INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
Exploring the Relationship between Work-Life Balance (WLB) and  
Employee Productivity of Judiciary Court Staff, Male’ Area,  
Maldives  
Mohamed Solih., Aniyath Jameel., Zubair Hassan  
Islamic University of Maldives  
DOI: https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91200058  
Received: 10 December 2025; Accepted: 17 December 2025; Published: 31 December 2025  
ABSTRACT  
This study investigates the influence of Work-Life Balance (WLB) on employee productivity among judiciary  
staff in the Malé region. Using a quantitative approach, data were collected from 246 participants through  
structured questionnaires. Descriptive analysis and multiple regression were employed to examine the  
relationship between WLB and productivity. The findings indicate a statistically significant and positive  
relationship (p < 0.001), with WLB explaining 5.9% of the variance in employee productivity. All assumptions  
for regression analysis were satisfied. The study concludes that improving work-life balance can enhance  
employee productivity in the judiciary context.  
INTRODUCTION  
Work-life balance (WLB), which is generally defined as the harmony between work and personal life, or  
managing commitments in both domains without conflict, has emerged as a crucial topic in contemporary  
research (Wolor et al., 2020). It has also been increasingly recognized as a key factor for employee success and  
today is of growing importance to both employees and employers (Kishore, 2021).The significance of WLB is  
highlighted by its potential impact on various organizational outcomes, including employee productivity and  
performance (Wolor et al., 2020). A comprehensive review of existing literature provides the necessary  
background and context for understanding these relationships and identifying areas for further study (Ryan,  
2022). Drawing on this foundation, this research seeks to explore the relationship between work-life balance and  
employee productivity focused on judiciary court staff, Male’ area.  
Background of the study  
There are several issues which lead to work-life imbalances according to research. Employee productivity plays  
a critical role in determining organizational effectiveness and service delivery, particularly in public institutions  
such as the judiciary. Globally, organizations are increasingly recognizing the value of maintaining a motivated  
and efficient workforce to meet growing institutional demands. However, existing literature is predominantly  
focused on corporate or private-sector contexts, with limited exploration of how WLB affects productivity in the  
public service domain particularly the judiciary sector. This gap is significant in the Maldives, where unique  
work dynamics, high caseloads, and centralization in Malé may create distinct WLB challenges for judiciary  
employees.  
Among the many factors influencing employee productivity, Work-Life Balance (WLB) has emerged as a key  
contributor. Effective WLB allows employees to manage professional responsibilities alongside personal  
commitments, reducing stress and improving overall job satisfaction. Previous studies have linked positive WLB  
with improved job performance, reduced absenteeism, and enhanced mental well-being.  
In the case of Work-Life Balance (WLB) and its impact on employee productivity, numerous international  
studies have explored this relationship mostly within corporate or private-sector settings. These studies have  
shown that WLB can influence outcomes such as job satisfaction, performance, and absenteeism.However, a  
clear gap exists in how this relationship plays out within the judiciary sector, especially in developing countries  
Page 674  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
like the Maldives. The judiciary is a unique work environment with distinct pressures, formalities, and  
expectations that may affect both WLB and productivity in different ways than other sectors. Despite this, very  
few empirical studies have been conducted on judiciary employees, particularly in the Malé region, where  
workload centralization and administrative demands may create specific challenges.Based on the comprehensive  
review of the literature on this area of study, and the broader literature on work-life balance and employee  
productivity, a significant research gap exists concerning the specific context of the judiciary within the Male'  
area of the Maldives.  
While some literature discusses WLB and productivity in various sectors and countries, including general  
mentions of the Maldives (Hassan et al., 2024; Naeem et al., 2025), none specifically focus on the judiciary  
sector. Studies involving the Maldives mention higher education and university teachers (Hassan et al., 2024),  
and lawyers in the public sector (Naeem et al., 2025), but a focused examination of judges, court staff, or other  
professionals within the court system is not present in the literature reviewed. Similarly, research on work-life  
balance or productivity within judicial systems in general appears less frequently in the literature compared to  
other industries like construction or higher education (Tijani et al., 2022; Natanael et al., 2023).  
Therefore, the significant research gap is the lack of empirical evidence exploring the impact of work-life balance  
on employee productivity among personnel working in the judiciary, specifically within the courts located in the  
Malé area of the Maldives. Investigating this relationship in the Maldivian judiciary would contribute novel  
insights into how WLB challenges and initiatives manifest in a unique legal and cultural environment and affect  
the productivity of employees crucial to the functioning of the justice system. This gap presents a clear  
opportunity for future research to provide empirical data and contextually relevant findings.  
This study seeks to fill that gap by providing data-driven insights on how WLB affects productivity among  
judiciary staff in Malé, contributing new knowledge to a largely unexplored area of public service research.  
Heavy Workload and Long Working Hours  
Heavy workload and extended working hours are significant contributors to work-life imbalance (Stanley &  
Sebastine, 2023). Research consistently shows that when employees face high job demands and are required to  
work overtime, their ability to balance personal and professional responsibilities diminishes, often resulting in  
increased work stress and reduced well-being. For example, a quantitative study among employees in Indonesia  
found that both workload and long working hours had a direct, significant negative effect on work-life balance,  
mediated by work stress (Natanael et al., 2023). Similarly, a study of social workers in India identified excessive  
workload and overtime as major sources of occupational stress, which in turn predicted low work-life balance  
and high burnout (Stanley & Sebastine, 2023). Another recent investigation among metro rail IT workers  
highlighted that workload was the leading factor contributing to job stress, burnout, and work-life conflict, with  
negative consequences for psychological well-being and job satisfaction (Prasad et al., 2024). Furthermore,  
research shows that when employees are unable to complete their tasks within standard hours, the resulting  
pressure and spillover into personal time directly disrupts their work-life balance (Aruldoss et al., 2021); this is  
also cited in Prasad et al. (2024).  
Lack of Flexibility in Work Arrangements  
A lack of flexibility in work arrangements such as rigid schedules, limited remote work options, or inflexible  
hours remains a key barrier to achieving work-life balance. Flexible working hours have been shown to enhance  
employee autonomy, allowing individuals to better align work with family and personal commitments, reduce  
stress, and improve overall well-being (Ridzuwan et al., 2025). However, inflexibility or poorly managed  
flexible arrangements can blur boundaries, leading to overwork, stress, and even burnout. For instance, research  
indicates that while flexible work options can improve work-life balance, they may also foster an “always-on”  
culture and cognitive overload if not supported by clear organizational policies and psychosocial support  
(Golding, 2023). Furthermore, studies have highlighted that employees with less control over their schedules are  
less able to manage competing demands, resulting in lower job satisfaction and diminished work-life balance  
(Ramachandaran et al., 2024). The International Labour Organization also suggests that working-time  
Page 675  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
arrangements with predictable or flexible schedules can facilitate a better work–life balance, while those with  
unpredictable schedules have the opposite effect (International Labour Office, 2022).  
Poor Time Management and Insufficient Social Support  
Poor time management and insufficient social or organizational support are critical factors leading to work-life  
imbalance. Employees who lack effective time management skills often struggle to prioritize tasks, leading to  
spillover of work into personal time and increased stress (Ramachandaran et al., 2024). Additionally, the absence  
of supportive supervisors, colleagues, or family members exacerbates the negative effects of work demands,  
increasing the risk of burnout and reducing job satisfaction (Waworuntu et al., 2022). A quantitative study among  
Indian social workers found that both social support and work-life balance were significant predictors of burnout,  
with low social support and poor work-life balance leading to higher levels of occupational stress and exhaustion  
(Stanley & Sebastine, 2023). Similarly, Vaziri et al. (2022) identified lack of time management and low family  
support as major contributors to work-life imbalance, resulting in psychological conflict and reduced family  
satisfaction (Oludayo & Omonijo, 2020). Recent research also emphasizes that organizational support including  
clear expectations, regular check-ins, and mental health programs is crucial for employees to navigate flexible  
work arrangements and maintain a healthy work-life balance (Ridzuwan et al., 2025).  
Problem Statement  
Several problems arise because of the issues mentioned in the background of the study. Three major problems  
include.  
Burnout and Mental Health Decline from Heavy Workloads  
Heavy workloads and excessive job demands are strongly linked to burnout, emotional exhaustion, and mental  
health decline. For example, a study of nurses in Mongolia found that an increase in mental workload  
significantly raised job burnout and led to decreased organizational commitment, ultimately harming both  
employee well-being and organizational outcomes (Zanabazar & Jigjiddorj, 2022). Systematic reviews during  
the COVID-19 pandemic confirm that psychological distress and burnout are closely connected, with burnout  
acting as a predisposing factor for mental disorders such as depression and anxiety, especially under persistent  
work pressure (Adanaqué-Bravo et al., 2023). In healthcare, heavy workloads and limited recovery opportunities  
have been shown to increase the risk of burnout, which manifests as emotional exhaustion, cynicism, and a sense  
of ineffectiveness, with serious implications for both personal health and workplace performance (The Society  
of Occupational Medicine, 2023).  
Blurred Boundaries and Work-Life Conflict from Inflexible or Poorly Managed Flexible Schedules  
A major problem caused by blurred boundaries between work and personal life is increased work-family conflict,  
which can erode well-being and job satisfaction. A systematic review on "work-life blending" found that high  
permeability between work and home domains leads to greater spillover, making it difficult for individuals to  
mentally detach from work and recover, thereby increasing strain and stress (Steffens et al., 2023). Research in  
academia demonstrates that flexible work and digital technologies, while offering autonomy, can also create  
unbounded work expectations, undermining work-life balance and causing tension between professional and  
personal responsibilities (Johnston et al., 2022). Empirical studies show that role blurring when work and family  
roles overlap due to excessive work pressures or lack of schedule control is positively associated with work-to-  
family conflict, further intensifying stress and reducing satisfaction in both domains (Glavin & Schieman, 2012;  
Work and Health Research Centre, 2020).  
Productivity Loss and Social Isolation from Lack of Support  
Insufficient organizational and social support can lead to productivity loss and increased social isolation, both  
of which harm employee engagement and mental health. A 2024 study in Singapore found that workers  
experiencing both social isolation and depressive symptoms reported significantly higher productivity loss,  
highlighting the compounded negative effects on work performance (Ha et al., 2024). Research during the  
Page 676  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
pandemic in Ireland showed that social isolation due to remote work and lockdowns led to increased job burnout,  
decreased job satisfaction, and chronic stress among employees (Ryan, 2022). Further, a large-scale study  
demonstrated that social isolation and loneliness are independent predictors of depressive symptoms and poorer  
self-rated health, underscoring the importance of social connectivity and support systems for workplace well-  
being (Czaja et al., 2021).  
Objectives  
To explore the relationship between Work-Life Balance and employee productivity.  
1. To identify the extent to which work-life balance is practiced by employees.  
2. To examine the influence of work-life balance on employee productivity.  
Research Questions  
1. What is the extent to which work-life balance is utilized by employees?  
2. Is there any influence of work-life balance on employee productivity?  
Significance of the study  
Extensive empirical evidence demonstrates that a well-managed work-life balance (WLB) is positively related  
to enhanced employee productivity and performance across numerous sectors and cultures (Marecki, 2024;  
Tamunomiebi & Oyibo, 2020; Wolor et al., 2020). Prior studies also show that favorable WLB predicts higher  
job and life satisfaction while reducing turnover intentions and burnout (Znidaršič & Marič, 2021; Dwitanti et  
al., 2023). Conversely, imbalances driven by excessive workload, inflexible schedules, or insufficient support  
impair well-being and diminish organizational output (International Labour Office, 2022; Irfan et al., 2023).  
Although these findings underscore WLB as a strategic lever for achieving organizational goals (Khatri &  
Shukla, 2024; Shirmohammadi et al., 2022), the existing literature remains fragmented—largely centered on  
Western contexts or sectors such as higher education, healthcare, and general public service (Al-Khateeb & Al-  
Louzi, 2020; Hassan et al., 2024).  
A pronounced gap concerns the Maldivian judiciary, where no empirical work has yet examined how court staff  
experience WLB and its influence on productivity (Naeem et al., 2025). Addressing this omission is crucial for  
three reasons. First, it advances theory by testing established WLB–performance models in a new legal and  
cultural milieu, thereby assessing their cross-context validity. Second, it offers sector-specific insights to  
policymakers and court administrators, guiding evidence-based interventions—such as flexible scheduling,  
workload calibration, and supervisor support programs—that can enhance employee effectiveness and service  
delivery. Third, by improving work conditions for judicial personnel, the study may yield broader social benefits,  
including faster case processing and improved public trust in the justice system.  
By focusing on Malé-area court staff, this research will therefore bridge a substantive knowledge gap, refine the  
multidimensional understanding of WLB, and generate actionable recommendations for both organizational  
practice and national policy.  
LITERATURE REVIEW  
Introduction/Overview  
The concept of work-life balance (WLB) has gained significant attention in recent decades, becoming a central  
topic in organizational research and practice as identified by Khatri and Shukla (2024), Irfan et al. (2023), and  
Khateeb (2021). It reflects the dynamic interplay between an individual's professional responsibilities and their  
personal life, encompassing aspects like family, leisure, and well-being according to Khateeb (2021), Wolor et  
al. (2020), Roopavathi and Kishore (2021), and Alfatihah et al. (2021). Achieving a state of equilibrium where  
individuals feel equally engaged and satisfied in both domains is increasingly viewed not just as a personal goal  
Page 677  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
but also as a critical factor influencing employee outcomes and, consequently, organizational success. One of  
the most compelling arguments for organizations to prioritize WLB initiatives stems from its purported impact  
on employee productivity and performance (Khateeb, 2021; Wolor et al., 2020; Alfatihah et al., 2021; Marecki,  
2024; Tamunomiebi & Oyibo, 2020).  
Employee productivity and performance are fundamental to achieving organizational goals and maintaining a  
competitive advantage (Khateeb, 2021; Tamunomiebi & Oyibo, 2020). While extensive research, particularly in  
Western contexts, has explored the link between WLB and various employee outcomes, including productivity,  
there remains a need for a comprehensive understanding of this relationship across diverse sectors and  
geographical locations (Tamunomiebi & Oyibo, 2020; Al-Khateeb & Al-Louzi, 2020).  
This literature review aims to synthesize the existing body of knowledge regarding work-life balance and  
employee productivity, drawing primarily from the provided sources. It will explore the definitions of these core  
concepts, summarize key findings and trends in the literature, identify similarities and differences in research  
approaches and results over recent years, and also highlight specific research gaps, particularly focusing on the  
context of the court staff working in the judiciary in Male' area of the Maldives. By examining the multifaceted  
relationship between WLB and productivity, this review seeks to provide a foundation for understanding its  
significance and directing future research efforts.  
Definitions and Explanations of Main Concepts  
Understanding the relationship between work-life balance and employee productivity requires clear definitions  
of these two concepts. The literature presents various perspectives and definitions, reflecting the complexity and  
multidimensional nature of each construct.  
Definitions of Work-Life Balance:  
Work-life balance is defined as the extent to which an individual is ‘equally engaged in and equally satisfied  
with’ his or her work roles (Tijani et al., 2022). According to Noon and Blyton (2007), WLB is referred to as the  
capacity of the employee to pursue their work and non-work lives successfully, without excessive pressures  
(Tijani et al., 2022). Work-life balance involves figuring out what ‘life’ (joy, leisure, relatives, and growth) and  
‘work’ (career and desire) should take precedence over, a concept considered broad (Marecki, 2024). Work-life  
balance can also be understood as a state of equilibrium where the requirements of both work and personal life  
for an individual are equal (Roopavathi & Kishore, 2021). It is the balance of the time someone spends working  
compared to the time spent on one's personal life (Wolor et al., 2020). Another perspective is that WLB is how  
to create a healthy and supportive work environment, which allows employees to have a balance between work  
and personal responsibility, thereby improving employee performance (Shirmohammadi et al., 2022; Wolor et  
al., 2020).  
These definitions highlight different facets of WLB, ranging from subjective satisfaction and engagement in  
multiple life roles to the successful management of time and demands across work and non-work domains, and  
the creation of supportive environments. The concept is not new but remains relevant and researched across  
generations (Lestari & Margaretha, 2021).  
Definitions of Employee Productivity.  
Employee productivity can be defined as the employee’s ability to produce work or goods and services according  
to the expected standards set by the employers, or beyond the expected standards (Anthonia, 2020). These  
definitions emphasize employee output, task completion, contribution to the organization, and adherence to  
expected functional behaviors. Optimizing employee productivity is a key challenge for organizations seeking  
to achieve their goals (Tamunomiebi & Oyibo, 2020).  
Based upon the perspectives presented in the literature, work-life balance can be defined as an individual's  
subjective perception of achieving a harmonious integration between their professional responsibilities and  
personal life demands and their aspirations. It involves managing time, energy, and emotional investment during  
Page 678  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
work, family, leisure, and personal growth domains in a way that leads to overall satisfaction and minimizes  
conflict or stress between these areas, supported by individual strategies and organizational policies.  
Based on the literature, employee productivity refers to the effectiveness and efficiency with which an individual  
utilizes their skills, knowledge, and effort to complete their assigned tasks, fulfill responsibilities, and contribute  
towards achieving the organizational objectives within a specific timeframe. It is the measurable output or  
outcome resulting from an employee's work activities.  
Conceptual Framework and Synthesis of Literature  
The literature on work-life balance and employee productivity is extensive and this continues to grow (Khatri &  
Shukla, 2024). Studies span various disciplines, including management, psychology, sociology, and human  
resources (Shirmohammadi et al., 2022). Much of the research has historically focused on Western countries,  
though there is an increasing focus on other regions as well. (Al-Khateeb & Al-Louzi, 2020)  
The overarching inclination in the literature is to investigate the relationship between work-life balance and  
various individual and organizational outcomes (Marecki, 2024). A primary objective across many studies is to  
determine the effect of WLB on employee performance or productivity (Marecki, 2024). Another significant  
objective is to identify the causes of poor WLB and propose interventions or initiatives to mitigate them(Tijani  
et al., 2022). Additionally, some research aims to review and synthesize existing literature to identify gaps,  
clarify concepts, and propose future research directions (Marecki, 2024).  
Key findings consistently suggest a positive relationship between work-life balance and favorable employee  
outcomes. A better WLB is often associated with higher job satisfaction (Marecki, 2024), increased life  
satisfaction (Znidaršič & Marič, 2021), reduced turnover intention (Marecki, 2024) and enhanced employee  
productivity (Marecki, 2024). Studies indicate that employees who achieve WLB are more likely to perform  
better (Tamunomiebi & Oyibo, 2020). Millennial generation employees, in particular, are noted for prioritizing  
WLB and flexibility, which influences their productivity and commitment (Wolor et al., 2020). Poor WLB,  
conversely, can lead to negative consequences such as increased stress, fatigue, burnout, mental health issues,  
and reduced productivity or increased turnover (Marecki, 2024). Factors like heavy workload, long working  
hours, role conflict, and family commitment are identified contributors to work-life imbalance (Dwitanti et al.,  
2023).  
Figure 1.  
The fundamental investigation into the relationship between WLB and employee productivity remains a central  
theme, as utilized by Wolor et al. (2020), Dwitanti et al. (2023), Marecki (2024), Borgia et al. (2022), and Stanley  
and Sebastine (2023).Studies consistently highlight the importance of WLB for employee well-being and  
organizational effectiveness, as shown by Wolor et al. (2020), Alfatihah et al. (2021), Marecki (2024), Dwitanti  
et al. (2023), Borgia et al. (2022), Natanael et al. (2023), Ari and Bahtiar (2024), and Aisyah et al. (2023).More  
recent studies delve into specific industries, such as construction (Handoko & Ginting, 2023), aviation (Yaşam  
et al., 2025), and higher education, as shown by Znidaršič and Marič (2021), Hassan et al. (2024), and Natanael  
et al. (2023); banking (Dwitanti et al., 2023); and the legal field, as seen in the study by Naeem et al.  
(2025).Studies done in different geographical regions such as Indonesia (Wolor et al., 2020; Dwitanti et al.,  
2023), Malaysia (Natanael et al., 2023; Dousin et al., 2021), Nigeria (Tamunomiebi & Oyibo, 2020; Oludayo &  
Omonijo, 2020), and the Maldives (Hassan et al., 2024; Naeem et al., 2025) acknowledge that cultural and  
organizational contexts matter (Al-Khateeb & Al-Louzi, 2020; Susanto et al., 2022).Moreover, Recent studies  
have introduced and examined the roles of variables such as technological knowledge risks (Borgia et al., 2022)  
Page 679  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
or person-job fit (Hasan et al., 2021) in the context of WLB and its outcomes. Therefore, newer variables are  
being studied. The concept of "work-life blending," where boundaries between work and personal life become  
permeable, has gained research attention as distinct from traditional "balance," according to Steffens et al. (2023)  
and International Labour Office (2022).  
Methodologies commonly employed include quantitative research using surveys and questionnaires, such as by  
Yaşam et al. (2025), Znidaršič and Marič (2021), Irfan et al. (2023), Hassan et al. (2024), Naeem et al. (2025),  
Tijani et al. (2022), and Handoko and Ginting (2023). Systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses are also  
frequently used to synthesize findings and identify trends or gaps, such as in Wolor et al. (2020), Tijani et al.  
(2022), Alper Ay (2024), Marecki (2024), Khatri and Shukla (2024), Samsudin et al. (2024), and Steffens et al.  
(2023). Qualitative methods like interviews are used, though less frequently in broad WLB research compared  
to quantitative surveys (Natanael et al., 2023; Tijani et al., 2022).Quantitative surveys remain a prevalent  
research method, as utilized by Dwitanti et al. (2023), Yaşam et al. (2025), Hassan et al. (2024), and Naeem et  
al. (2025), often examining relationships between variables using statistical techniques, such as those used by  
Dwitanti et al. (2023), Znidaršič and Marič (2021), Susanto et al. (2022), Hassan et al. (2024), Yaşam et al.  
(2025), and Borgia et al. (2022). In addition, systematic reviews have also become increasingly common to  
consolidate knowledge and identify future directions, as seen in studies done by Wolor et al. (2020), Alper Ay  
(2024), Khatri and Shukla (2024), Samsudin et al. (2024), and Steffens et al. (2023).Though quantitative studies  
dominate, there is continued use and recognition of qualitative methods, such as phenomenological approaches  
to understand lived experiences of WLB challenges (Natanael et al., 2023).  
Studies are increasingly explicit about the theoretical lenses used (e.g., Social Exchange Theory, Conservation  
of Resources Theory, Job Demands-Resources Theory) to explain relationships, as seen in the studies by Naeem  
et al. (2025) and Natanael et al. (2023).Overall, the recent literature confirms the established link between WLB  
and productivity but expands upon it by exploring complex interrelationships with a wider array of variables,  
considering diverse contexts, and utilizing varied methodological approaches to gain deeper insights. Despite  
the wealth of research, gaps remain, particularly in understanding the specific challenges and effects of WLB in  
unique professional and cultural settings.  
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY  
This study employs a quantitative exploratory survey design to examine the relationship between work-life  
balance (WLB) and employee productivity among judiciary staff in Malé, Maldives, excluding judges and  
justices. The design is appropriate due to limited prior research in this context and aims to establish a direct link  
between WLB (independent variable) and productivity (dependent variable) (Anderson & Lightfoot, 2022;  
George, 2023). A sample of 246 respondents was selected using simple random sampling, exceeding the  
minimum requirement of 80 based on the 5:1 item-to-sample ratio (Gorsuch, 1983; Hatcher, 1994; Suhr, 2006,  
as cited in Memon et al., 2020). Data were collected via a Google Forms questionnaire adapted from validated  
instruments (Borowiec & Drygas, 2023; Rañeses et al., 2022), divided into demographic and Likert-scale items  
measuring WLB and productivity. A pilot study ensured contextual validity and reliability. Responses were  
coded and analyzed in SPSS, using descriptive statistics to assess WLB practices and multiple regression  
analysis to determine the influence of WLB on productivity. This systematic approach ensures objectivity,  
statistical rigor, and actionable insights for HR policy development (Heffernan & Levin, 2024; Zyoud, 2024;  
Jebb, Ng, & Tay, 2021).  
FINDINGS  
Demographic analysis  
Variable  
Category  
Frequency (n)  
Percent (%)  
17.1  
Cumulative Percent (%)  
Age  
18–25 years  
26–35 years  
42  
68  
17.1  
44.7  
27.6  
Page 680  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
36–45 years  
46–55 years  
55 years & above  
Total  
58  
23.6  
17.5  
14.2  
100.0  
62.6  
37.4  
100.0  
24.8  
31.3  
28.0  
15.9  
100.0  
8.5  
68.3  
85.8  
100.0  
43  
35  
246  
154  
92  
Gender  
Female  
62.6  
Male  
100.0  
246  
61  
Total  
Position  
Senior Management  
Middle Management  
Junior Level  
Support Staff  
Total  
24.8  
56.1  
84.1  
100.0  
77  
69  
39  
246  
21  
Work  
Experience  
Less than 1 year  
1–5 years  
100.0  
25.2  
45.1  
67.1  
91.5  
62  
25.2  
19.9  
22.0  
24.4  
100.0  
71.1  
28.9  
100.0  
6–10 years  
49  
11–15 years  
More than 15 years  
Total  
54  
60  
246  
175  
71  
Marital Status  
Currently married  
Currently unmarried  
Total  
71.1  
100.0  
246  
Age  
The age distribution shows that the largest group of respondents falls within the 26–35 years category (27.6%),  
followed by those aged 36–45 years (23.6%). Employees aged 18–25 years account for 17.1%, while those aged  
46–55 years represent 17.5%. The smallest group comprises individuals aged 55 years and above (14.2%). This  
indicates that the sample includes a mix of younger, mid-career, and older employees, with a slight concentration  
in the early to mid-career range.  
Gender  
The gender composition of the sample is predominantly female, with 154 respondents (62.6%), compared to 92  
male respondents (37.4%). This suggests that women form the majority of the workforce in the surveyed  
judiciary staff population.  
Position  
Among the respondents, 31.3% hold middle management positions, making it the largest category. Junior-level  
staff account for 28.0%, while senior management represents 24.8%. Support staff form the smallest group at  
Page 681  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
15.9%. This distribution reflects a workforce that is primarily concentrated in operational and middle-tier roles,  
with a notable presence of senior managers.  
Work Experience  
The tenure profile shows that 25.2% of respondents have 1–5 years of experience, while 24.4% have more than  
15 years. Employees with 11–15 years of experience make up 22.0%, and those with 6–10 years account for  
19.9%. A smaller group (8.5%) has less than one year of experience. This indicates a balanced mix of early-  
career and long-tenured employees.  
Marital Status  
The majority of respondents are currently married (71.1%), while 28.9% are currently unmarried. This suggests  
that most employees in the sample have family commitments, with a smaller proportion being single.  
The extent to which work-life balance is utilized by employees of Judiciary in Male’ area  
Figure 4.7 Extent of work-life balance usage among employees of Judiciary in Male’ area  
Item Items  
No  
Total Agreement  
Frequency  
Total disgreement  
Mean  
Std Deviation  
%
Frequency  
%
1
I sometimes give up going 72  
to social gatherings to do  
my professional work  
during this time.  
29.3  
75  
30.5  
3.01  
0.958  
2
Even  
in  
situations  
of 86  
34.9  
72  
29.3  
3.08  
1.039  
overloading, I find time for  
physical activity.  
3
4
5
I usually find enough time 84  
for my family.  
34.1  
36.9  
37.8  
68  
70  
60  
27.6  
28.5  
24.4  
3.07  
3.15  
3.17  
1.051  
1.008  
1.054  
My job makes my personal 91  
life difficult.  
It happens that I do not use 93  
sick leave, even when I am  
really sick and I feel bad.  
6
I put personal needs second 92  
because of work.  
37.4  
72  
29.3  
3.14  
1.05  
This study surveyed 246 judiciary employees working in Male’ area to explore their work-life balance  
experiences. Overall, the findings suggest a moderate level of strain between professional and personal life.  
Among the six items assessed, the highest agreement was observed for Item 5: “I do not use sick leave even  
when I am really sick” (37.8%), followed closely by Item 6: “I put personal needs second because of work”  
(37.4%). However, Item 1 – “I give up social gatherings for work” – had the highest disagreement (30.5%). All  
mean values are slightly above 3, indicating mild agreement across all items.  
There is some evidence of WLB utilization, particularly in maintaining physical activity and family engagement  
denoted by mean scores of item 2 and 3. However, the more dominant trend is work-life conflict, especially  
Page 682  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
around health neglect, personal compromise, and social isolation as denoted by mean scores of items 5, 6, 4 and  
1.  
Therefore the data reflects a neutral to slightly negative perception of work-life balance among judiciary staff,  
indicating that personal well-being is often compromised for professional responsibilities.  
Regression Assumptions  
Linearity  
The Normal P-P Plot of Regression Standardized Residuals shows that the data points closely follow the diagonal  
line, indicating that the residuals are approximately normally distributed. This suggests that the assumption of  
linearity and normality of residuals is reasonably met.  
The scatterplot of standardized residuals against standardized predicted values displays a random dispersion of  
points around the horizontal axis (zero), without any systematic pattern. This randomness confirms that the  
residuals are evenly spread and do not show evidence of non-linearity or heteroscedasticity. Therefore, the  
assumption of a linear relationship between the independent and dependent variables is supported.  
Figure 4.8  
Figure 4.9  
Page 683  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
Homoscedasticity  
The histogram of standardized residuals appears approximately symmetric and bell-shaped, suggesting that the  
residuals are normally distributed. The Normal P–P Plot of Regression Standardized Residuals further supports  
this, as the points closely follow the diagonal line, indicating a good fit to the normal distribution. Additionally,  
the scatterplot of standardized residuals versus predicted values shows a random dispersion of points around the  
zero line, with no evident pattern, curvature, or funnel shape. These observations provide strong evidence that  
the assumption of homoscedasticity is satisfied, and the residuals exhibit constant variance across predicted  
values.  
Figure 4.11  
Figure 4.12  
Page 684  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
Figure 4.13  
Multicollinearity  
Multicollinearity was checked using VIF and tolerance values. Both metrics were 1.000, indicating no  
multicollinearity. Since VIF is well below 10 and tolerance is above 0.001, the assumption of no multicollinearity  
is met.  
Coefficientsa  
Model  
Unstandardized Coefficients  
t
Sig.  
Collinearity Statistics  
Standardized  
Coefficients  
B
Std. Error  
1.516  
Beta  
Tolerance  
1.000  
VIF  
1
(Constant)  
WLB  
13.507  
.314  
8.911  
3.895  
.000  
.000  
.081  
.242  
1.000  
a. Dependent Variable: Employee productivity  
Figure 4.14  
Independence of errors  
The Durbin-Watson statistic was used to assess the independence of residuals. A value near 2.0 suggests that  
residuals are uncorrelated, while values below 1.5 or above 2.5 may indicate autocorrelation. In this model, the  
Durbin-Watson value is 1.647, which falls within the acceptable range. This indicates that the assumption of  
independence of errors is satisfied.  
Model Summaryb  
Mod  
el  
R
R
Adjusted R  
Square  
Std. Error  
Change Statistics  
Durbin-  
Watson  
Square  
of  
the  
R
Square  
F
df1  
1
df2  
Sig.  
Change  
F
Estimate  
Change  
Change  
1
.242a  
.059  
.055  
3.31160  
.059  
15.169  
244  
.000  
1.647  
a. Predictors: (Constant), WLB  
b. Dependent Variable: Employee_productivity  
Figure 4.15  
Page 685  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
Outliers  
Outliers were assessed using Mahalanobis Distance and Cook’s Distance. The maximum Mahalanobis distance  
observed was 8.433, which is below the chi-square critical value of 16.27 (df = 3, p < 0.001), indicating the  
absence of multivariate outliers. Additionally, Cook’s Distance values ranged from 0.000 to 0.122, well below  
the threshold of 1.0, suggesting that no single case exerted undue influence on the regression model. Therefore,  
the assumption regarding the absence of influential outliers is satisfied.  
Residuals Statisticsa ( Figure 4.16)  
Minimum  
16.9608  
-2.904  
Maximum  
21.6700  
2.811  
Mean  
19.3537  
.000  
Std. Deviation  
.82402  
N
Predicted Value  
246  
246  
246  
Std. Predicted Value  
1.000  
Standard Error of Predicted  
Value  
.213  
.650  
.284  
.091  
Adjusted Predicted Value  
Residual  
17.0393  
-10.58867  
-3.197  
-3.235  
-10.83563  
-3.299  
.021  
21.6952  
6.41133  
1.936  
1.958  
6.56086  
1.970  
8.433  
.122  
19.3563  
.00000  
.000  
.82245  
3.30484  
.998  
246  
246  
246  
246  
246  
246  
246  
246  
246  
Std. Residual  
Stud. Residual  
.000  
1.002  
3.33430  
1.007  
1.469  
.011  
Deleted Residual  
Stud. Deleted Residual  
Mahal. Distance  
Cook's Distance  
-.00266  
-.001  
.996  
.000  
.004  
Centered Leverage Value  
.000  
.034  
.004  
.006  
a. Dependent Variable: Employee_productivity  
The influence of work-life balance on employee productivity  
Work-life balance reflects how well individuals manage their responsibilities at work alongside personal and  
family life. As organizations increasingly recognize the importance of employee well-being, understanding how  
work-life balance impacts productivity has become critical. This research question explores the relationship  
between employees' ability to balance work and personal life, and how this balance influences their productivity  
at work. The study aims to identify whether better work-life balance contributes to higher levels of employee  
productivity in a professional setting.  
Model Summary and Fit  
The regression model shows a significant result, as the p-value is less than 0.001, indicating that the model is  
statistically meaningful. The R value is 0.242, suggesting a positive impact of work-life balance on employee  
productivity. While the R² value of 0.059 indicates that the model explains only a small portion of the variance  
in productivity, the significance confirms that work-life balance does have a measurable and valid impact on  
employee performance.  
Page 686  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
Model Summaryb  
Mo  
del  
R
R
Adjusted  
R Square  
Std. Error  
of the  
Estimate  
Change Statistics  
Square  
R Square  
Change  
F
df1  
1
df2  
Sig.  
Change  
F
Change  
1
.242a  
.059  
.055  
3.31160  
.059  
15.169  
244  
.000  
a. Predictors: (Constant), WLB  
b. Dependent Variable: Employee productivity  
Figure 4.17  
ANOVA Summary  
The ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) test result is significant, with a p-value less than 0.001. This indicates that  
the regression model fits the data well and that Work-Life Balance explains a meaningful portion of the variance  
in employee productivity. The result also suggests that the model is a valid representation of the relationship in  
the study sample and can be considered reflective of the broader population.  
ANOVAa  
Model  
1
Sum of Squares  
166.357  
df  
Mean Square  
166.357  
F
Sig.  
Regression  
Residual  
Total  
1
15.169  
.000b  
2675.875  
244  
245  
10.967  
2842.232  
a. Dependent Variable: Employee productivity  
b. Predictors: (Constant), WLB  
Figure 4.18  
Regression Coefficients  
The coefficients table lists a single predictor which is Work-Life Balance (WLB) alongside the intercept. WLB  
is statistically significant, with p = .000 (p < .001), indicating a reliable positive effect on employee productivity.  
The unstandardized coefficient (B = 0.314) means that each one-unit rise in WLB is associated with a 0.314-unit  
increase in productivity, holding all else constant. The standardized coefficient (Beta = 0.242) and t-value of  
3.895 further confirm that WLB makes a moderate yet meaningful contribution to the model.  
Because WLB is the only predictor, no competing variables dilute its influence, and the result highlights WLB’s  
unique contribution to explaining productivity differences among employees. Although the effect size is modest,  
its statistical significance underscores the practical value of fostering better work-life balance initiatives to boost  
workforce productivity.  
Coefficientsa  
Model  
Unstandardized Coefficients  
Standardized  
Coefficients  
t
Sig.  
B
Std. Error  
Beta  
Page 687  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
1
(Constant)  
WLB  
13.507  
.314  
1.516  
.081  
8.911  
3.895  
.000  
.000  
.242  
a. Dependent Variable: Employee_productivity  
Figure 4.19  
Summary of Findings  
Based on the analysis, it can be concluded that Work-Life Balance (WLB) has a statistically significant and  
positive influence on employee productivity. The regression model was found to be significant at p < 0.001,  
indicating that the observed relationship is unlikely to be due to chance. The coefficient for WLB (B = 0.314, β  
= 0.242) suggests that employees with higher work-life balance tend to exhibit higher productivity levels.  
Although the R Square value (0.059) indicates that WLB explains a modest 5.9% of the variance in employee  
productivity, the effect is still meaningful in the context of workplace behavior research. Importantly, all key  
assumptions of regression, normality, linearity, homoscedasticity, and independence of residuals were met,  
further validating the reliability of the model.  
The demographic profile of the sample provides important context for interpreting these findings. The majority  
of respondents were female (62.6%), married (71.1%), and within the 26–45 age group, primarily holding middle  
or junior management positions. These groups often face heightened personal responsibilities, which may  
contribute to their experience of work-life strain. Additionally, a significant portion of the sample (44.3%) had  
1–10 years of work experience, reflecting a career stage where employees may be more sensitive to imbalances  
between professional and personal life.  
Taken together, the findings support the conclusion that work-life balance contributes positively to employee  
productivity, and the study offers a valid and representative basis for understanding this relationship within the  
judiciary sector.  
DISCUSSIONS  
The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of Work-Life Balance (WLB) on Employee Productivity  
among judiciary employees. The results of the regression analysis reveal a statistically significant positive  
relationship between WLB and productivity, as indicated by a p-value less than 0.001. The standardized  
coefficient (β = 0.242) and unstandardized coefficient (B = 0.314) suggest that improvements in work-life  
balance are associated with corresponding increases in productivity scores.  
Although the R Square value is relatively low (0.059), indicating that WLB explains approximately 5.9% of the  
variance in employee productivity, this finding remains important. In organizational research, especially in  
behavioral studies, small effect sizes are common due to the complex interplay of multiple human factors.  
Therefore, even modest improvements in work-life balance may yield meaningful benefits in employee output  
and well-being.  
The diagnostic tests support the validity of the regression model. The assumptions of normality, linearity,  
homoscedasticity, and independence of residuals were all satisfied. In particular, the Durbin-Watson value of  
1.647 falls within the acceptable range, indicating no significant autocorrelation. Residual analysis showed no  
influential outliers or multicollinearity, reinforcing the model’s robustness.  
These findings align with previous literature suggesting that work-life balance contributes to greater job  
satisfaction, reduced burnout, and improved performance. In the context of the judiciary, where job stress and  
workload are often high, the positive effect of WLB on productivity underscores the importance of implementing  
flexible and employee-centered policies.  
Page 688  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
Recommendation  
Based on the findings of this study, which confirm a positive and statistically significant relationship between  
Work-Life Balance (WLB) and Employee Productivity, the following recommendations are proposed to enhance  
both employee well-being and organizational performance within the judiciary sector:  
1. Implement Flexible Working Hours Introduce flexible start and end times to help employees manage personal  
obligations alongside their workload. This can reduce stress and improve focus during working hours, thus  
enhancing productivity.  
2. Promote the Use of Leave Entitlements Encourage employees to fully utilize their sick leave and annual leave  
without fear of negative judgment. The high agreement with statements like working while sick suggests the  
need for a supportive culture around rest and recovery.  
3. Introduce Employee Wellness Programs Develop structured wellness initiatives, such as fitness sessions,  
stress management workshops, and mental health support, to improve employees’ ability to maintain work-life  
balance and increase overall effectiveness at work.  
4. Regularly Monitor Workload Distribution Periodic reviews of task assignments and deadlines should be  
conducted to prevent overloading, which often disrupts personal life. Balanced workloads help maintain  
consistent productivity and reduce burnout.  
5. Provide Training on Time Management and Boundary Setting Offer skill-building sessions focused on  
managing time effectively and setting boundaries between work and personal life. This empowers staff to take  
control of their schedules, improving their ability to perform efficiently.  
6. Establish Feedback Mechanisms for Work-Life Challenges Create confidential platforms where employees  
can share challenges related to work-life balance. Using this feedback to adjust policies or practices ensures that  
organizational responses remain aligned with employee needs.  
Implications  
This study offers valuable insights into the relationship between work-life balance and employee productivity,  
with implications for multiple stakeholders:  
1 Judiciary Administrators  
Senior management in the judiciary can use these findings to develop policies that promote healthier work-life  
integration. Recognizing that improved WLB enhances productivity enables them to justify investments in  
flexible work arrangements and employee support programs.  
2 Human Resource Departments  
HR professionals gain empirical evidence to support the design and implementation of WLB initiatives, such as  
wellness programs, flexible scheduling, and employee assistance services. These efforts can directly improve  
workforce morale and performance.  
3 Employees in the Judiciary  
The research validates the personal and professional benefits of maintaining a healthy work-life balance.  
Employees are empowered to advocate for better conditions and take proactive steps to manage stress and  
enhance their productivity.  
Page 689  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
4 Policymakers and Government Bodies  
For policymakers overseeing the judicial sector, the study highlights the importance of work-life reforms in  
enhancing public sector efficiency. These findings can inform broader workforce strategies and labor regulations  
within civil service structures.  
5 Organizational Researchers and Academics  
Scholars in organizational behavior and public administration can build on this research to explore further  
variables affecting productivity in high-stress professions. It also contributes to the growing literature on  
employee well-being in government institutions.  
Future Studies  
Work-life balance (WLB) has emerged as a critical determinant of employee productivity, particularly in high-  
pressure professional environments. While the current study provides valuable insights into the relationship  
between WLB and productivity among judiciary employees in Malé, its conceptual framework opens avenues  
for broader exploration. The novelty of this research lies in its focus on a specific public sector group within the  
Maldivian context, offering an initial understanding of how WLB influences performance in judicial settings.  
However, productivity is a multidimensional construct influenced by various factors beyond WLB, such as job  
satisfaction, burnout, organizational support, and motivation. Incorporating these variables in future studies can  
enrich the theoretical model and provide a more holistic view of employee well-being and performance.  
Additionally, expanding the scope beyond judiciary employees in Malé to include regional courts and other  
islands can reveal location-based variations in WLB experiences, resource accessibility, and workload  
distribution. Comparative studies between public and private sector employees would further clarify whether  
observed patterns are sector-specific or universal. Employing longitudinal or experimental designs—such as  
tracking employees over time or introducing interventions like flexible schedules and wellness programs—can  
strengthen causal inferences. Finally, integrating qualitative approaches, including interviews and focus groups,  
will uncover nuanced perceptions of WLB, complementing quantitative findings and enhancing the depth of  
analysis. Collectively, these directions aim to advance the understanding of WLB and its implications for  
productivity, contributing to evidence-based policy and organizational practices in diverse work environments.  
Limitations  
While this study provides meaningful insights into the relationship between Work-Life Balance (WLB) and  
employee productivity, several limitations should be acknowledged:  
1 Limited Geographic Coverage  
The study focused solely on judiciary employees located in the Malé region, excluding staff from outer islands  
and cities. This limited geographic scope may not capture regional differences in work-life balance and  
productivity influenced by workload distribution, resource access, or administrative structures in other areas.  
2 Use of a Quantitative-Only Approach  
The study relied solely on quantitative data collected through structured questionnaires. While this method  
captures measurable trends, it does not provide in-depth insights into employees' personal experiences or  
contextual factors influencing their perceptions of work-life balance and productivity. The absence of qualitative  
data limits the richness and depth of interpretation.  
3 Single Predictor Model  
The regression model included only Work-Life Balance as the independent variable. Other important factors  
that may influence productivity such as job satisfaction, stress levels, or organizational support were not  
considered, narrowing the explanatory scope of the model.  
Page 690  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
4 Cross-Sectional Design  
As the data were collected at a single point in time, the study cannot establish cause-and-effect relationships. A  
longitudinal or experimental design would be needed to assess how changes in work-life balance over time affect  
productivity.  
5 Lack of Departmental or Role-Based Comparison  
The study did not classify responses by specific departments, job roles, or workloads within the judiciary. As a  
result, it was not possible to examine whether the WLB–productivity relationship varies across different  
functional groups, limiting more detailed, role-specific conclusions.  
CONCLUSION  
This study explored the relationship between work-life balance (WLB) and employee productivity among court  
staff in the judiciary sector of the Malé area, Maldives. The findings provide empirical support for a positive and  
statistically significant relationship between WLB and employee productivity, affirming the theoretical  
proposition that balanced integration of personal and professional responsibilities enhances employee  
performance outcomes. This aligns with existing literature indicating that employees who effectively manage  
their work and life domains exhibit higher motivation, reduced stress, and greater organizational commitment  
(Wolor et al., 2020; Marecki, 2024; Tamunomiebi & Oyibo, 2020).  
The results of the regression analysis demonstrated that WLB accounts for a meaningful proportion of the  
variance in employee productivity, suggesting that interventions aimed at improving WLB could yield  
considerable gains in organizational efficiency and service quality within the judiciary. These findings are  
particularly significant given the limited empirical research conducted in the Maldivian legal sector, where rigid  
schedules, high caseloads, and limited autonomy are known stressors (Naeem et al., 2025). Studies on legal  
professionals highlight that poor WLB in the legal field is associated with mental health risks, burnout, and lower  
performance, emphasizing the urgency of addressing work-life concerns within this high-pressure sector (Naeem  
et al., 2025).  
In addition to validating prior studies conducted in other professional contexts, this research fills a notable gap  
by offering sector-specific insights that are culturally and institutionally grounded. It underscores the importance  
of contextualizing work-life balance policies and highlights the need for institutional reforms such as flexible  
work arrangements, supervisory support, and wellness programs to mitigate stress and enhance productivity.  
In conclusion, the study contributes to both academic literature and practical policy formulation by establishing  
the importance of work-life balance in improving employee productivity among court staff in the Maldivian  
judiciary. Future research should consider longitudinal designs and include qualitative insights to deepen  
understanding of how specific WLB practices influence performance over time. Implementation of targeted  
WLB initiatives, informed by these findings, holds potential not only for improving institutional outcomes but  
also for enhancing the well-being and professional satisfaction of judicial staff.  
REFERENCES  
1. Adanaqué-Bravo, I., Escobar-Segovia, K., Gómez-Salgado, J., García-Iglesias, J. J., Fagundo-Rivera, J.,  
& Ruiz-Frutos, C. (2023). Relationship Between Psychological Distress, Burnout and Work Engagement  
in Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Public  
Health, 67(January), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2022.1605605  
2. Borowiec, A. A., & Drygas, W. (2023). Work–Life Balance and Mental and Physical Health among  
Warsaw Specialists, Managers and Entrepreneurs. International Journal of Environmental Research and  
Public Health, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010492  
3. Czaja, S. J., Moxley, J. H., & Rogers, W. A. (2021). Social Support, Isolation, Loneliness, and Health  
Among Older Adults in the PRISM Randomized Controlled Trial. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(October),  
1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.728658  
Page 691  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
4. Glavin, P., & Schieman, S. (2012). Work-family role blurring and work-family conflict: The moderating  
influence of job resources and  
job demands. Work and Occupations, 39(1), 71–98.  
https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888411406295  
5. Golding, G. (2023). the Right To Disconnect in Australia: Creating Space for a New Term Implied By  
Law. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 46(2), 728–757. https://doi.org/10.53637/HJMQ5885  
6. Ha, J. W. Y., Yip, W., Ge, L., Yap, C. W., & Pereira, M. J. (2024). Association of social isolation and  
depressive symptoms with workplace productivity loss in a multi-ethnic Asian study. Scientific Reports,  
14(1), 22145. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-73272-4  
7. International Labour Office. (2022). Working time and work-life balance around the world.  
8. Johnston, Karen & Tanwar, Jagriti & Pasamar, Susana & Laar, Darren Van & Jones, A. B. (2022).  
Blurring boundaries: work-life balance and unbounded work in academia. The role of flexibility,  
organisational support and gender. Labour and Industry A Journal of the Social and Economic Relations  
of  
Work  
Volume  
32,  
2022  
-
Issue  
2.  
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10301763.2022.2081902  
9. Natanael, K., Christiana, M., Kalis, I., Daud, I., Rosnani, T., & Fahruna, Y. (2023). Enrichment: Journal  
of Management Workload and working hours effect on employees work-life balance mediated by work  
stress. Enrichment: Journal of Management, 13(5).  
10. Oludayo, A. O., & Omonijo, D. O. (2020). Work-life balance: The relevance of social support. Academy  
of Strategic Management Journal, 19(3), 1–10.  
11. Prasad, K. D. V., Rao, M., Vaidya, R., Sriyogi, K., Singh, S., & Srinivas, V. (2024). The relationship  
between work-life balance and psychological well-being: an empirical study of metro rail travelers  
working in the information technology sector. Frontiers in Psychology, 15(January), 1–18.  
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1472885  
12. Ramachandaran, S. D., Nuraini, R., & Doraisingam, P. (2024). Understanding Work-Life Balance  
Challenges among Academic Professionals in Higher Education: A Phenomenological Study.  
International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 23(12), 130–147.  
https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.23.12.8  
13. Rañeses, M. S., Nisa, N. un, Bacason, E. S., & Martir, S. (2022). Investigating the Impact of Remote  
Working on Employee Productivity and Work-life Balance: A Study on the Business Consultancy  
Industry in Dubai, UAE. International Journal of Business and Administrative Studies, 8(2), 63–81.  
https://doi.org/10.20469/ijbas.8.10002-2  
14. Ridzuwan, M. A., Nur, N., Nik, F., & Tenny, J. A. (2025). Flexible Working Hoursꢀ: Balancing  
Opportunities  
and  
Challenges  
in  
the  
Modern  
Workplace.  
15(01),  
586–596.  
https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v15-i1/24230  
15. Ryan, M. (2022). An analysis burnout , social isolation and productivity among men and women in their  
working environment during the pandemic in. August, 1–62.  
16. Stanley, S., & Sebastine, A. J. (2023). Work-life balance, social support, and burnout: A quantitative  
study  
of  
social  
workers.  
Journal  
of  
Social  
Work,  
23(6),  
1135–1155.  
https://doi.org/10.1177/14680173231197930  
17. Steffens, K., Sutter, C., & Sülzenbrück, S. (2023). The concept of “Work-Life-Blending”: a systematic  
review. Frontiers in Psychology, 14(December), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1150707  
18. The Society of Occupational Medicine. (2023). Burnout in healthcare: risk factors and solutions. July,  
19–20.  
19. Vaziri, H., Wayne, J. H., Casper, W. J., Lapierre, L. M., Greenhaus, J. H., Amirkamali, F., & Li, Y.  
(2022). A meta-analytic investigation of the personal and work-related antecedents of work–family  
balance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 43(4), 662–692. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2594  
20. Waworuntu, E. C., Kainde, S. J. R., & Mandagi, D. W. (2022). Work-Life Balance, Job Satisfaction and  
Performance Among Millennial and Gen Z Employees: A Systematic Review. Society, 10(2), 384–398.  
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.464  
21. Zanabazar, A., & Jigjiddorj, S. (2022). Relationships between mental workload, job burnout, and  
organizational  
commitment.  
SHS  
Web  
of  
Conferences,  
132,  
01003.  
https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202213201003  
22. Aisyah, C., Suryaningsih, A., & Putri, D. A. (2023). The Effect of Work Life Balance on Employee  
Performance in Manufacture Companies (Case Study at PT. Gemilang Mitra Sejahtera). Journal of  
Page 692  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
Contemporary  
Administration  
and  
Management  
(ADMAN),  
1(1),  
26–33.  
https://doi.org/10.61100/adman.v1i1.19  
23. Al-Khateeb, A., & Al-Louzi, K. S. (2020). An Exploratory Study on the Impact of Work/Life Balance  
and Employee Engagement on Talent Management and Organization Performance: A Case of Jordan  
Telecom  
and  
IT  
Sector.  
Journal  
of  
Social  
Sciences  
(COES&RJ-JSS),  
9(3),  
617.  
https://doi.org/10.25255/jss.2020.9.3.617.647  
24. Alfatihah, I., Nugroho, A. S., Haessel, E., & Maharani, A. (2021). The Influence of Work-Life Balance  
with Work Motivation as Mediating Factor on Job Satisfaction A Prediction toward Transition to New  
Normal  
Situation.  
The  
Management  
Journal  
of  
Binaniaga,  
6(1),  
79.  
https://doi.org/10.33062/mjb.v6i1.431  
25. Alper Ay, F. (2024). The relationship between work motivation and productivity: Bibliometric analysis  
of articles from 1953 to 2024. Human Systems Management, 44(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3233/hsm-  
240020  
26. Anthonia, O. (2020). Effect of Work Life Balance and Employee Productivity in Nigerian Organizations.  
International Journal of Advanced Research, 9(2), 67–93. www.garph.co.uk  
27. Ari, A. H., & Bahtiar, Y. (2024). META-ANALYSIS OF WORK LIFE BALANCE POLICIES. 4(1),  
419–425.  
28. Borgia, M. S., Di Virgilio, F., La Torre, M., & Khan, M. A. (2022). Relationship between Work-Life  
Balance and Job Performance Moderated by Knowledge Risks: Are Bank Employees Ready?  
Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095416  
29. Dousin, O., Collins, N., Bartram, T., & Stanton, P. (2021). The relationship between work-life balance,  
the need for achievement, and intention to leave: Mixed-method study. Journal of Advanced Nursing,  
77(3), 1478–1489. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14724  
30. Dwitanti, E., Murwani, F. D., & Siswanto, E. (2023). the Effect of Work-Life Balance on Employee  
Performance Through Work Stress and Workload. International Journal of Business, Law, and  
Education, 4(2), 569–586. https://doi.org/10.56442/ijble.v4i2.211  
31. Handoko, G., & Ginting, H. (2023). Improving Employee’s Productivity Using Work-Life Balance  
Analysis  
In  
Project  
Based  
Construction  
Company.  
Jurnal Scientia,  
12(2),  
1824–1841.  
http://infor.seaninstitute.org/index.php  
32. Hasan, T., Jawaad, M., & Butt, I. (2021). The influence of person–job fit, work–life balance, and work  
conditions on organizational commitment: Investigating the mediation of job satisfaction in the private  
sector of the emerging market. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126622  
33. Hassan, Z., Ali, A., & Imran, M. (2024). Influence of Workload and Level of Stress on Work Life Balance  
, Organizational Commitment and Performance among the Employees in Higher Education Context of  
Maldives Sarcouncil Journal of Economics and Business Management Influence of Workload and Level  
of Stress on Work Life Balance , Organizational Commitment and Performance among the Employees  
in Higher Education Context of Maldives. December. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14502302  
34. International Labour Office. (2022). Working time and work-life balance around the world.  
35. Irfan, M., Khalid, R. A., Kaka Khel, S. S. U. H., Maqsoom, A., & Sherani, I. K. (2023). Impact of work–  
life balance with the role of organizational support and job burnout on project performance. Engineering,  
Construction and Architectural Management, 30(1), 154–171. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-04-2021-  
0316  
36. Khateeb, F. R. (2021). Work Life Balance- a Review of Theories ,. Cross-Cultural Management Journal,  
XXIII(1), 27–55. https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=1057815  
37. Khatri, P., & Shukla, S. (2024). A review and research agenda of work-life balance: an agentic approach.  
Community, Work and Family, 27(3), 286–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2022.2127348  
38. Lestari, D., & Margaretha, M. (2021). Work life balance, job engagement and turnover intention:  
Experience  
from Y generation employees. Management  
Science Letters, 11, 165–170.  
https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2020.8.019  
39. Marecki, Ł. (2024). Impact of work-life balance on employee productivity and well-being. Journal of  
Management and Financial Sciences, XVI(50). https://doi.org/10.33119/jmfs.2023.50.9  
40. Naeem, S., Jusoh, M., Khatibi, A., & Azam, S. M. F. (2025). Enhancing Job Satisfaction Among Lawyers  
in the Maldives Through Work-Life Balance: a Contribution To Sdg 8. Journal of Lifestyle and SDG’S  
Review, 5(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.47172/2965-730X.SDGsReview.v5.n01.pe04217  
Page 693  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XII December 2025  
41. Natanael, K., Christiana, M., Kalis, I., Daud, I., Rosnani, T., & Fahruna, Y. (2023). Enrichment: Journal  
of Management Workload and working hours effect on employees work-life balance mediated by work  
stress. Enrichment: Journal of Management, 13(5).  
42. Oludayo, A. O., & Omonijo, D. O. (2020). Work-life balance: The relevance of social support. Academy  
of Strategic Management Journal, 19(3), 1–10.  
43. Roopavathi, S., & Kishore, K. (2021). ISSN NOꢀ: 0022-1945 The Impact Of Work Life Balance On  
Volume XII , Issue X , October / 2020 Page Noꢀ: 31. Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research,  
XII(April), 31–37.  
44. Samsudin, A., Ikaningtiyas, M., Mulia, F., & Rintalla, M. (2024). Exploring the Relationship Between  
Career Advancement, Work-Life Balance, and Corporate Financial Performance: A Systematic Review.  
Atestasiꢀ: Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi, 7(2), 1091–1110. https://doi.org/10.57178/atestasi.v7i2.918  
45. Shirmohammadi, M., Au, W. C., & Beigi, M. (2022). Remote work and work-life balance: Lessons  
learned from the covid-19 pandemic and suggestions for HRD practitioners. Human Resource  
Development International, 25(2), 163–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2022.2047380  
46. Stanley, S., & Sebastine, A. J. (2023). Work-life balance, social support, and burnout: A quantitative  
study  
of  
social  
workers.  
Journal  
of  
Social  
Work,  
23(6),  
1135–1155.  
https://doi.org/10.1177/14680173231197930  
47. Steffens, K., Sutter, C., & Sülzenbrück, S. (2023). The concept of “Work-Life-Blending”: a systematic  
review. Frontiers in Psychology, 14(December), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1150707  
48. Susanto, P., Hoque, M. E., Jannat, T., Emely, B., Zona, M. A., & Islam, M. A. (2022). Work-Life  
Balance, Job Satisfaction, and Job Performance of SMEs Employees: The Moderating Role of Family-  
Supportive  
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.906876  
49. Tamunomiebi, M. D., & Oyibo, C. (2020). Work-Life Balance and Employee Performance: A Literature  
Review. European Journal of Business and Management Research, 5(2), 1–10.  
https://doi.org/10.24018/ejbmr.2020.5.2.196  
50. Tijani, B., Osei-Kyei, R., & Feng, Y. (2022). A review of work-life balance in the construction industry.  
International Journal of Construction Management, 22(14), 2671–2686.  
https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2020.1819582  
Supervisor  
Behaviors.  
Frontiers  
in  
Psychology,  
13(June),  
1–12.  
51. Waworuntu, E. C., Kainde, S. J. R., & Mandagi, D. W. (2022). Work-Life Balance, Job Satisfaction and  
Performance Among Millennial and Gen Z Employees: A Systematic Review. Society, 10(2), 384–398.  
https://doi.org/10.33019/society.v10i2.464  
52. Wolor, C. W., Kurnianti, D., Zahra, S. F., & Martono, S. (2020). The importance of work-life balance  
on employee performance millennial generation in Indonesia. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(9), 1103–  
1108. https://doi.org/10.31838/jcr.07.09.203  
53. Yaşam, İ., Motivasyonu, Ç., Sırasında, C.-P., & Sivil, T. (2025). Work-Life Balance and Work  
Motivationꢀ: A Study on Turkish Civil Aviation Employees During the COVID-19 Pandemic 1. 16, 385–  
397.  
54. Znidaršič, J., & Marič, M. (2021). Relationships between Work-Family Balance, Job Satisfaction, Life  
Satisfaction and Work Engagement among Higher Education Lecturers. Organizacija, 54(3), 227–237.  
https://doi.org/10.2478/orga-2021-0015  
Page 694  
www.rsisinternational.org