Work Life Balance

Journal of Maharaja Agrasen College of Higher Education
Volume-2, Issue-1, June 2015

Online ISSN 2394 - 4390
Work Life Balance Interference between Work & Personal Obligations
AUTHORS
Sourabh Munjal*
Assistant Professor, NIMS IM & CS, NIMS University, Jaipur
sourabhmunjal0112@gmail.com
Dr. Sudhinder Singh Chowhan

Associate Professor, NIMS IM & CS, NIMS University, Jaipur
Ankit Kumar Baliyan
Assistant Professor, NIMS IM & CS, NIMS University, Jaipur
Work and personal life are the two sides of coin; one cannot separate both of them and has to give time and
efforts to both. But to meet the requirements for one, other side remains deficient. Multiple responsibilities
need efforts, energy and time. Both male and females experience the problem in managing both work and
family obligations. This research focuses on organizational factors that impact on the work life balance &
study the impacts of work demands on the personal life and vice versa. Organizations are drafting the
policies to balance the lives of employees; different methods are suggested in this paper to improve the
balance & to provide a healthy environment for work and life.
INTRODUCTION
Perhaps every person in his or her life goes through this situation, when one wants to complete various tasks,
especially at different places but feel difficult to manage time and efforts to fulfill all requirements. We all
play many roles: employee, boss, subordinate, spouse, parent, child, sibling, friend, and society member. Each
of these roles imposes demand which require time, efforts and energy to resolve. Work-family or work-life
conflict1 occurs when the cumulative demands of these many work and non-work roles are incompatible in
some respect, so that participation in one role creates difficulty in participation in another role. Changes in the
social, political and economic fabric of societies have influenced and continue to influence both the nature of
employment and its relationship to life outside of work. Work life balance has emerged as a hot topic in recent
years. Today to fulfill the dual demands of ones personal and professional life and pressure to perform better,
conflicts arises between the two goals i.e. to fulfill work obligations or family and social responsibilities.

Work-life-Balance also referred to as family friendly work arrangements (FFWA), and, in international
literature, as alternative work arrangements (AWA).
Within the work-family literature, in fact, a major assumption is that work demands (often conceptualized as
work hours) interfere directly with family life and vice-versa. Research focuses to draw link between the
demands an employee faces at work and at home and work-life conflict.
WORK-LIFE CONFLICT BROADLY TO INCLUDE
Work overload: This form of work-life conflict occurs when the total demands of energy and time required
to perform activities of multiple roles are too great to perform the roles adequately or comfortably.
Role Interference: One cannot sail in two boats in different directions at same time, but one have to perform
all duties work as well as family, and both require time and energy, sometime it create friction to fulfill both
demands. Role interference is conceptualized as having two distinct facets:
A) Work interferes with family (WIF): This type of role conflict occurs when work demands and
responsibilities make it more difficult to fulfill family role responsibilities. For example, long hours paid or
non-paid work prevent active enjoyment of family life, work stresses adversely affect the home environment
and increases conflict with the family as the less time left for family.
B) Family interferes with work (FIW): This type of role conflict occurs when family demands and
responsibilities make it more difficult to fulfill work role responsibilities. (i.e. a child's illness prevents
attendance at work; conflict at home makes concentration at work difficult).
CAREGIVER STRAIN
Caregiver strain is a multi-dimensional construct, which is defined in terms of "burdens" in the caregivers
day-to-day life. This can be attributed to the need to provide care or assistance to someone else who needs it
(Robinson, 1983). Three types of caregiver strains are: emotional strain (i.e. depression, emotional
exhaustion and anxiety), physical and financial strain.
Work-life conflict has two major components: the practical aspects associated with time management and
scheduling conflicts (e.g. role interference), and the perceptual aspect of feeling overwhelmed, work
overloaded or stressed by the pressures of multiple roles (e.g. role overload and caregiver strain).
There is a large body of literature to confirm women experience higher levels of work-life conflict than do
men. Why this is so is still the topic of some debate. Some suggest that women may be biologically
programmed (through sex-based hormonal systems, for example) to respond differently to stressors. This

hypothesis is borne out by differences in symptomatology shown by women versus men (i.e. whereas women
tend to respond to stress by exhibiting emotional symptoms, such as depression, mental illness, and general
psychological discomfort, men tend to respond by manifesting physiological disease, such as heart disease and
cirrhosis). So WLB is concern with everyone, male, female, and young, old.
A balance in work & life leads to various benefits to employees & organizations. Improved work-life balance
reduces in the impact of work on home and family life. Reduce stress levels & Control over time management
in meeting work-life commitments Increased focus, motivation and job satisfaction knowing that family and
work commitments are being met. Increased job security as an organisation understands and supports workers
with family responsibilities. With increasing company focus on the high cost of health care, work/life
programs are becoming an intelligent choice to help lower the number of health care claims.
SCOPE OF THE STUDY
WLB considered as parameter of satisfaction, happiness and work-personal life index. Study will provide the
insights of job satisfaction, motivation, and corporate social responsibility towards employees. Study also aims
to figure out ways to create work-life balance, which itself has many benefits. The research can provide
governments, businesses, labour leaders, policy makers and academics with an objective "big picture" view of
work-life balance. Help employees, human resource practitioners and unions to craft the policy for quality of
work life and work life balance.
OBJECTIVES
To identify the determinants (organizational factors) of Work Life Balance.
To study Work interferes with family for males & females.
To study Family interferes with work (FIW) for males & females.
HYPOTHESIS OF STUDY
Hypothesis 1:
H1o: There is no relation between Family obligations, responsibilities & the performance of employee at
Work.
H1a: Family obligations & responsibilities affects the performance at work.
Hypothesis 2:
H2o: Work demands and responsibilities do not effect family role responsibilities.
H3a: Work demands and responsibilities affect family role responsibilities.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & DESIGN
The study is descriptive in nature whereby efforts made to highlight the work life balance & organizational
factors associated with it and impacts of work and life responsibilities to each other.
Sampling: Questionnaire was distributed randomly selected email addresses. Thirty questionnaires were
received out of which four were rejected.
Table 2
Data Analysis Technique: Central Tendency tools &
Age Group
Chi Sq. Test using SPSS.

20-
25-
30-
35-
40-
Table 1
25
30
35
40
45
50+
Gender
19.23
42.31
11.54
15.38
7.69
3.85
Data Interpretation:
Female
Male
53.85
46.15
Sample includes 53.85% females & 46.15% males and represents various age groups.
Work Life Balance leads to satisfaction in job as well as home; employees seek various parameters while
searching for a job and evaluate the same. Data reveals that flexibility, training opportunities, job security,
friendly environment & leave arrangements are the crucial parameters on which employees are highly
dissatisfied, which somewhere create a psychological impact and in sake of filling these gaps one tries to put
extra efforts and time and left with the less time and energy for the home. However there is possibility that all
the factors can-not meet the desired level of employees, but as these factors have the synergy effect so a little
improvement in one or more factor brings the work life in a balancing state.
Almost 45% employees are working more than usual working hours (paid & unpaid). In this study overall
35% employees are not satisfied with their job, creating a scratch line in happier life. Organizations are sought
to have work life balance policy but as per data only 15% organizations have such or kind of policies.
Involving the family members of employees in different occasions, providing facilities to share some time on
work with family, friends and others can generate a wave of motivation for one, but more than 80 % of

organizations dont create such environment. These small factors if considered by organization can bring a
balance without affecting the work.
Table :3
Rating of current job on following parameters by Respondents

Highly
Not
Very
Neutral /
Dissatisfactory
Satisfactory
Good
NA
Salary/Wages
3.85
38.46
30.77
26.92
0.00
Location of workplace
11.54
3.85
46.15
19.23
0.00
Holidays
11.54
38.46
38.46
11.54
0.00
Interest in job
0.00
15.38
30.77
53.85
0.00
Career development prospect
15.38
19.23
42.31
19.23
3.85
Flexible working Hours
26.92
30.77
19.23
7.69
15.38
19.23
26.92
34.62
19.23
0.00
Training opportunities
23.08
34.62
30.77
7.69
3.85
Job security
23.08
23.08
26.92
23.08
3.85
Friendly Environment
19.23
15.38
34.62
30.77
0.00
30.77
23.08
15.38
3.85
26.92
Good
Leave Arrangement (Casual,

Academic, Sick,
Maternity/Parental etc.)
Family involvement on
occasions
Organizational factors that leads to satisfaction and plays a very important role in work life balancing.
Financial support or salary require to survival & fulfilling the materialistic demands of self & family, more
than 40% of respondents do not find their salary at satisfaction level. Other factors like career development
prospect, leave arrangement job security, family involvement & friendly environment are also not in good
state for all, these factors more or less impacts the satisfaction level.

Gender * Impact of Family obligations on fatigue & relaxation to recover
Table 4.1
Crosstab
Impact of Family obligations on fatigue & relaxation to recover
Gender Male
Female
Total
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Count
12
Expected Count
1.4
3.7
3.7
2.3
.9
12.0
% within Gender
.0%
33.3%
41.7%
25.0%
.0%
100.0%
% within Family obligations

reduce the time you need to
relax or be by yourself
.0%
50.0%
62.5%
60.0%
.0%
46.2%
% of Total
.0%
15.4%
19.2%
11.5%
.0%
46.2%
Count
14
Expected Count
1.6
4.3
4.3
2.7
1.1
14.0
% within Gender
21.4%
28.6%
21.4%
14.3%
14.3%
100.0%

100.0%
50.0%
37.5%
40.0%
100.0%
53.8%
% of Total
Count
11.5%
15.4%
11.5%
7.7%
7.7%
53.8%
26
Expected Count
% within Gender
% of Total
3.0
11.5%
8.0
30.8%
8.0
30.8%
5.0
19.2%
2.0
7.7%
26.0
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
11.5%
30.8%
30.8%
19.2%
7.7%
100.0%
Table : 4.2
Value
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear Association
N of Valid Cases
5.579a
7.484
.207
26
Not
Disagree Important
Chi-Square Tests
Df
Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
4
.233
4
.112
1
.650
Total

Pearson chi sq value is 5.57 &10 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .92. accept the alternate hypothesis, means the family work cause fatigue that affects the performance at
work.
Gender * Impact of Family worries or problems on work
Table 5.1
Crosstab
Impact of Family worries or problems on work
Gender Male
Female
Total
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Not
Important
Total
Count
12
Expected Count
1.8
3.7
2.8
2.3
1.4
12.0
% within Gender
8.3%
41.7%
41.7%
8.3%
.0%
100.0%
% within Family
worries or problems
distract you from your
work
25.0%
62.5%
83.3%
20.0%
.0%
46.2%
% of Total
3.8%
19.2%
19.2%
3.8%
.0%
46.2%
Count
14
Expected Count
2.2
4.3
3.2
2.7
1.6
14.0
% within Gender
21.4%
21.4%
7.1%
28.6%
21.4%
100.0%
% within Family
worries or problems
work
75.0%
37.5%
16.7%
80.0%
100.0%
53.8%
% of Total
Count
11.5%
11.5%
3.8%
15.4%
11.5%
53.8%
26
Expected Count
4.0
8.0
6.0
5.0
3.0
26.0

% within Gender
% within Family
worries or problems
work
% of Total
15.4%
30.8%
23.1%
19.2%
11.5%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
15.4%
30.8%
23.1%
19.2%
11.5%
100.0%
Chi-Square Tests
Value
Df
Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square
8.865a
.065
Likelihood Ratio
10.395
.034
1.317
.251
Linear-by-Linear
Association
N of Valid Cases
26
Chi sq. value confirms relation between family worries & work. Family worries cause stress that affects the
work too.10 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.38.
Gender * Family matters reduce the time you can devote to work
Table 6.1
Crosstab
Family matters reduce the time you can devote to
work
Gender Male
Count
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Not
Important
Total
12

Expected Count
.5
4.2
3.2
3.2
.9
12.0
% within Gender
.0%
33.3%
33.3%
25.0%
8.3%
100.0%
% within Family matters

reduce the time you can
devote to work
.0%
44.4%
57.1%
42.9%
50.0%
46.2%
% of Total
.0%
15.4%
15.4%
11.5%
3.8%
46.2%
Count
14
Expected Count
.5
4.8
3.8
3.8
1.1
14.0
% within Gender
7.1%
35.7%
21.4%
28.6%
7.1%
100.0%

devote to work
100.0%
55.6%
42.9%
57.1%
50.0%
53.8%
% of Total
Count
3.8%
19.2%
11.5%
15.4%
3.8%
53.8%
26
Expected Count
% within Gender
devote to work
% of Total
1.0
3.8%
9.0
34.6%
7.0
26.9%
7.0
26.9%
2.0
7.7%
26.0
100.0%
100.0%
100.0
%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
3.8%
34.6%
26.9%
26.9%
7.7%
100.0%
Female
Total
Table 5.2
Pearson ChiSquare
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear
Association
N of Valid Cases
Chi-Square Tests
Value
df
Asymp.
Sig. (2sided)
1.250a
.870
1.630
.803
.138
.710
26
a. 10 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than

5. The minimum expected count is .46.

Table : 7.1
Gender * Impact of work overtime on family.

Crosstab
Your job reduces the amount of time you can spend
with the family
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Gender Male
Not
Important
Total
12
Expected Count
3.7
2.3
2.8
2.3
.9
12.0
25.0%
33.3
%
16.7%
25.0%
.0%
100.0%
37.5%
80.0
%
33.3%
60.0%
.0%
46.2%
11.5%
15.4
%
7.7%
11.5%
.0%
46.2%
Count
14
Expected Count
4.3
2.7
3.2
2.7
1.1
14.0
% within Gender
35.7%
7.1%
28.6%
14.3%
14.3%
100.0%
% within Your job reduces

the amount of time you
can spend with the family
62.5%
20.0
%
66.7%
40.0%
100.0%
53.8%
% of Total
Count
19.2%
3.8%
15.4%
7.7%
7.7%
53.8%
26
Expected Count
8.0
5.0
6.0
5.0
2.0
26.0

% of Total
Total
Disagree
Count
% within Gender
Female
Neutral

% within Gender
% of Total
30.8%
19.2
%
23.1%
19.2%
7.7%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0
%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
30.8%
19.2
%
23.1%
19.2%
7.7%
100.0%

Table : 7.2
Chi-Square Tests
Value
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear
Association
N of Valid Cases
Df
5.043
5.932
4
4
.283
.204
.186
.666
26
Overtime working reduces the available for home. This is a cause of problems at home. 10 cells (100.0%) have
expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .92
Table : 8.1
Gender * Irritation at home due to work Problems

Crosstab
Problems at work make you irritable at home
Gender
Male
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Not Important
Total
Count
12
Expected Count
1.8
3.7
2.8
2.8
.9
12.0
.0%
50.0
%
33.3%
16.7%
.0%
100.0%
.0%
75.0
%
66.7%
33.3%
.0%
46.2%
.0%
23.1
%
15.4%
7.7%
.0%
46.2%
14
% within Gender
% within Problems at
work make you
irritable at home
% of Total
Female
Count

Expected Count
% within Gender
work make you
irritable at home
% of Total
Count
Expected Count
% within Gender
Total
Linear-by-Linear
Association
N of Valid Cases
3.2
3.2
1.1
14.0
28.6%
14.3
%
14.3%
28.6%
14.3%
100.0%
100.0%
25.0
%
33.3%
66.7%
100.0%
53.8%
7.7%
6
6.0
15.4%
6
6.0
7.7%
2
2.0
53.8%
26
26.0
23.1%
23.1%
7.7%
100.0%
7.7%
8
8.0
30.8
%
15.4%
100.0%
100.0
%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
15.4%
30.8
%
23.1%
23.1%
7.7%
100.0%
Chi-Square Tests
Value
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
4.3
15.4%
4
4.0
work make you
irritable at home
% of Total
Table 8.2
2.2
Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Df
9.234a
11.61
6
.056
.020
.160
.689
26
Value of chi sq. coefficient accept the alternate hypothesis, respondents agree that due to work stress &
problems they irritate at home. 10 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .92.
Gender * Energy demands at work
Crosstab
Table 9.1
Your job takes up so much energy you dont feel up to

doing things that need attention at home
Gender Male
Count
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Not
Important
Total
12

Expected Count
2.3
3.7
2.8
2.3
.9
12.0
% within Gender
16.7%
41.7%
8.3%
33.3%
.0%
100.0%
% within Your job takes up

so much energy you dont
feel up to doing things that
need attention at home
40.0%
62.5%
16.7%
80.0%
.0%
46.2%
% of Total
7.7%
19.2%
3.8%
15.4%
.0%
46.2%
Count
14
Expected Count
2.7
4.3
3.2
2.7
1.1
14.0
% within Gender
21.4%
21.4%
35.7%
7.1%
14.3%
100.0%

60.0%
37.5%
83.3%
20.0%
100.0%
53.8%
% of Total
Count
11.5%
11.5%
19.2%
3.8%
7.7%
53.8%
26
Expected Count
% within Gender
% of Total
5.0
19.2%
8.0
30.8%
6.0
23.1%
5.0
19.2%
2.0
7.7%
26.0
100.0%
100.0%
100.0
%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
19.2%
30.8%
23.1%
19.2%
7.7%
100.0%
Female
Total
(Table 9.2)
Chi-Square Tests
Value
Df
Pearson Chi-Square
7.055a
.133
Likelihood Ratio
8.164
.086
.073
.787
Linear-by-Linear
Association
N of Valid Cases
26

Energy demands at work affect the personal life. Chi sq. value 7.055 confirms the statement. 10 cells (100.0%)
have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .92.
CONCLUSION
Research elaborates the impact of both family/personal and work on each other. One need to reduce the
negative impact, for this various steps to be taken at personal as well as organizational level. Organizations
should impart such work culture that help employee to maintain the work life balance, organization will be
benefited with increased morale and efficiency. However organization policies alone are not enough to reduce
the imbalance, one should manage the family responsibilities in way to maintain minimum negative impact on
work.
FOLLOWING WORK ARRANGEMENTS CAN HELP IN ENABLING WLB
Flexi-timings
Part Time Work Arrangements
V-Time
Zero hours contract
E-working
Teleworking
Term-time working
Facilities for child care like crche or day care centre near work place.
Financial planning services for employees who need them.
Work sharing.
Leave plans - both paid and unpaid - to suit employee's needs.
Subsidized food plans.

Counselling services for problems like managing work and the home.
Rest rooms, food preparation services.
Work from home.
Career breaks
REFERENCES
Agarwala, T. Strategic Human Resource Management, Oxford University Press, 2007, pp. 709.
Beatrix, B. and Cheryl R. (2001), Work-family interaction strain: coping strategies used by successful
women in the public corporate and self-emp
loyed sectors of the economy, South African
Journal of Psychology, Vol. 31 Issue 4, pp. 55.

Bhargava, U.K. (1996). Taxmanns Industrial Law. New Delhi: Taxmann Allied Services.
Doherty, L. (2004), Work-life balance initiatives: implications for women, Employee Relations, Vol.
26 No. 4, pp. 433-452.
Drew, E. (2005), Work/life balance: senior management champions or laggards?, Women in
Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 262-278.
Eikhof, D., Warhurst C. and Haunschild A. (2007), Introduction: What work? What life? What
balance?, Employee Relations, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 325-333).
Hughes, J. (2007), Work life balance as a source of job dissatisfaction and withdrawal attitudes,
Personnel Review, Vol. 36 No.1, pp. 145-154.
Jain, S. P. & Agarwal, S. (1995). Industrial and Labour Laws. Delhi: Dhanpat Rai and Sons.
Krishna Raj, M. (1983). Research on Women and Work in the Seventies Where Do We Go from
Here? Bombay: Research Centre for Womens Studies, SNDT University.
McIntosh, S. (2003), Work-life balance: How life coaching can help, Business Information Review,
Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 181-189.
Moore, F. (2007), Work Life Balance: contrasting managers and workers in an MNC Employee
Relations, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 385-399.
Pande, T. (2000). Organisational Role Stress and Coping among Dual Career Couples along the Work
Family Life Cycle. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Department of Psychology, University of Delhi.
Rajadhayksha, U. (1996). Work-Family Conflict Across the Work-Family Life Cycle: A Study of Dual
Career Couples. PhD Thesis, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad.

Robinson, Perryman and Hayday, 2004:
The drivers of employee engagement. IES Report 408.
Institute of Employment Studies. www.employment studies.co.uk.

Santos, G.G. and Cardoso, C.C. (2008), Work-family culture in academia: a gendered view of workfamily conflict and coping strategies, Gender in Management, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 442-457.
Sekaran, U. (1984). Job and Life Satisfaction Experienced by Dual-Career Family Members. Journal of
Psychological Research, 28(3), 139-44.
Shukla, A. & Kapoor, M. (1990). Sex-Role Identity, Marital Power and Marital Satisfaction among
Middle Class Couples in India. Sex Roles, 22, 693-706.
Woodward, D. (2007), Work life balancing strategies used by women managers in British modern
universities, Equal Opportunities International, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 6-17.

Work Life Balance

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Work Life Balance

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Maharaja Agrasen College of Higher Education

Volume-2, Issue-1, June 2015

Dr. Sudhinder Singh Chowhan