The formation and functioning of idiosyncratic deals: a qualitative exploration from multiple perspectives

Using a qualitative approach, this study addresses a deficit in multi-stakeholder research on idiosyncratic deals (i-deals). I-deals are multi-party arrangements, but the tendency within the literature to prioritise the employee’s perspective of these individualised employment arrangements has narrowed our understanding of their formation and functioning. The study explores experiences of and attitudes towards financial and flexibility i-deals via 57 semi-structured interviews with employees, co-workers, line managers, subordinates and HR representatives in a financial services company and a construction company. Three sets of findings are presented and discussed. First, the research brings together the employer and employee perspectives by providing insight into employer motivations and conditions for granting i-deals, and how these correspond to employee responses. Based on these findings, the thesis proposes “market-based” and “supportive” i-deal pathways with distinct effects. Second, the findings detail why and how co-workers perceive i-deals as fair, revealing what constitutes flexibility i-deals as needed and financial i-deals as equitable from their perspective. The research highlights influences and information that inform co-workers’ assessments of i-deals against these socially acceptable fairness criteria. Finally, the research explicates line managers as potential recipients (not just authorisers) of i-deals, and how line managers’ flexibility i-deals can impact on third-party experiences and attitudes. These findings emphasise the need for future research to distinguish between i-deals held by individuals with and without line management responsibilities. The research contributes to i-deal theorisation through its multi-stakeholder approach. Recommendations are made to facilitate the creation of supportive flexibility i-deals that will be perceived as fair by third parties, with additional considerations highlighted when these arrangements are negotiated by line managers. The study also acts to manage expectations regarding the benefits of financial i-deals that may have limited, purely functional outcomes and risk negative responses from co-workers when used in place of a market-based compensation scheme