Comparative qualitative analysis examines moral tension caused by individualized deals in collectivist organizations, suggesting cultural reconciliation mechanisms.
This study examines how individualized employment practices—specifically idiosyncratic deals (i-deals)—generate moral tension when introduced into collectivist organizational contexts. Drawing on comparative qualitative data from five Japanese and Vietnamese organizations, we explore how the individualized logic of i-deals intersects with collectivist values of harmony, equality, and relational obligation. Our findings reveal that i-deals do not simply produce fairness concerns; instead they activate deeper moral struggles over what constitutes legitimate distinction in the workplace. We identify three organizational mechanisms that help reconcile this tension: (1) cultural framing that situates i-deals within shared moral narratives, (2) relational practices that re-embed individual benefits into collective purposes, and (3) institutional transparency that sustains trust across status boundaries. These mechanisms form a culturally grounded model of “moral channeling,” showing how organizations reinterpret individualization through collective ethics. This research contributes to i-deals theory, cross-cultural management, and organizational ethics by demonstrating how collectivist organizations in Asia navigate the moral complexity of individualization without eroding cooperative foundations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hattori et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: