Empirical investigation reveals how work-life balance impacts employee productivity amidst stress in India, suggesting key HR strategies.
ABSTRACT:Contemporary Indian organisations are navigating mounting pressure to address work-life balance (WLB) as a central human resource imperative. The post-pandemic restructuring of work characterized by blurred professional boundaries and heightened psychological demands has intensified the urgency of this challenge. This study empirically investigates the interplay among WLB, occupational stress, perceived organisational support, and job performance across multiple industry sectors in India. Primary data collected from a structured survey instrument administered to 92 validated respondents drawn from a sampling pool of 100–150 professionals. The participant base was predominantly youthful, with 66.3% below 25 years of age and 30.4% between 25 and 34 years, spanning industries including education, information technology, banking and finance, and healthcare.Survey results shows occupational stress is moderate to elevated (composite mean = 3.11 on a five-point Likert scale), while WLB satisfaction registers below the midpoint (mean = 2.88), pointing to widespread dissatisfaction. Perceived support from HR policies and flexible work provisions was rated moderately (mean = 3.18). Notwithstanding these adverse conditions, respondents reported above-average motivation and productivity (mean = 3.41), a finding that signals the role of intrinsic drive and professional commitment as resilience factors. A notable discovery is that hybrid work adopters reported the lowest WLB scores (2.41) lower than both fully office-based (3.00) and fully remote (2.93) employees challenging prevailing assumptions about the benefits of flexible arrangements. Actionable recommendations for HR professionals and organisational policymakers are presented, encompassing equitable workload distribution, flexible scheduling frameworks, and strengthened employee wellness infrastructure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Panda et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: