This chapter explores the impact societal changes have had on idiosyncratic-deals (i-deals) and discusses how contextual factors have impacted the rise and use of i-deals in the workplace. It also discusses the trend of individualization of society, which has ultimately led to individualization of the workplace, providing the necessary ground for i-deals in the workplace. The chapter argues that i-deals are both the result of societal trends and are influenced by societal trends, particularly in the current global economic crisis. It elaborates on the theoretical assumptions underlying the functioning of i-deals in the workplace. The chapter describes how i-deals and interest in i-deals research have been inspired and to a great extent caused by societal changes and trends. I-deals have been described as the opportunity for personalization or customization of work arrangements that provide people with jobs and careers that are accommodated to their abilities, needs, and wishes.
This chapter contributes to existing literature on psychological contracts by adopting a process-oriented lens to understand how psychological contract breach occurs. Drawing on neuroscientific insights, the authors extend and complement recently developed work on psychological contract dynamism by examining the intra-individual processes that precede the cognition of psychological contract breach. They argue that breach is affected by direct, indirect, and slow triggers that elicit conscious attention to the psychological contract terms and demand a shift from automatic processing to conscious attention. Moreover, stimuli matching with the (preconsciously buffered) memories of past triggers—connected triggers—will effortlessly activate the psychological contract. This results in an idiosyncratic chain of connected triggers processed in a cumulative manner, building up the pressure in the employment relationship and exacerbating the impact of breach. A better knowledge and understanding of these processes will offer employers alternative modes for handling and managing perceptions of psychological contract breach.
“In-Between” is the title of this conference. If I am right, it focuses on the role of the artist as a middle-man, or middle-woman, between art and learner. It focuses, maybe, on the way artists are capable to transfer knowledge, skills, attitudes, insights, emotions of an artistic nature. And it focuses, maybe, on the way experiences from the domain of the arts may be transferred through the mechanism inherent in the domain of education; two domains which sometimes seem to have a rather problematic relation because the arts are seen as a domain of beauty, of expressivity, of individuality, of freedom, of creativity, whereas education is seen as the domain of standardization, of group work, of compliance to rules, and of mastering the existing.