Xem mẫu
- International Journal of Management (IJM) Volume 11, Issue 2, February 2020, pp. 271–276, Article ID: IJM_11_02_028 Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijm/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=11&IType=2 Journal Impact Factor (2020): 10.1471 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com ISSN Print: 0976-6502 and ISSN Online: 0976-6510 © IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed A STUDY ON EMPLOYEE WORK LIFE BALANCE AS AN HR IMPERATIVE Magdalene Peter Assistant Professor, Department of Management Studies, Bharath Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, India Dr. S. Fabiyola Kavitha Associate Professor, SRM Arts and Science College, Trichy, India ABSTRACT There is a growing awareness in today's workplaces that employees do not give up their lives just because they work. Work and life remain the two most important domains in the life of an employed individual. However, the challenge of balancing work and non-work demands is one of today's central concerns for both individuals and organisations. With the growing diversity of family structures represented in today‟s workforce, particularly with the growing norm of dual-career families, the importance of managing an employee's work-life balance have increased markedly over the past 20 years. Employers are realising that the quality of an employee's personal and family life impacts work quality and that there are concrete business reasons to promote work and non-work integration. In this paper, we contend that assisting employees to achieve a work-life balance should become a critical part of HR policy and strategy if it is to truly get the best from the organisation's people without leaving them unsatisfied, burnt-out and unfulfilled. Key words: Work-life balance, Human resources, Employee, Organization Cite this Article: Magdalene Peter and Dr.S.Fabiyola Kavitha, a Study on Employee Work Life Balance as an Hr Imperative, International Journal of Management (IJM), 11 (2), 2020, pp. 271–276. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=11&IType=2 1. INTRODUCTON 1.1. PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL Execution evaluation is a technique by which the presentation of a representative is estimated (by and large as far as quality, amount, cost and Time). The underlying foundations of Performance Appraisal can be found in Frederick Winslow Taylor's time and movement study. Execution examination is a piece of vocation improvement. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 271 editor@iaeme.com
- Magdalene Peter and Dr.S.Fabiyola Kavitha 1.2. REQUIRE FOR THE STUDY a. Self-advancement and individual directing. b. Organized preparing and advancement. c. Team building. d. Performance the board. e. Strategic or association advancement. f. Validation of preparing and different activities. 1.3. SCOPE OF THE STUDY The accompanying four powers have energized the quick development of 360-degree input in the ongoing years: Changes in the jobs of the representative and what the association expects of the worker, for example, consolation given to joint effort and group working, ceaseless upgrades, decrease in representative numbers and levels of the executives, adaptability and so on. 1.4. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY In spite of the fact that the exploration turned into achieved in an orderly and organized way, there were multiple limitations that couldn't be survived. These comprised the restrictions of the examination. Care turned into taken that the below constraints didn't have an effect on the exploration outcomes to such an extent. Time vital was the finest confinement. The task have to be completed inside three months and thus the example size have to be lesser. Area determination ought to be achieved on an irregular premise. In a few instances supervisors were now not prepared it supply the data. One trouble that each questioner faces is the readiness of the customers in topping off the survey. The respondents have some secret issues over the organization. Along those lines, it is difficult to find out the belief precisely. The impact of the contenders can't be predicted by methods for this investigation. 1.5. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 1.5.1. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE • To compare the overall performance of employees. • To compare the performance of the organization. The components of the look at includes: • Determining employee’s contribution & commitment towards overall performance appraisal system. • Determining the steps taken with the aid of the enterprise to perform the performance appraisal. Determining the effectiveness of steps taken to carry out the performance appraisal. Research 2. METHODOLOGY The exam strategy applied for the exploration object is wonderful in nature. The populace for this research is large scope IT companies in Chennai. In this way the exam has performed on evaluation study. A rundown of sizeable IT businesses (just open constrained) running in Chennai(223) become readied and these corporations were stratified into Application programming, Client server, E-Commerce, Embedded/EDA/VLSI/ASIC/Chip Design, Software programming, Mainframe, ERP/CRM, DBA/Warehousing, QA/Testing, Network Admin/Security and Tech support/Telecom/Hardware. In view of judgment and inferable http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 272 editor@iaeme.com
- A Study on Employee Work Life Balance as an Hr Imperative from time requirement the professional outstanding one hundred thirty employees for man or woman meetings. The degrees of those workers are General Manager, Assistant Manager and Manager. Right now facts is straightforwardly amassed from directors with the help of booked surveys and meeting approach separately. The professional has likewise amassed information from auxiliary sources. A part of the auxiliary sources are: Websites Magazines Books TABLE 1 TABLE VIEWING HOW THE WORKERS DISCOVER THE WORK NO OF S.NO CHOICE PERCENTAGE (%) RESPONDENTS 1. Outstanding 34 26.15 2. Good Quality 62 47.69 3. Pleased 27 20.77 4. Awful 7 5.38 TOTAL 130 100 SOURCE: PRIMARY DATA INFERENCE: 47.69% of the personnel locate the job to be good, 26.15% of the personnel reveals the job to be excellent, 20.77% of the employees are satisfied with the task whereas in few cases the personnel finds the task to be bad. CHART SHOWING HOW DO THE EMPLOYEES FIND THE JOB 5% 26% 21% EXCELLENT GOOD SATISFIED BAD 48% Chart 1 TABLE 2 TABLE PRESENTATION WHETHER THE WORKER REQUIRE PREPARATION NO OF S.NO OPTIONS PERCENTAGE (%) RESPONDENTS 1. YES 90 69.2 2. NO 40 30.8 TOTAL 130 100 SOURCE: PRIMARY DATA http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 273 editor@iaeme.com
- Magdalene Peter and Dr.S.Fabiyola Kavitha INFERENCE: 69.2% of the member of staff need teaching whereas 30.8% of the worker does not teaching. CHART SHOWING WHETHER THE EMPLOYEE NEED TRAINING 31% YES NO 69% . Chart 2 3. FINDINGS OF THE STUDY • If the employee is asked to work alone 44.6% of the employees sometimes excel, 36.9% of the employees will always excel, 10.8% will often excel whereas in few cases the employee never excel. • If the employee is made part of a team, 45.39% of the employees will always get things done, 29.23% may get the things done18.46% will often get the things done whereas in few cases the employee never get things done. • 47.69% of the employees find the job to be good, 26.15% finds the job to be excellent, 20.77% are satisfied with the job whereas in few cases the employees finds the job to be bad. • If the employee asked to work alone 45.39% of the employees will always excel, 29.23% will sometimes excel, 18.46% will often excel whereas in few cases the employee never excel. • 69.2% of the employee need training whereas 30.8% of the employee does not training. • 32.31% of the superiors never allocate the work which are highly confidential, 27.69% always allocate the work, 21.54% will sometimes allocate whereas in few cases the superiors often allocate the work which are highly confidential. • 51.54% of the employees get on with others in the company, outstanding relationship is only 28.46% and unsatisfactory is 20%. • 32.31% of the abilities can never be better utilized, 27.69% can always be better utilized, and 21.54% can be sometimes utilized whereas in few cases it is often. • 36.92% of the employees will sometimes accept responsibility for decisions, 23.08% will often & always accept the responsibility whereas in few cases it is never. http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 274 editor@iaeme.com
- A Study on Employee Work Life Balance as an Hr Imperative • The ratings of the employee assessment questionnaire for the particular factors are mostly sometimes, in some cases it is always whereas in few cases it is never in case of all the factors of employee assessment questionnaire. • 36.92% of the employees will sometimes analyze and identify the problems, 31.54% will always analyze and identify the problems, and 22.31% will often do the job, whereas in few cases it is never. • 44.6% of the employees will sometimes identify the possible causes of problems and takes corrective action, 36.9% will always identify, and 10.8% will often do the job whereas in few cases it is never. • 44.62% of the employees sometimes plan responsibly for departmental budgeted areas, 29.23% will always plan, and 16.92% will often plan whereas in few cases it is never. • 30.77% of the employees always make difficult commitments, 29.23% sometimes make difficult commitments, and 28.46% often make it whereas in few cases it is never. • 36.92% of the employees sometimes report on internal customer satisfaction, 23.08% will often and always report whereas in few cases it is never. • 52.31% of the employees sometimes identify the customer needs, 30.77% will often identifies, and 9.23% will never do the job whereas in few cases it is never. • 38.46% of the employees never listen to problems with genuine interest, 36.92% sometimes listens with genuine interest, and 30.77% will always listen whereas in few cases it is never. • 34.62% of the employees often encourages the free expression of opinions without being defensive, 33.85% always encourages, 28.46% sometimes encourages whereas in few cases it is never. • 36.92% of the employee’s decisions often balance company’s profitability and customer needs, 34.62% always balance, and 19.23% sometimes balance whereas in few cases it is never. • 40.77% of the employees always select good people, 37.69% often select good people, 16.15% sometimes excel whereas in few cases it is never. • 35.38% of the employees will often train and develop employees, 32.31% will always train, and 24.62% will sometimes train whereas in few cases it is never. • 49.23% of the employees always conduct staff meetings, 38.46% never conduct meetings, and 26.15% sometimes do whereas in few cases it is never. • 46.92% of the employees often sets challenging goals for self and others, 30.10% always set the goals, 16.15% sometimes set challenging goals whereas in few cases it is never. • 39.23% of the employees often allocate decision – making responsibilities to the staff, 31.54% always allocate, 18.46% sometimes allocate whereas in few cases it is never. • 39.23% of the employees always provide encouragement necessary to get the work done, 30.77% often does the job, 21.54% sometimes whereas in few cases it is never. • The ratings of the employee assessment questionnaire for the particular factors are mostly sometimes, in some cases it is always whereas in few cases it is never in case of all the factors of employee assessment questionnaire http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 275 editor@iaeme.com
- Magdalene Peter and Dr.S.Fabiyola Kavitha 4. SUGGESTIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS The top management should take up periodic programs to explain the objectives and the related issues to the executives and queries should be thoroughly cleared. It is necessary to improve the performance analysis and review system in following areas: There should be clear definition of rewards based on performance PA’S should have direct bearing on promotions Self-appraisal discussion with the assessing officer & then the officer recording his appraisal will be ideal. Every year an appraisal letter should be given to employees because that can make an employee to show great affection to their job ascertained Subordinate & peers also should have a role in individual’s assessment 5. CONCLUSION A powerful balanced among work and family life takes after a triumph win situation for agents and administrators. Work-Life Balance has twofold edged augmentations where right evening out is basic to be kept up. Openness and use of Work-Life Balance Practices, when given with respect to employees and manager's assistance can diminish work-life conflict and increase positive assessments of one's affiliation. REFERENCE [1] Sindhushree M T, A Study on the Influence of Fairness Cream Advertisements on the Purchase Behavior and Belief System of Youth in Mysore, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology 9(7), 2018, pp. 496–504. [2] Adya Hermawati, Rahayu Puji Suci, Suhermin and Survival, Biplot and Cluster Analysis of Satisfaction Level and the Interest of MSMEs Human Resource of Tourism Sector in East Java to Transglobal Leadership, QWL, Employee Involvement, Employee Performance Level, Responsible Marketing and Tourism Sustainable Competitive, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 10(8), 2019, pp. 348–363. [3] Rasak, Bamidele, Oyekola, Isaac, Asamu, Festus, Ben-Caleb and Egbide, Quality of Work Life (Qwl) of Academic Staff in Private Universities in North Central Nigeria, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 10(03), 2019, pp. 177-186 [4] Dr. R. Srinivasan, R. Divyaranjani and Dr. S. Poongavanam, A Analysis on Employee Relation and Psychological Wok Commitment in Production and Manufacturing Insustries in India, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology 9(7), 2018, pp. 1197– 1208 [5] Shanmugasundaram M, Karthiyaini S and Ammar Arif, a Case Study on Enterprise Culture Heritage Management of Construction Industry Based On Employee Feed Back, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 9(13), 2018, pp. 574-578 [6] Ruchika Malik, Tanavi Madappa, Dr. Ravinder Kaur, Dr. Jaya Chitranshi, A Conceptual Study on the Impact of Role Efficacy on the Motivation Levels of Employees. International Journal of Marketing and Human Resource Management, 7(3), 2016, pp. 10–17. [7] Minto Waluyo, A Model of Relationship Between Employee Performance and Job Loyalty in a Small Company, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology 9(8), 2018, pp. 462–469. [8] Dr. V. Antony Joe Raja and R. Anbu Ranjith Kumar. A Study on Employee Retention in Education Sector in India. International Journal of Management, 7(3), 2016, pp. 01-11 [9] Dr. Sr. Catheline and K. Punitha Devi. A Study on Employees Attitude towards Various Levels of Stressors. International Journal of Management, 7(2), 2016, pp. 663-669 http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 276 editor@iaeme.com
Chính trị học
Báo chí - Truyền thông
Xã hội học
Giáo dục học
Tâm lý học
Lịch sử - Văn hoá
Triết học
Ngôn ngữ học
Thư viện thông tin
Văn học nước ngoài
Ngư nghiệp
Hành chính - Pháp luật
Địa lý - Địa danh
Văn học Việt nam
Lịch sử Đảng
CNXH - KH
Tư Tưởng HCM
Ngụ ngôn - Cổ tích
Ca dao - Tục ngữ
Hoá học
Sinh học
Y khoa - Dược
Kinh tế học