responsibilities that attached itself to a maximalist lifestyle, or just the lack of fulfilment behind the general
idea of a wealthy lifestyle are some of the causes that give traction to the minimalism ideology (Weinswig,
2016). Regardless of the reasoning behind it, they all bear an implied trait of similarity: tiredness, boredom, or
draining. This cycle happens to be repetitive with an ending that is predictably regretful, as these very people,
such as the CEO of Hijabistahub, Dato’ Aliff Syukri who wished to downsize their livelihood after realising
the commitment that comes with the sustenance of the luxury and opulence way of life that reaches millions of
bills (Farizan, 2025). In contrast, minimalism, in all its grand promises and offers, provides no empirical
evidence for its beneficial claims, yet remains relevant through the logical deduction of possible repercussions
to its adoption, where a more sustainable life that is indiscriminate to all races and statuses is achievable as it
caters to individuals’ means and efforts (Kang et al., 2021). In the modern context where overconsumption is
the norm, minimalism appears as a messianic message, not just as a mere growing bud to the beauty of
simplicity, but also as a way of repossessing one’s own autonomy (Hook et al., 2021). Undoubtedly, every
person is responsible for their own selective choice, generally speaking, but the concept of minimalism that is
simplistic by nature is now seen as paradoxically empowering, as it creates the feeling of security in retaking
control to their own will through personal choice that is not influenced by others.
An extension to the said minimalism seeps into the ideology of work-life balance in the sense of the un-
glorification of overworking. It is by no means a call for a narrowed limitation placed upon others at a meagre
bare minimum or an estoppel to self-improvement on personal economic stance, but rather a restraint to the
damaging stress and conflict that arises from extreme working devotion (Sirgy et al., 2017). Work-life balance
by itself has been defined with an inexhaustive accumulation of factors that affect an employed individual,
ranging from job satisfaction and productivity to mental health and the overall effect of the employment on
existing relationships with other people in one’s life (Lahav, 2025). Thus, the concept of work-life balance in
the context of minimalism should not be misconstrued in a contextual variant that is irresponsibly renouncing
by the total concept of working, especially when Sirgy, in his paper ‘Work-life Balance: An Integrative
Review,’ further elaborated the positive by-products of work for the employees, with the current emphasis that
should be focused currently on the methods in bridging the said benefits over to our non-working life. The
aforementioned non-working life was further elaborated to be inclusive upon personal time or better known
from its unorthodox equivalent as ‘me-time,’ rather than just restricted family-time bonding, as the term ‘life’
itself is not restrictive. After all, such restriction being placed upon common interpretation and analogical
examples is considered ironically neglectful when the concept of work-life balance itself is a reformation
ideology to free people from the corporate shackles regardless of individuals. Yet those who are without family
attachment are indirectly disregarded over the mere assumption of a lack of familial responsibilities that can be
filled with a bigger employment burden, as these ‘lone wolves’ own personal care and rest are seen to be less
significant and easily dismissed (Boutelle, 2017).
It is worth noting that the position of work-life balance would also be heavily affected by the ‘genre’ of
employment that a person chooses. After all, a person who chooses to work within the umbrella of ‘service for
contract’ or better known as gig workers are granted a flexible work capacity, granting an opportunistic
standardisation of work-life balance. Yet, that unpredictable pattern resulted in lower pay and unprotected
rights that are common in normal employment (Warren, 2021). From a different perspective, this effect is not
necessarily optional, as it may also stem from an inherent, innate self in a volatile working environment. An
illustration can be made to lecturers whose job scopes commonly require them to hold their class within an
online setting. They are said to have a greater work-life balance than ever before, to the point that it was
applied relatively throughout many universities courses even after the post-Covid necessity (Nur Azilah,
2018). On the other hand, a woman, specifically, in a legal industry has a far more terrible work-life balance
due to not only the typical burden of litigations and legal work required to be completed, but also the pressure
from high expectations by their employers stemming from unintended misogynist perception (Gomez, 2024).
Simply put, the determination of work-life balance in Malaysia is generally based on one’s own independent
choice, but the backlash would also have to be taken, for better or worse. It is not completely hopeless, as that
new young drive of ‘enjoyment of life’ along with the burn-out energy from working has reduced many
employees to the mentality of ‘work to live,’ leading them to settle for mediocre pay or even threaten self-
dismissal if their work-life balance are to be heavily disturbed (Yee, 2023). Such bravado, while
commendable, is a luxury that can only be portrayed in normal corporate/office jobs that run from ‘9 to 5’
rather than professional work such as lawyers, doctors and engineers.