JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS

ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 11, 2020

A STUDY OF WORK-LIFE BALANCE DURING

COVID-19
ADITI JOSHI1, SHIVANI GOUR2
1
Assistant Professor, JIMS Kalkaji, India
2
Pursuing PGDM, BIMTECH, Uttar Pradesh, India
1
[email protected], [email protected]

ABSTRACT:
Work-life balance is often the understated term in our lives. The dimensions of work-life balance have changed
drastically with the current pandemic the world is gripped with. The paper studies the management practices w.r.t
to WFH that have changed during COVID 19 and their impact on the working and psyche of employees. Given the
conditions of social distancing, the organizations have come at crossroads between creating the right balance for
employees working from home to ensure their work-life balance is met. While the interference of work in the
personal life and personal life with work has shown a negative impact, the study focuses on whether the employees
are satisfied with the current situation of working from and further whether these have resulted in their low morale.
With COVID 19 we need to recognize that the personal and work dynamics have changed and we need to let go of
the mental model of thinking work time and home time being distinct. Using a questionnaire, a survey was
conducted of 308 respondents in India. The research design is exploratory in nature. Statistical tools have been
used to analyze the data. Chi test is used to form hypotheses.
KEYWORDS:COVID 19, Social Distancing, WFH, WLB

I. INTRODUCTION
The Coronavirus has acutely impacted organizations across the world in recent times. The general shift of the
people from working in the office setup has changed as people have been forced to Work from Home (WFH).
Work-life balance (WLB) is about finding the right balance between work and life, and about feeling comfortable
with both work and family commitments. Work-life balance is essentially the balance between three components,
namely, paid work, unpaid work, and personal time. There is no one accepted definition of what constitutes a WLB
practice, the term usually refers to one of the following factors: organizational support for dependent care, flexible
work options, and family or personal leave[1]. Earlier, travelling to work was tough but now with people being at
home, there are a fresh set of inconveniences and stresses. In today‟s time, people were suffering on the account of
lack or absence of work-life balance. Technology has made it possible for people to work at the ease of their homes
round the clock. Due to COVID19 when people have been restricted within the confines of their homes. Yet
shelling out time with one‟s family is still a distant reality. Organizations across be it education, IT, aerospace all
resorted to providing their workers to WFH. However, with the perks of being at home and working the general
perception of worker that since the employee is available at home and making him work for a longer duration has
harmed the employees. WFH may be an ideal situation for many but certain industries shy from it as the tools
required to perform the task are not always available with the employees at home.
So, this paper closely examines the problems faced by employees while working from home and their expectations
towards a balanced work life. It also revealed whether they are optimistic or pessimistic towards this policy of
Working from Home during this global pandemic, famously known as COVID-19.

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

1) K. Agha, F. T. Azmi and A. Irfan (2017), “Work-Life Balance and Job Satisfaction: An Empirical study
focusing on Higher Education Teachers in Oman” published in International Journal of Social Science and
Humanity examined that is there a need to integrate work and personal life in a smooth manner? This study
found that balance or imbalance between work and personal life is likely to affect the overall performance of
the teachers as well as the overall performance of the organization.
http://www.ijssh.org/vol7/813-HA00017.pdf
2) Laurent M. Lapierre, Elianne F. Van Steenbergen, Maria C. W. Peeters and Esther S. Kluwer (2015), “Juggling
work and family responsibilities when involuntarily working from home: A multiwave study of financial sales
professionals” published in Journal of Organizational Behaviour examined whether involuntary working from
home (teleworking) was related to higher time-based and strain-based work-to-family conflict (WFC). In this
study researchers found out that to the extent that an organization wishes to implement such a policy despite
some employees having weaker work-family balance self-efficacy, it would be advisable that efforts be made
4149
 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS

ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 11, 2020

to help their employees having weaker work-family balance self-efficacy, it would be advisable that efforts be
made to help their employees strengthen such self-efficacy.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/job.2075
3) Alfred M. Dockery and Sherry Bawa (2018), “When two words collude: Working from home and family
functioning in Australia” published in International Labour Review in which researchers worked on to analyse
the effect of employees working from home on their partners' assessments of Family functioning using
Australian household panel data. Where they found that there is the negative effect of the presence of children,
and notably of younger children, on the measures of family functioning.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ilr.1211
4) PrithwirajChoudhury, Wesley W. Loo and Xina Li (2020), “Working (From Home) During a Crisis: Online
Social Contributions by workers during the Coronavirus Shock” published in Harvard Business School which
focuses on whether workers who continued to work (albeit from home) during this crisis were constrained in
their ability to make social contributions and exhibited disproportionately greater psychic costs compared to
workers who could not WFH. The Study demonstrates that WFH workers make disproportionately greater
online contributions to socially helpful topics such as remote work best practices and yet face
disproportionately higher psychic costs and possibly time famine, managers might consider awarding WFH
workers temporal flexibility in the form of a few “free hours” to engage in online contributions and other
“virtual water coolers” in order to deal with work-social and work-life balance.
https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=57911
5) Jennifer Smith and Dianne Gardner (2007), “Factors Affecting Employee Use of Work-Life Balance Initiatives”
published in New Zealand Journal of Psychology which identifies demographic and workplace factors that
influence the extent to which employees use available WLB initiatives and whether the use of these initiatives
impact on work-life balance and other outcomes. This study has identified how a large New Zealand
organisation provides opportunities for its employees to achieve WLB, the degree to which the initiatives were
used and who made use of which initiatives. Organisational climate and demographic differences affect
employees‟ needs for WLB initiatives and their willingness to use them. The relationship between WLB and
organisational outcomes is a complex one and future research needs to examine this further but this study has
demonstrated that an organisational culture that is supportive of WLB will influence whether initiatives are
used, reduce conflict between the work domain and the home domain, and result in employees who are
committed and less likely to leave in search of other jobs.
https://mro.massey.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10179/6161/36-1_Smith-Gardner_pg3.pdf
6) ShwetaBelwal and RakeshBelwal (2014), “Work-Life Balance, Family-Friendly Policies and Quality of Work
Life Issues: Studying Employers ' Perspectives of Working Women in Oman” published in Journal of
International Women's Studies. This study aims to secure managers‟ perception of WLB and QWL-related
issues and also their opinion about offering certain FFP-related benefits to the working women in Oman. It
found that Work-life balance initiatives support the needs of staff in achieving a balance between their work
and family lives. Better management of work and family life can help in reducing stress and increasing a
motivated, loyal and productive workforce
https://vc.bridgew.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1737&context=jiws
7) Esther KadarkoDizaho, RohaniSalleh and Azrai Abdullah (2017), “Achieving WLB through Flexible Work
Schedules and Arrangements” published in Global Business and Management Research: An International
Journal to examine the strategies in organizational work schedule and arrangements that can be designed in
encouraging and achieving WLB. Findings reveal that flexible work schedule and arrangement is an effective
means of achieving WLB. Flexi-time, working from home, part time, job sharing and teleworking have been
depicted as effective strategic approaches of achieving WLB. Shift work has however been found to be
negatively interfering with WLB.
http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=b4b06f70-23a7-4105-82b0-f5511f64efa2
%40sessionmgr4007

4150
 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS

ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 11, 2020

III. METHODOLOGY
A. Scope of the research
For this research, data has been collected from employees‟ point of view to gather insights about their experience
as well as problems when most of them are working from home because of global pandemic COVID-19. The scope
of this research is to provide information about the problems faced by the employees when they are working from
home and WLB. The research was conducted using an Online Quantitative Questionnaire Survey Method. Since,
there were no problems which already existed; the research was conducted at exploratory mode. The research
helped in providing relevant insights about the problem. It was based on all industries and Judgemental Sampling
was used. As the research was conducted using a quantitative study, all the questions were pre-planned.
B. Objective of the research
The objective is to reconsider past researches that were conducted about Working from Home with respect to
Work-Life Balance. Many researches were conducted on the similar topic but not the same one. So keeping that
gap into consideration the objectives of this study are as follows:
● To find the factors responsible for dissatisfaction towards Working from Home
● To explore the relationship between WLB and Working from Home
C. Research Hypothesis
The following hypotheses are taken in order to conduct this research:
H1: Having a dedicated workspace at home differ in the overall satisfaction gained with current WFH arrangement
H2: There is an influence of working for more than 12 hours a day while working from home on inability to
balance work life
D. Research Methodology
In this research, the method used is the Quantitative Survey Method. This survey questionnaire was conducted
online. This Questionnaire Survey Method is a cheaper source of collecting insights directly from respondents.
With the help of this method the data was collected quickly.
Questions which were asked in the survey were framed in an easy language so that respondents do get confused
while answering. The survey was conducted at the initial stage as it gives the best result of collecting data from a
large number of people.
The questionnaire was designed in a way that it has a total of 18 questions out of which the first 3 questions contain
the personal information of respondents such as name, company and industry in which the company lies. The next
2 questions ask about the experience of the respondent while working from home. Rests of the questions ask about
the different types of problems and about WLB.
E. Data Collection
The data was collected from Primary Source mainly (Online Questionnaire Survey) as well as Secondary Data that
was collected from the previous researches done by researchers on the similar topic.
The respondents of this survey were the employees working in different companies based in India as well as MNCs.
But this survey was restricted to geographical boundaries of India. These respondents were the employees who
were able to share their problems, experience and expectations towards WLB while Working from Home. The
total numbers of respondents were 308. The respondents had to mark only one option provided in the questionnaire
and have to share their opinion towards what companies should do to maintain WLB when they‟ve asked
employees to switch to Online/Virtual mode of working.
F. Tools and techniques used for analysis
● Simple Percentage Analysis
● Likert Scaling Technique
● Chi-Square
● Independent Sample T-Test

4151
 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS

ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 11, 2020

IV. RESULTS
In this part of study, the results of data collected from respondents have been shown, by using appropriate
Statistical Tools:
Table I: Distribution of frequency with respect to industries (N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Aerospace 5 1.62 9
Agriculture 1 0.32 14
Education 37 12.01 3.5
Food 4 1.30 11.5
Health Care 10 3.25 5.5
Hospitality 5 1.62 9
IT 69 22.40 2
Manufacturing 37 12.01 3.5
News Media 10 3.25 5.5
Pharmaceutical 3 0.97 13
Real Estate 6 1.95 7
Telecommunication 5 1.62 9
Transport 4 1.30 11.5
Other 112 36.36 1
Total 308 100
Source: Prepared by Author
The respondents were from different industries. Many main industries were mentioned in the questionnaire and
rest were categorized as „other‟. The industries were divided into 13 different categories. The different industries
were Aerospace, Agriculture, Education, Food, Health Care, Hospitality, IT, Manufacturing, News Media,
Pharmaceutical, Real Estate, Telecommunications, Transport and other.
There were 5 respondents (1.62%) from Aerospace Industry, 1 respondent (0.32%) from Agriculture, 37
respondents (12.01%) from Education, 4 respondents (1.30%) from food, 10 respondents (3.25%) were from
Health Care, 5 respondents (1.62% ) from Hospitality, 69 respondents (22.40%) from IT, 37 respondents
(12.01%) were from Manufacturing, 10 respondents (3.25%) were from News Media, 3 respondents (0.97%)
were from Pharmaceutical , 6 respondents (1.95%) were from Real Estate, 5 respondents (1.62%) were from
Telecommunication, 4 respondents (1.30%) were from Transport Industry and 112 respondents (36.36%) from
Other Industries which were not mentioned in the questionnaire.
Table II: Distribution of frequency with respect to satisfaction with respect to WFH arrangement (N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Very Dissatisfied 15 4.87 5
Dissatisfied 31 10.06 4
Neutral 95 30.84 2
Satisfied 99 32.14 1
Very Satisfied 68 22.08 3
Total 308 100
Source: Prepared by Author
15 respondents (4.87%) were very dissatisfied, 31 respondents (10.06%) were dissatisfied, 95 respondents
(30.84%) were neutral, 99 respondents (32.14%) were satisfied and 68 respondents (22.08%) were very satisfied
with the current WFH arrangement.
Table III: Distribution of frequency with respect to feeling optimistic or pessimistic about working from
home (N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Optimistic 131 42.53 1
Pessimistic 64 20.78 3
About the same 113 36.69 2
Total 308 100
Source: Prepared by Author

4152
 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS

ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 11, 2020

When compared to earlier situation 131 respondents (42.53%) feel optimistic, 64 respondents (20.78%) feel
pessimistic and 113 respondents (36.69%) feel the same about working from home.
Table IV: Distribution of frequency with respect to one biggest challenge respondents face while working
from home (N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Childcare 6 1.95 10
Keeping a regular schedule 67 21.75 1
My physical workspace 26 8.44 6.5
Communication with co-workers is difficult 25 8.12 8
I don't have access to the tools or information I need to do my job at home 32 10.39 4
Internet connectivity 31 10.06 5
I'm sick or helping others who are sick 0 0.00 11
Anxiety about the impact of COVID-19 on my life 26 8.44 6.5
Too many distractions at home 41 13.31 2
Social isolation 33 10.71 3
Other 21 6.82 9
Total 308 100.00
Source: Prepared by Author
Respondents discussed different challenges while working from home. 6 respondents (1.95%) feel childcare as a
challenge, 67 respondents (21.75%) feel keeping a regular schedule is a challenge for them, 26 respondents (8.44%)
consider their physical workspace as a challenge, 25 respondents (8.12%) face challenge as their communication
with co-workers is difficult, 32 respondents (10.39%) don‟t have access to the tools or information which they
need for job while working from home, 31 respondents (10.06%) have the challenge of internet connectivity, no
respondents (0.00%) feel the challenge of helping other who are sick, 26 respondents (8.44%) feel anxious about
the impact of COVID-19 in life, 41 respondents (13.31%) feel that there are too many distractions at home, 33
respondents (10.71%) feel the challenge of Social Isolation and 21 respondents (6.82%) face other challenges such
as no fixed office time etc.
Table V: Distribution of frequency with respect to availability of all types of equipments which respondents
need in order to WFH (N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Yes 206 66.88 1
No 102 33.12 2
Total 308 100
Source: Prepared by Author
206 respondents (66.88%) have all types of equipment which they need in order to WFH and 102 respondents
(33.12%) do not have all types of equipment which they need in order to WFH.
Table VI: Distribution of frequency with respect to availability a dedicated workspace where they can work
at their home (N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Yes 207 67.21 1
No 101 32.79 2
Total 308 100.00
Source: Prepared by Author
207 respondents (67.21%) have a dedicated workspace where they can work at their home and 101 respondents
(32.79%) do not have a dedicated workspace where they can work at their home.
Table VII: Distribution of frequency with respect to working for more than 6 days a week while working
from home (N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Always 45 14.61 5
4153
 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS

ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 11, 2020

Often 47 15.26 4
Sometimes 72 23.38 2
Rarely 57 18.51 3
Never 87 28.25 1
Total 308 100
Source: Prepared by Author
45 respondents (14.61%) always work for more than 6 days a week while working from home, 47 respondents
(15.26%) do this very often, 72 respondents (23.38%) sometimes work for more than 6 days a week while working
from home, 57 respondents (18.51%) rarely work for more than 6 days a week while working from home and 87
respondents (28.25%) never for more than 6 days a week while working from home.
Table VIII: Distribution of frequency with respect t to working for more than 12 hours a day while working
from home (N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Always 30 9.74 5
Often 41 13.31 4
Sometimes 84 27.27 2
Rarely 59 19.16 3
Never 94 30.52 1
Total 308 100
Source: Prepared by Author
30 respondents (9.74%) always work for more than 12 hours a day while working from home, 41 respondents
(13.31%) do this very often, 84 respondents (27.27%) sometimes work for more than 12 hours a day while working
from home, 59 respondents (19.16%) rarely work for more than 12 hours a day while working from home and 94
respondents (30.52%) never for more than 12 hours a day while working from home.
Table IX: Distribution of frequency with respect to not able to balance work life while working from home
(N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Always 36 11.69 5
Often 74 24.03 2
Sometimes 111 36.04 1
Rarely 40 12.99 4
Never 47 15.26 3
Total 308 100
Source: Prepared by Author
36 respondents (11.69%) always feel that they are not able to balance their work life while working from home. 74
respondents (24.03%) feel this very often, 111 respondents (36.04%) feel this sometimes, 40 respondents (12.99%)
feel this rarely and 47 respondents (15.26%) never feel this.
Table X: Distribution of frequency with respect to thinking about work while doing other household chores
(N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Always 45 14.61 3
Often 92 29.87 2
Sometimes 117 37.99 1
Rarely 34 11.04 4
Never 20 6.49 5
Total 308 100
Source: Prepared by Author
45 respondents (14.61%) always think about work while doing other household chores, 92 respondents (29.87%)
often think about that, 117 respondents (37.99%) sometimes think about work while doing other household work,

4154
 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS

ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 11, 2020

34 respondents (11.04%) rarely think about that and 20 respondents (6.49%) never think about work when they are
doing other household chores.
Table XI: Distribution of frequency with respect to finding enough time to spend with family when they
WFH (N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Always 84 27.27 2
Often 102 33.12 1
Sometimes 81 26.30 3
Rarely 35 11.36 4
Never 6 1.95 5
Total 308 100
Source: Prepared by Author
When it comes to finding enough time to spend with family while working from home then 84 respondents
(27.27%) always find time to spend with family, 102 respondents (33.12%) often find time, 81 respondents
(26.30%) sometimes find time for family when they are working from home, 35 respondents (11.36%) rarely find
time and 6 respondents (1.95%) never find time for family when they are working from home.
Table XII: Distribution of frequency with respect to feeling tired/depressed because of work (N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Always 23 7.47 5
Often 51 16.56 3
Sometimes 139 45.13 1
Rarely 65 21.10 2
Never 30 9.74 4
Total 308 100
Source: Prepared by Author
23 respondents (7.47%) always feel tired/depressed because of work, 51 respondents (16.56%) often feel that, 139
respondents (45.13%) sometimes feel tired/depressed, 65 respondents (21.10%) rarely feel that and 30 respondents
(9.74%) never feel tired/depressed because of work.
Table XIII: Distribution of frequency with respect to getting time for work out while working from home
(N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Always 51 16.56 4
Often 72 23.38 2
Sometimes 96 31.17 1
Rarely 53 17.21 3
Never 36 11.69 5
Total 308 100
Source: Prepared by Author
51 respondents (16.56%) always get time for work out while working from home, 72 respondents (23.38%) often
get time for work out, 96 respondents (31.17%) sometimes get time for work out, 53 respondents (17.21%) rarely
get time and 36 respondents (11.69%) never get time for work out when they are working from home.
Table XIV: Distribution of frequency with respect to taking special initiatives to manage sleep (N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Always 41 13.31 5
Often 44 14.29 4
Sometimes 95 30.84 1
Rarely 78 25.32 2
Never 50 16.23 3
Total 308 100
Source: Prepared by Author
4155
 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS

ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 11, 2020

41 respondents (13.31%) always take special initiatives to manage their sleep, 44 respondents (14.29%), 95
respondents (30.84%), 78 respondents (25.32%) and 50 respondents (16.23%) feels this very often, sometimes,
rarely and never respectively.
Table XV: Distribution of frequency with respect to awareness of separate policy for work-life balance in
the company (N=308)
Options f Percent Rank
Yes 73 23.70 3
No 159 51.62 1
Not aware 76 24.68 2
Total 308 100
Source: Prepared by Author
73 respondents (23.70%) know that their company has a separate policy for work-life balance, 159 respondents
(51.62%) know that their company doesn‟t have a separate policy for work-life balance and 76 respondents
(24.68%) are not aware about whether their company has a separate policy for work-life balance or not.
Table XVI: Cross Tabulation of different Industries as a factor to be taken into consideration and feeling
optimistic or pessimistic towards working from home (N=308)
Industry* Feeling more optimistic or pessimistic about working from home

Feeling more optimistic or pessimistic about Total

working from home
Optimistic Pessimistic About the same
Industry Aerospace 2 2 1 5
Agriculture 0 1 0 1
Education 18 8 11 37
Food 1 3 0 4
Health Care 3 1 6 10
Hospitality 2 1 2 5
IT 38 12 19 69
Manufacturing 19 10 8 37
News Media 4 1 5 10
Pharmaceutical 2 0 1 3
Real Estate 1 1 4 6
Telecommunication 0 1 4 5
Transport 1 0 3 4
Other 40 23 49 112
Total 131 64 113 308
Source: Prepared by Author
Table XVII: Chi-Square of different Industries as a factor to be taken into consideration and feeling
optimistic or pessimistic towards working from home (N=308)
Chi-Square Tests
Value df Asymptotic Significance (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 38.651a 26 .053
Likelihood Ratio 39.905 26 .040
Linear-by-Linear Association 6.745 1 .009
N of Valid Cases 308
a. 30 cells (71.4%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .21.
Source: Prepared by Author
From Table XVII, it could be observed that p-value is 0.053 which is higher than the alpha value which is 0.05. It
shows feeling optimistic or pessimistic towards working from home does not get affected by the criteria of
Industries for which the respondents work. By Chi-Square Test, as compared to the earlier situation, feeling
optimistic or pessimistic about working from home is independent of the industries for which respondents work.
Hence, anyone who feels optimistic or pessimistic about working from home is not influenced by Industry.

4156
 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS

ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 11, 2020

Table XVIII: Cross Tabulation of different Industries as a factor to be taken into consideration and
inability to balance work life while working from home (N=308)

Industry* Not able to balance your work life while working from home
Not able to balance your work life while working Total
from home
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
Industry Aerospace 2 1 0 1 1 5
Agriculture 0 1 0 0 0 1
Education 0 11 16 5 5 37
Food 1 0 2 1 0 4
Health Care 0 2 6 1 1 10
Hospitality 0 4 0 0 1 5
IT 15 13 30 4 7 69
Manufacturing 3 7 15 8 4 37
News Media 2 4 2 0 2 10
Pharmaceutical 1 0 0 0 2 3
Real Estate 1 2 1 0 2 6
Tele-communication 0 0 3 1 1 5
Transport 0 1 2 0 1 4
Other 11 28 34 19 20 112
Total 36 74 111 40 47 308
Source: Prepared by Author
Table XIX: Chi-Square of different Industries as a factor to be taken into consideration and inability to
balance work life while working from home
Chi-Square Tests
Value df Asymptotic Significance (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 67.996a 52 .067
Likelihood Ratio 78.165 52 .011
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.785 1 .182
N of Valid Cases 308
Source: Prepared by Author
From Table XIX, it could be observed that p-value is 0.067 which is higher than the alpha value which is 0.05. It
shows inability to balance work life while working from home does not get affected by the criteria of Industries for
which the respondents work. By Chi-Square Test, inability to balance work life while working from home is
independent of the industries for which respondents work. Hence, inability to balance work life while working
from home is not influenced by Industry.
Table XX: Descriptive Statistics of the survey done
Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Do you work for more than 6 days a 308 0 4 2.31 1.402
week while working from home?
Do you work for more than 12 hours a 308 0 4 2.47 1.310
day while working from home?
Do you feel you’re not able to balance 308 0 4 1.96 1.205
your work life while working from
home?
How often do you think about work 308 0 4 1.65 1.065
while doing other household chores?
Do you find enough time to spend 308 0 4 1.28 1.045
with your family when you WFH?

4157
 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS

ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 11, 2020

Do you ever feel tired/depressed 308 0 4 2.09 1.030

because of work?
Are you able to get time for working 308 0 4 1.84 1.231
out while working from home?
Do you take special initiatives to 308 0 4 2.17 1.247
manage your sleep?
Valid N (listwise) 308
Source: Prepared by Author
The Table XX shows the mean and standard deviation values for the survey conducted. It can be seen from the
above-mentioned table that respondents on an average, sometimes work for more than 6 days a week, they
sometimes work for more than 12 hours a day, they sometimes feel they‟re not able to balance work-life while
working from home, they sometimes think about work while doing other household chores, they often find enough
time to spend with their family while working from home, they sometimes feel tired/depressed because of work,
they sometimes are able to get time for working out while working from home and they sometimes have to take
special initiatives to manage their sleep.
Table XXI: Independent Sample T-Test
Group Statistics
Dedicated workspace where N Mean Std. Std. Error
you can work at your home Deviation Mean
Satisfied with current Yes 207 3.72 1.023 .071
WFH arrangement No 101 3.25 1.152 .115
Source: Prepared by Author
Levene's
Test for
t-test for Equality of Means
Equality of
Variance
Std. 95% Confidence
Sig. Mean Error Interval of the
F Sig. t df
(2-tailed) Difference Differe Difference
nce Lower Upper
Equal
varian
ces .794 .37 3.65 306 .000 .47 .130 .217 .73
Curre assum
nt ed
WFH Equal
arrang varian
ement ces
3.5 179 .001 .47 .135 .206 .74
not
assum
ed
Source: Prepared by Author
Table XXI, it shows that (p-value=0.000) Equal Variance Assumed is in place. From the above table it could be
interpreted that there is a significant difference between respondents who have a dedicated workspace at home
where one can work and those who do not have a dedicated workspace at home where they can work towards
satisfaction gained with current WFH arrangement.
Thus, we can say that the Hypothesis H1 does not hold true in this case.

4158
 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS

ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 11, 2020

Table XXII: Cross Tabulation of Work for more than 12 hours a day while working from home and feeling
not able to balance your work life while working from home
Work for more than 12 hours a day while working from home * Feeling not able to balance your work life
while working from home
Feeling not able to balance your work life while Total
working from home
Always Often Sometimes Rarely Never
Work for Always 11 13 4 0 2 30
more than 12 Often 6 15 16 2 2 41
hours a day Sometimes 7 23 40 8 6 84
while working Rarely 5 13 18 13 10 59
from home Never 7 10 33 17 27 94
Total 36 74 111 40 47 308
Source: Prepared by Author
Chi-Square Tests
Value df Asymptotic Significance (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 73.585a 16 .000
Likelihood Ratio 73.555 16 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 48.566 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 308
a. 4 cells (16.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 3.51.
Source: Prepared by Author
From Table XXII, it could be observed that p-value is 0.000 which is lower than the alpha value which is 0.05. By
the Chi-Square Test, it shows that the feeling of not being able to balance work life while working from home is
dependent on working for more than 12 hours a day while working from home. Hence, the feeling of not being able
to balance work life while working from home is influenced by working for more than 12 hours a day while
working from home.
Thus, we can say that the Hypothesis H2 does not hold true in this case.
V. FINDINGS
1. Among all the respondents 1.62% belongs to Aerospace Industry, 0.32% belongs to Agriculture Industry, 12.01%
belong to Education Industry, 1.30% belongs to Food Industry, 3.25% belongs to Health Care Industry, 1.62%
belongs to Hospitality Industry, 22.40% belongs to IT Industry, 12.01% belongs to Manufacturing Industry,
3.25% belongs to News Media, 0.97% belongs to Pharmaceutical, 1.95% belongs to Real Estate, 1.62%
belongs to Telecommunication, 1.30% belongs to Transport Industry and 36.36% belongs to other Industries
which were not mentioned in the options given in the questionnaire.
2. When it comes to satisfaction with the current WFH arrangement 4.87% were very dissatisfied, 10.06% were
dissatisfied, 30.84% were neutral, 32.14% were satisfied and 22.08% were very satisfied.
3. When compared to earlier situations, 42.53 feel optimistic, 20.78% feel pessimistic and 36.69% feel about the
same about working from home.
4. 1.95% respondents feel childcare as their biggest challenge, 21.75%, 8.44%, 8.12%, 10.39%, 10.06%, 8.44%,
13.31%, 10.71% and 6.82% face the biggest challenge of keeping a regular schedule, physical workspace,
difficulty in communication with co-workers, do not have access to the tools or information that are needed in
job, internet connectivity, anxiety about the impact of COVID-19 on life, too many distractions at home, social
isolation and other challenges respectively when they WFH.
5. 66.88% respondents have all the equipment needed in order to do WFH whereas 33.12% respondents do not
have all the equipment needed in order to do WFH.
6. 67.21% respondents have a dedicated workspace where they can work at home but 32.79% respondents do not
have a dedicated workspace at home to work.
7. 14.61% always, 15.26% often, 23.38% sometimes, 18.51% rarely and 28.25% never work for more than 6 days
a week while working from home.

4159
 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS

ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 11, 2020

8. 9.74% always, 13.31% often, 27.27% sometimes, 19.16% rarely and 30.52% never work for more than 12 hours
a day while working from home.
9. 11.69% always, 24.03% often, 36.04% sometimes, 12.99% rarely and 15.26% never feel that they are not able to
balance their work life while working from home.
10. 14.61% always, 29.87% often, 37.99% sometimes, 11.04% rarely and 6.49% never think about work while
doing other household chores.
11. 27.27% always, 33.12% often, 26.30% sometimes, 11.36% rarely and 1.95% never find enough time to spend
with their family when they WFH.
12. 7.47% always, 16.56% often, 45.13% sometimes, 21.10% rarely and 9.74% never feel tired/depressed because
of work.
13. 16.56% always, 23.38% often, 37.17% sometimes, 17.12% rarely and 11.69% never able to get time for
working out while working from home.
14. 13.31% always, 14.29% often, 30.84% sometimes, 25.32% rarely and 16.23% never take special initiatives to
manage their sleep.
15. 23.70% know that their company has a separate policy for work-life balance, 51.62% do not know that and
24.68% respondents are not aware that whether their company has a separate policy for work-life balance or
not.
16. As compared to the earlier situation feeling optimistic or pessimistic about working from home is independent
of the industries for which respondents work.
17. Inability to balance work life while working from home is independent of the industries for which respondents
work.
18. There is a significant difference between respondents who have and do not have a dedicated workspace at
home where one can work towards satisfaction gained with current WFH arrangement.
19. The feeling of not being able to balance work life while working from home is influenced by working for more
than 12 hours a day while working from home.
VI. SUGGESTIONS
1. Companies should provide proper set up such as necessary software & hardware installed, proper work
schedule so that employees could give appropriate attention to work and then to their home as well.
2. Companies should also come up with virtual employee engagement activities such as session talks to keep
employees enthusiastic and positive towards work.
3. Companies should give training to the employees to balance their professional and personal life while WFH.
4. Providing a strict work schedule is very important when an employee is working from home because a person
can‟t be available anytime or every time.
VII. CONCLUSION
WFH has proven to be advantageous for the employees especially when this survey took place during the global
pandemic situation of COVID-19. But on the other side of it, employees who are working from home do face big
challenges such as according to the survey conducted keeping a regular schedule is the main problem. The result of
this study portrays that only less than 35% of respondents feel that they are not able to balance their work life while
working from home. Also, more than 75% respondents of different industries feel either optimistic or about the
same with reference to working from home. There are less than 25% respondents who feel pessimistic about
working from home.
This research has shown that the dissatisfaction takes place in the minds‟ of employees because of keeping a
regular schedule, working for more than prescribed hours and time-consuming household chores.
REFERENCES
1. S. Kar and K. C. Misra, “Nexus between WLB practices and employee retention-the mediating effect of a
supportive culture,” Asian Social Science, vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 63-69, Sep. 2013.

4160
 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS

ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 11, 2020

2. Matthew B. Perrigino, “Work-Family Backlash: The „Dark-Side‟ of Work-Life Balance (WLB) Policies”,
Academy of Management Annals: 2018, Vol. 12, No. 2, 600-630.
https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/annals.2016.0077
3. Latshaw, “Spillover and Crossover Effects of Work-Family Effects Conflicts among Married and
Cohabiting Couples”, American Sociological Association: 2018.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2156869318813006
4. Beauregard, T. A., & Henry, L. C., “Making the link between work-life balance practices and
organizational performance”, Human Resource Management Review: 2009, 19(1): 9–22.
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2008.09.001
5. https://bloncampus.thehindubusinessline.com/people-at-work/60-millennials-seek-flexible-working-opti
ons-reveals-survey/article27582130.ece
6. https://www.forbes.com/sites/vickyvalet/2020/03/12/working-from-home-during-the-coronavirus-pande
mic-what-you-need-to-know/#5347acab1421
7. https://www.forbes.com/sites/benjaminlaker/2020/04/28/how-to-dramatically-improve-work-life-balanc
e-during-coronavirus-crisis/#4d5caec15b1e
8. https://johancruyffinstitute.com/en/blog-en/sport-management/work-life-balance-and-remote-working-a
s-a-measure-of-work-effectiveness/
9. https://resources.businesstalentgroup.com/btg-blog/maintaining-work-life-balance-covid-19

AUTHOR’S PROFILE
Aditi Joshi did her Bachelors in Commerce (DeenDayalUpadhyay Gorakhpur University) and then her MBA in Human
Resources from Birla Institute of Management (BIT, Mesra). She has experience both in academia as faculty in Madan Mohan
Malviya University of Technology and other management college and has worked in industry as well. She is currently
working with JIMS Kalkaji as an Assistant Professor.

ShivaniGour is currently a PGDM student in the domain of Retail from Birla Institute of Management Technology, Greater
Noida. She completed B.Com (Hons) in 2019 from Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University. In her graduation she worked
as an Industrial Relations Intern with Honda Cars India Ltd. She has interest in the field of Human Resource Management and
Customer Relationship Management.

4161