social comparison theories, I hypothesized that employees\u27 perceived organizational support (POS), quality of relationship with the supervisor known as leader-member exchange (LMX), and quality of the relationship with the supervisor in comparison to others in the group termed as leader-member exchange social comparison (LMXSC) mediates the relationships between i-deals to outcomes. In a sample of 338 faculty employees nested in 49 departments from a private university in India, I found support for direct relationships between i-deals and outcomes, and mediators (POS, LMX, and LMXSC). I also found partial support for the mediation of LMX and LMXSC. Yet, unexpectedly, I did not find any support for the mediating role of employee\u27s perceived organizational support (POS) and moderating role of unit climate for the relationship between i-deals and the mediators. The theoretical and practical implications of results are discussed