Networking and development idiosyncratic deals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the antecedents of development idiosyncratic deals (i-deals) from an organizational politics and a situationist perspective. The paper tests a moderated mediation model in which networking skills is indirectly related to development i-deal in a context of high hierarchical plateau. Design/methodology/approach The authors test the research model with a sample of 252 engineers, 88 percent male, who work in an economically wealthy region of France and who are thus well positioned to negotiate development i-deals. Findings The authors lead analyses with the Preacher et al. ’s macros on SPSS. Results support the hypotheses. The authors find that support-seeking behaviors partially mediate the relationship between networking skills and development i-deals, and that this relationship is significant only in a context of high plateauing. Originality/value Overall, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of i-deal antecedents by bridging the literatures on i-deals and careers. It also shows that socially skilled employees are able to seek support and in turn, to proactively negotiate development i-deals. This process is a way to cope with perceptions of hierarchical plateau.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".