Development of work- Life Balance and Organizational Productivity Framework for State Universities and Colleges

Development of Work- Life Balance and Organizational Productivity Framework for State Universities and Colleges

Elenita P. Pateña

University of Rizal System Pililla Campus Province of Rizal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2024.1107066

Received: 30 June 2024; Accepted: 08 July 2024; Published: 15 August 2024

ABSTRACT

The present research study focused on the development of work- life balance and organizational productivity framework for state universities and colleges. During these times, handling a balanced life between professional and personal life seems hard to achieve, especially for the people in the educational area, teachers, professors, staff, faculties, and even students are having a hard time balancing. Since different problems and rising expectations occur regularly in organizations’ lives, the researcher attempts to create a work- life balance and organizational productivity framework for state universities and colleges to help SUC members and institutions think about an effective way to have a work-life balance in relation to organizational productivity. This study utilized descriptive research as the design. Correlational research helps the researcher to design and to understand the concept of the correlation between work-life balance and organizational productivity to state universities’ organization and employees. The study utilized a questionnaire checklist aligned with the assessment towards the development of work life balance and organizational productivity framework for state universities and colleges that adapted from other research studies. The researcher also utilized descriptive statistics and correlation analysis using Pearson-r correlation that has been employed to determine the effect of work-life balance on employee productivity.  The extent of work-life balance of the SUCs faculty members concerning their self-management, time management, stress management, and leisure management was extremely very high. The extent of organizational productivity of the SUCs faculty members with respect to the quality and relevance of instruction, research and development, extension and training services and management resources was very high. There is a significant relationship of work-life balance of SUCs faculty members to the organizational productivity. The work-life balance of SUCs faculty members and the predictors of organizational productivity have resulted in a good model in the area of quality and relevance of instruction, research and development, management of resources, and organizational productivity, while the extension and training services are interpreted as not a good model. Based on the data gathered, the conclusion was: The SUCs faculty members’ different practices to their work-life balance effect on the productivity in serving the organization or institution. The SUCs faculty members have a balanced personal and professional life that significantly influences the work-life balance of faculty staff members positively. It not only allows them to perform their duties effectively but also ensures they have the time and flexibility to engage in personal activities, contributing to their overall well-being.

Keywords: work-life balance, organizational productivity framework, self-management, time management, leisure management, stress management 

INTRODUCTION

Work-life balance provides different meaning and perceptions to some people. To some individuals, it is an essential part of working for their family and their well-being. A concept of how an employee meets the demands of his life and work at the same time. According to Clutterbuck, work-life balance is being aware of different demands on time and energy, having the ability to make choices in the allocation of time and energy, knowing what values to apply to choices and making choices.

There have been shifts of focus on strengthening the human resources as the fundamental asset in ensuring the stability of managing educational institutions. Managers and educational leaders deliver massive interventions in capacitating personnel to achieve maximized potential towards efficiency and higher performance levels. These factors are greatly affected by ensuring the work-life balance of every individual in the workplace.

The challenges of achieving work-life balance in higher education have been widely documented by previous education studies. Faculty who struggles with achieving balance between their professional and personal lives due to the demands of higher education may eventually become dissatisfied with their job in academia. Work-life balance (WLB) has become a challenge for many academic professionals in higher education due to the increased demands imposed upon faculty. Faculty members often struggle to balance their academic and personal lives to maintain equilibrium in the academic profession.

Productivity at work demands that institutional leaders to ensure a high level of performance by initiating varied programs responsive to the needs of its employees. As to the personal and professional discretion in assessment and considerations, it is highly demandable for an organization to evaluate and profile everyone in the workforce. This will facilitate the proper crafting of programs to address certain issues to deliver what is expected from each personnel as a member of the workforce.

Regarding to relationship between work-life balance and organizational productivity of employees, work-life balance seems to be the extent considering the family’s responsibilities and obligations where it encourages management and employees to work together to meet their personal and work needs. (Studocu).

Work and family are two important aspects of an individual’s life (Komal and Yasir 2014). Every employed person has two important domains to play several roles in his or her life these domains can be categorized as work and family. Work and family require certain role demands to be fulfilled in order to maintain the balance in life. The work environment has become more stressful because of diverse role expectations, professional competition, globalization and technological innovations. Managing work with family is an important issue as it has decisive challenges for organizations and employees. According to Castro and Martins, such changes have created several complications on both the domestic and professional fronts of the employees. The pressure of work has been intensifying and there is growing feeling among employees that the demands of work begin to dominate life and a sense of work-life balance is felt. The challenges of integrating work and family life is a part of everyday reality for many employees nowadays (Chimote & Srivastava 2013).

Theoretical Framework

Kumar and Janakiram (2017) stated that the Spillover Theory (Staines, 1980) posed to be the most popular theory between work and life domain. In general, the Spillover Theory states that participation in one domain affect participation in the other domain. In the reality of working life today, Bell et al. (2012) stated that employees are juggling to manage their work and life which often leads to spillover. According to Xu (2009), there are two types of spillover which is positive spillover and negative spillover. Satisfaction and achievement in work/life can affect the same emotions in life/work can be referred to as positive spillover. Meanwhile, negative spillover refers to the problems and despair in work/life that can affect the same emotion in life/work. To support this, as cited by Bell (2012), spillover can have positive or negative effects. Both positive and negative spillover can happen in both ways which is work to life and life to work (Balmforth & Gardner, 2006; Hanson et al., 2006; Hill et al., 2001).

According to Greenhaus and Powell (2006), there are effective work-life spillover and instrumental work-life spillover. Affective work-life spillover is the transfer of moods and attitudes in one domain to another domain; meanwhile, the instrumental work-life spillover is the transfer of skills in one domain to another domain (Radó et al., 2016).

Thus, this theory is being applied because of the term of work-life balance being used is the work/family enrichment and work/family conflict. Based on the theory, it is in line with both the conflict and enrichment of family to work and work to family. If the enrichment between work-family and vice versa happens, it means that there is positive spill over because the satisfaction and achievement from work affect the same emotions in life and vice versa. However, if there are work-family conflicts and family-work conflicts, it shows that there is a negative spillover because the problems and despair in work affect the same emotion in life and vice versa. On the other hand, integration theory as cited by Clark (2000), assumes that the method in which family and work encompasses all parties and when responsibilities are mutual leads to better outcomes in all concerned domains than when solutions are made separately. This theory denotes the general view that a strong process of flexible and penetrable boundaries can better expedite and inspire the domains of community life, family-life as well as work-life (Clark, 2000).

Furthermore, this theory has been recognized to best explain the combination of supplementary contextual components with regard to family and work in the body of knowledge (Morris & Madsen, 2007). Additionally, Morris and Madsen (2007) stated that the theory seeks a modern understanding that reshapes customary work-life standards making all concerned parties dynamic partners with the same voices in the establishment of a complete model of WLB.

The Spillover Theory and Integration Theory allows the feelings and experiences most especially the SUCs faculty members from one area of life—to their personal or professional life— can affect and can be interconnected to each other. Workplace emotions can influence one’s personal life in both positive and negative ways. Conversely, these theories seek to achieve harmony rather than division by harmoniously integrating work and personal life. By regulating boundaries, lowering conflict, and promoting well-being in both domains, striking a balance between the two ideas can aid in achieving a healthy work-life balance.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM / RESEARCH QUESTIONS

To understand the concept of the correlation between work-life balance and organizational productivity to state universities’ organization and employees, this study sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the extent of the work-life balance of the SUCs faculty members with respect to their:

1.1 Self- Management;

1.2 Time Management;

1.3 Stress Management;

1.4 Leisure Management?

2. What is the extent of organizational productivity of the SUCs faculty members with respect to:

2.1 Quality and Relevance of Instruction;

2.2 Research and Development;

2.3 Extension and Training Services;

2.4 Management Resources?

3. Is the work-life balance of SUCs faculty members significantly related to organizational productivity?

4. Is the work-life balance of SUCs faculty members predict organizational productivity?

5. What specific strategies or mechanisms were applied by SUC’S faculty members in achieving work-balance?

6. What specific projects or activities were initiated by SUC’S faculty members to ensure productivity?

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

In today’s competitive environment, organizations are under immense pressure to increase their performance and success. Work-life balance is a global issue that has a significant impact on both organizational and individual well-being and performance. Employees frequently struggle to strike a balance between their personal lives and their commitments at work. People who have enough time to balance their work and personal lives are said to have a work-life balance. A slew of important studies on work-life balance and its relationship to other factors like employee performance and well-being have been published in recent years.

In the studies of various disciplines, theories are the foundation that grasps the study frameworks. Some study variables or frameworks are derived and supported by theories that could give credibility to the outcome of these studies. In the discipline of human resource management, work life balance (WLB) is an aspect that involves the welfare of employees who are the key assets of any establishment. Because the general quality of an employee’s existence concerning their working life is of utmost importance in the achievement of organizational goals (Guest, 2002). As cited by Kluczyk (2013), the paper investigated the impact of work-life balance on employee happiness in the private sector. The results revealed that poor work-life balance has negative consequences on family gratification, as seen by increasing levels of family-work and work-family conflict.

Work life balance creates a spot in the human resource management as a determinant of success and high performance of any institution. The word “WORK” in WLB denotes actions in which intellectual or physical abilities are needed to accomplish it. Furthermore, the word “BALANCE” in the concept is used to give stability between the domains of life and work as defined by Clarke, Koch & Hill, (2004). In 1986 that term was coined and it gained popularity in the 1990s with Juliet Schor’s publication (Sing, 2014) when WLB became a wide concept that covers suitable perspectives, prioritizing between life and work Rincy & Panchanatham (2014). It is a term that is usually used in organizations in relation to the welfare of their employees (Gragnano, Simbula & Miglioretti, 2020). In addition, WLB is a concept associated with the institutional as well as the social settings of countries hence studies have developed several theoretical perspectives necessary to have an in-depth knowledge of the fundamental issues between employee lives and work (Gragnano, et al, 2020).

A number of theories have evolved based on the various readings and investigations. Based on these definitions; researchers have evolved a number of models to describe the dynamics of WLB. In studying various roles and their effects on WLB, boundary theory and border theory have been recognized as the two major theories that other theories used in WLB studies are built on (Kumer & Janakiram, 2017).  In the different facets of WLB, the theories commonly used are as follows:

Segmentation Theory In the relationship between work and home, this theory has the earliest view which argues that the two aspects do not affect the other as they are segmented and thereby an independent entity (Edwards & Rothb and, 2000; Kanter, 1977; Staines, 1980; Young & Kleiner, 1992; Zedeck, 1992). Although Bruke and Greenglass (1987) and Voydan off (1987) had shown that family and work are closely related in his study. Life and work have been inherently divided by space, function, and time right from the era of the Industrial Revolution as claimed by Gragnano et al. (2020). It has been argued that it is a way in which employees sternly hold back thoughts, actions and feelings relating to work when at home and vice versa when at work, thereby enabling employees to maintain fine lines in relation to family and work Piotrkowski (1979). This allows employees to skilfully sort their life.

However, it has been argued that in the relationship between employee social life and work, segmentation theory has the weakest empirical support hence being considered as only a theoretical potential (Guest, 2001). This theory has been used in WLB studies to show the relationships of different domains of employee lives to reduce stress arising from various roles (Parasuraman, Greenhaus, & Granrose, 1992; Zedeck, 1992).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Research Design

Since the study was concerned with the assessment work-life balance and organizational productivity components manifested by the SUCs faculty members, it is concerned with the conditions or existing practices and processes. Through a descriptive correlational method, more understanding of the related components will be dealt with in depth alongside with other variables under investigation.

This study used the descriptive-correlational design. Descriptive correlational describes the variables and the relationships that occur naturally between and among them.

Participants/Respondents

The respondents of this research were from the main campuses of the selected state, universities and colleges, and the target population are the University Faculty members who are actively teaching during the academic year 2022-2023.  The respondents were composed of three hundred forty four (344) regular faculty members randomly chosen from the five SUC’s namely: Batangas State University, Cavite State University, Laguna State Polytechnic University, Southern Luzon State University and University of Rizal System, using the simple random sampling.

Instrumentation

The researcher used a survey questionnaire reflecting the components identified, to assess the work-life balance and organizational productivity of SUCs. The questionnaire consists of two parts: part one the work-life balance of the respondents and part two, the assessment of the work-life balance and organizational productivity components. The researcher also added open-ended questions to find additional elements that could be used in developing a work-life balance model aligned with its connection to organizational productivity.

The questionnaire used in this study is adapted, modified, and refined from Davidson’s Theory and Philippine SUCs Levelling KRAs to ensure suitability under with the cultural context of SUC’s Faculty members. The questionnaires are split into two sections where, the first section is the questions related to the Personal and Professional Domain on Work-Life Balance of Employees meanwhile the second part is the questions associated with the Institutional/Work Domain of Organizational Productivity.

DATA ANALYSIS

The variables in this study include self-management, time management, stress management and leisure-management as components for work-life balance whereas quality and relevance of instruction, research and development, extension and training services and management resources were the variables leading to the identification of the level of organizational productivity. Data collection was carried out through a questionnaire using the seven-point Likert scale. This study was carried out in all possible state universities and colleges where, the researcher made use of primary sources of data. The population of study targets 100 teaching staff made up of all the employees of selected universities and colleges. The major instrument to be used in this research work is a questionnaire-checklist. Consequently, the study has undergone face and content validity in this research work. To assess the extent of work life balance and organizational productivity extent manifested in their work as teaching staff, statistical computations were used. Regression was applied in this research for it is a kind of statistical technique that relates a dependent variable to one or more independent variables.

Ethical Consideration

Under the Data Privacy Act, the details and responses of each respondent were confidential for the safety and to uphold the integrity of the respondents.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The framework above reveals that a significant relationship exists between self-management and organizational productivity in terms of the quality and relevance of instruction and management of resources. Another significant relationship exists between time management and organizational productivity in terms of the quality and relevance of instruction and research development.  Also, a significant relationship exists between leisure management and organizational productivity in terms of research and development. The extent of the Work-Life Balance of the SUC faculty members with respect to their Self-Management, Time Management, Stress Management, and Leisure Management was extremely in a very high extent.

CONCLUSION, LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The work-life balance of SUCs faculty members and the predictors of organizational productivity were good models with respect to the Quality and Relevance of Instruction, Research and Development, Management of Resources, and Organizational Productivity, while the Extension and Training Services were not a good model.

The specific strategies or mechanisms to achieve a balance between life and work environment are Organizing and setting goals, Planning and time management, Establishing Boundaries and Self-prioritizing, and Socializing.

The specific projects or activities to ensure their contributions to the organization are Research Programs, Contribution through active participation and services, State universities and colleges developmental programs, and Teaching skills and management seminars and workshops.

Conclusions

The SUCs faculty member different practices for their work-life balance influence the productivity in serving the organization or institution. The SUCs faculty members have a balanced personal and professional life that significantly influences the work-life balance of faculty staff members positively. It not only allows them to perform their duties effectively but also ensures they have the time and flexibility to engage in personal activities, contributing to their overall well-being.

Recommendations

Based on the conclusions formulated from the findings, the following recommendations are given.

1. The institutions/organization may develop a strategic plan to manage the SUCs faculty members’ work-life balance by encouraging open communication between staff and management regarding work-life balance issues. Creating a channel where employees can voice concerns or suggestions.
2. The institutions/organization may implement regular check-ins or surveys to measure changes in perceptions and work-life balance satisfaction among staff. Use this data to continuously improve policies and interventions.
3. The SUCs faculty members may invest time in continuous learning and skill development, which can increase efficiency at work and potentially reduce work-related.
4. Further investigation is needed to understand the specific aspects of stress management that might influence organizational productivity. It’s possible the current stress management strategies aren’t effectively addressing employee needs.
5. Future Researchers is highly recommended to other institutions/organizations with the increased sample size to validate the findings presented in this study.

REFERENCES 

1. Abe, E.N., Abe, I.I., Fields, Z., & Idris, G.O. (2018). Work-family stressors and work-family satisfaction: Effect of sense of coherence at a metropolitan municipality. Work, 10(2), 74–88
2. Abdulraheem, I. (2014). The changing nature of WLB in Nigerian higher institutions. Journal of Business and Management, 16(4), 61-66. https://doi.org/10.9790/487x-16426166
3. Adebayo, A. (2016). WLB among Academic Staff of the University of Lagos. Makerere Journal of Higher Education, 8(2), 153-164. https://doi.org/10.4314/majohe.v8i2.6
4. Agha, K., Azmi, F. T., & Irfan, A. (2017b). Work-Life Balance and Job Satisfaction: An Empirical study Focusing on Higher Education Teachers in Oman. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 7(3), 164–171. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijssh.2017.v7.813
5. Al Kahtani, N.S., & Allam, Z. (2013). A comparative study of job burnout, job involvement, locus of control and job satisfaction among banking employees of Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Life Science Journal, 10(4), 2135-2144
6. Allam, Z. (2017). A scientific approach to understand role stress amongst business schoolteachers. Man in India, 97(10), 183-196
7. Altun, S. A. (2022, January 1). The benefits of sectoral accreditation and reflections for educational organizations. Document – Gale Academic OneFile. https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA694640418&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=24742546&p=AONE&sw=w&userGroupName=anon%7E53376d51&aty=open-web-entry
8. Arif, B., & Farooqi, Y. A. (2014). Impact of Work Life Balance on Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment among University Teachers: A Case Study of University of Gujrat, Pakistan. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Sciences and Engineering, 5(9), 24-29
9. Bell, Amanda & Rajendran, Diana & Theiler, Stephen. (2012). Job Stress, Wellbeing, Work-Life Balance and Work-Life Conflict Among Australian Academics. Electronic Journal of Applied Psychology. 8. 25-37. 10.7790/ejap. V 8i1.320.
10. Bhatnagar, Jyotsna & Shanker, Tara. (2010). Work Life Balance, Employee Engagement, Emotional Consonance/ Dissonance &Turnover Intention. Indian journal of industrial relations. Indian Journal of Industrial Relation, July, 2010-Pgs 74-87. Pgs 74-87. 10.2307/25741098.
11. Bingöl, B. (2023, September 15). The importance of work skills training: Building a workforce. Serti fier. https://sertifier.com/blog/the-importance-of-work-skills-training-building-a-workforce/
12. Briner, R., & Drew berry, C. (2007). Staff wellbeing is key to school success: A research study into the links between staff wellbeing and school performance. London: Birkbeck College, University of London and Work life Support Ltd.
13. Brochard D, Letablier M-T. Trade union involvement in work–family life balance: lessons from France. Work, Employment and Society. 2017;31(4):657-674. doi:10.1177/0950017016680316
14. Callo, Eden & Sahagun, Ma. Rona (2019). Influence of Research Awareness and Culture to the Level of Research Productivity among Faculty Members of a Higher Education Institution. International Journal of Advanced Research. 7. 618-628. 10.21474/IJAR01/8370.
15. Chimote, Niraj Kishore and Srivastava, Virendra, Work-Life Balance Benefits: From the Perspective of Organizations and Employees (April 1, 2013). The IUP Journal of Management Research, Vol. XII, No. 1, January 2013, pp. 62-73
16. Clark SC. Work/Family Border Theory: A New Theory of Work/Family Balance. Human Relations. 2000;53(6):747-770. doi:10.1177/0018726700536001
17. Collewet, M. & Sauermann, J. (2017). Working hours and productivity. IZA Institute of Labor Economics- Discussion Paper Series.
18. Fatima, Noor & A. Sahibzada, Dr. (2012). An Empirical Analysis of Factors Affecting Work Life Balance among University Teachers: the case of Pakistan. 12.
19. Ganiyu, Idris & Derera, Evelyn & Atiku, Sulaiman & Fields, Ziska. (2020). Measuring the effectiveness of work–life balance strategies in the manufacturing sector. SA Journal of Human Resource Management. 18. 10.4102/sajhrm. V 18i0.1216.
20. Glazer, S., & Liu, C. (2017). Work, stress, coping, and stress management. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.30
21. Gragnano, Andrea & Simbula, Silvia & Miglioretti, Massimo. (2020). Work–Life Balance: Weighing the Importance of Work–Family and Work–Health Balance. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 17. 907. 10.3390/ijerph17030907.
22. Greenhaus, J. H., Collins, K. M., & Shaw, J. D. (2003). The relation between work-family balance and quality of life. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63(3), 510–531
23. Hanaysha, J. R. (2016). Work Environment and Organizational Learning as Key Drivers of Employee Productivity: Evidence from Higher Education Sector. International Journal of Human Resource Studies. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijhrs.v6i2.9203
24. Hunter, F. F., Sparnon, N., & Hunter, U. B. (2020). Resource management. In BRILL eBooks (pp. 106–131). https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004447059_005
25. Ko, Jaekwon & Hur, Seung Uk. (2013). The Impacts of Employee Benefits, Procedural Justice, and Managerial Trustworthiness on Work Attitudes: Integrated Understanding Based on Social Exchange Theory. Public Administration Review. 74. 10.1111/puar.12160.
26. Kumar, Govindappa &. B, Janakiram. (2017). Organisational causes for work life conflict and initiatives to enhance work life balance-a conceptual and review framework. 10.13140/rg.2.2.22360.34565.
27. Kumer, G. V., & Janakiram, B. (2017). Theories of work life balance–a conceptual review. International Research Journal of Management and Commerce, 4(9), 184-192.
28. Lankesh wara, P. &Wijesekara, N.M. (2015). Impact of Work Life Conflict on Employee productivity: Special Reference to Ceylon Electricity Board-Sabaragamuwa Provincial Office:2nd International HRM Conference, 2, (1), 49
29. Lassonde, K. (2022, February 15). Student Research Report: Coping Mechanisms for Stressed-Out College Students — Communicating Psychological Science. Communica ting Psychological Science. https://www.communicatingpsychologicalscience.com/blog/student-research-report-coping-mechanisms-for-stressed-out-college-students
30. Lee, S. H., Kim, M., & Kim, H. W. (2019). Comparative Analysis of Work-Life Balance Issues between Korea and the United States. The Journal of Information Systems, 28(2), 153-179. https://doi.org/10.5859/KAIS.2019.28.2.153
31. Lundy, K., & Ladd, H. (2020, December 18). Why collaboration is key to the future of higher education. EY – Global. https://www.ey.com/en_gl/strategy/strategies-for-collaborating-in-a-new-era-for-higher-education
32. Malik, A., & Allam, Z. (2021). An Empirical Investigation of Work Life Balance and Satisfaction among the University Academicians. the Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business/ the Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(5), 1047–1054. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no5.1047
33. Martins, N., & Coetzee, M. (2007). Organisational culture, employee satisfaction, perceived leader emotional competency and personality type: An exploratory study in a South African engineering company. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 5, 20-32.
34. Mazerolle, Stephanie & Eason, Christianne & Trisdale, Walter. (2015). Work-Life Balance Perspectives of Male NCAA Division I Athletic Trainers: Strategies and Antecedents. Athletic Training & Sports Health Care. 7. 50-62. 10.3928/19425864-20150216-01.
35. Mcnall, L. A., Masuda, A. D., & Nicklin, J. M. (2010). Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover Intentions: The Mediating Role of Work-to-Family Enrichment. The Journal of Psychology, 144(1), 61-81. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980903356073
36. Morris, M. L., & Madsen, S. R. (2007). Advancing work-life integration in individuals, organizations, and communities. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 9(4), 439–454.
37. Nadeem, M. S., & Abbas, D. Q. (2009). The Impact of Work Life Conflict on Job Satisfactions of Employees in Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Management, 4(5), 63-83. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v4n5p63
38. Nidhi A. Thakor & S. Balasubramanian (2013) “A study on work life balance among teachers” YMER, Volume.20, Issue 11, pp 132-139.
39. Omar, M. K., Mohd, I. H., & Ariffin, M. S. (2015). Workload, role conflict and WLB among employees of an enforcement agency in Malaysia. International Journal of Business, Economics and Law, 8(2), 52-57
40. Padmasiri, M. K. D., & Mahalekamge, W. G. S. (2016). Impact of demographical factors on WLB among academic staff of university of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka. Journal of Education and Vocational Research, 7(1), 54-59. https://doi.org/10.22610/jevr.v7i1.1223
41. Perry, R. P., Menec, V. H., Struthers, C. W., Hechter, F. J., Schon wetter, D. J., & Menges, R. J. (1997). Faculty In Transition: A Longitudinal Analysis of the Role of Perceived Control and Type of Institution in Adjustment to Postsecondary Institutions. Research in Higher Education, 38(5), 519-556. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1024925712509
42. Punia, B. K., & Khosla, M. (2009). Relational Analysis of Organisational Role Stress and Conflict Management Strategies in Indian Service Sector. The Journal of Innovations, 4(2), 87-96
43. Radó, Márta & Nagy, Beata & Király, Gábor. (2016). Work-to-family spillover: Gender differences in Hungary. Demográfia English Edition. 58. 39-64. 10.21543/DEE.2015.2.
44. Rani, S., Kamalanabhan, & Selvarani. (2011). Work / Life Balance Reflections on Employee Satisfaction. Serbian Journal of Management, 6(1), 85-96. https://doi.org/10.5937/sjm1101085r
45. Sammalisto, K., Sundström, A., & Holm, T. (2015). Implementation of sustainability in universities as perceived by faculty and staff – a model from a Swedish university. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 45–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.015
46. Scholarios, D., & Marks, A. (2004). Work‐life balance and the software worker. Human Resource Management Journal, 14(2), 54-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-8583.2004.tb00119.x
47. Sedanza, Vol.6 (Iss.11): November 2018] (Received: October 18, 2018 – Accepted: November 19, 2018) ISSN- 2350-0530(O), ISSN- 2394-3629(P) DOI: 10.29121/granthaalayah. V 6.i11.2018.1117
48. Shan, Q., Xiaoming, L., Yuejiao, Z., Zhiyong, S., & Bonita, S. (2018). Attitudes toward evidence-based practices, occupational stress and work-related social support among health care providers in China: A SEM analysis. PLoS ONE, 13(8), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202166
49. Stander, Marius W., Rothmann, Sebastiann (2010) Psychological empowerment, job insecurity and employee engagement. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology | Vol 36, No 1 | a849
50. Susi, S., & Jawaharrani, K. (2011). WLB: The key driver of employee engagement. Asian Journal of Management Research, 2(1), 474-483
51. Tavassoli, T., & Sune, A. (2018). A national study on the antecedents and outcomes of WLB in Iran. International Journal of Social Sciences, 3(3), 1616-1636. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2018.33.16161636
52. Thevanes, N., & Arurajah, A. A. (2017). The search for sustainable human resource management practices: A review and reflections. Paper presented at the Proceedings of 14th International Conference on Business Management (ICBM), University of Sri Jayewardenepura
53. Turner, S., & Braine. M. (2016). Embedding wellbeing knowledge and practice into teacher education: Building emotional resilience. Teacher Education Advancement Network Journal, 8(1), 67-82
54. V. Mathew, Rincy & Natarajan, Panchanatham. (2014). WORK LIFE BALANCE: A SHORT REVIEW OF THE THEORETICAL AND CONTEMPORARY CONCEPTS. 1-24. 10.5707/cjsocsci.2014.7.1.1.24.
55. Wang, H.J. Lu, C.Q. &Siu O.L. (2015). Human Resources, job performance, motivation, organizational justice. Trust Journal of Applied Psychology. 2(5)121-131
56. Wang, Q., Hou, H., & Li, Z. (2022). Participative Leadership: A Literature review and Prospects for Future research. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.924357
57. Wong, P. Y., Bandar, N. F. A., & Saili, J. (2017). Workplace factors and WLB among employees in selected services sector. International Journal of Business and Society, 18(S4), 677-684
58. Wooll, M. (2021, July). Why always working long hours is ruining your productivity. Retrieved December 14, 2023, from https://www.betterup.com/blog/always-Working
59. et al.., (2019) “Study on women work life balance with reference to three dimensions: personal life, work life educationalist (faculties) and work life research in Bangalore college”.
60. Zwikael, O., & Huemann, M. (2023). Project benefits management: Making an impact on organizations and society through projects and programs. International Journal of Project Management, 41(8), 102538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102538