MultiCraft

International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences Vol. 2, No. 1, 2011, pp. 33-42

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BUSINESS, MANAGEMENT AND SOCIAL SCIENCES www.ijbmss-ng.com 2011 MultiCraft Limited. All rights reserved

HR interventions for work-life balance: evidences from organisations in India

R. Baral1*, S. Bhargava2
1*

Department of Management Studies, IIT Madras, Chennai, INDIA 2 S.J.M. School of Management, IIT Bombay, Mumbai, INDIA * Corresponding Author: e-mail:rupashreebaral@gmail.com

Abstract Work-life balance has become a subject of concern for both research scholars and business leaders in view of the contemporary demographic, technological, market, and organisational changes associated with it. However, there has been little academic attempt to provide a holistic picture of work-life balance benefits and programmes (WLBPs) offered by various organisations in India. With the basis of extant literature, primary and secondary data, the present paper has made an effort to understand the current status of WLBPs in Indian organisations and to identify its future prospects. The paper has discussed the challenges for effective implementation of such policies, which can help HR managers to be cautious before introducing WLBPs in their respective organisations. Analysis of literature and available data suggests that family-friendliness of employers in India have been reflected in various welfare provisions which has been a matter of concern for employers since industrialization. With time, the scope and coverage of such initiatives have broadened and have become more individual growth and family well-being oriented. However, these policies and practices are more prominent in new economy organisations such as software and services organisations. Moreover, the range of WLBPs varies across organisations and there is still a long way to go when WLBPs will become strategic HR initiatives in most organisations. The paper suggests that organisations need to incorporate WLBPs and encourage a culture that support utilizing them to ensure employee commitment and productivity. While introducing WLBPs, congruence between employee needs and organisational values also should be considered. Keywords: Work-Life Balance, Work-Family Conflict, Family-Friendly Policies, Work-Life Benefits. 1. Introduction Today work-life balance has become an increasingly pervasive concern for employers as well as employees. Demographic changes as seen in the increasing number of women in the workplace and dual career families have generated an increasingly diverse workforce and a greater need of employees to balance their work and non-work lives (Bharat, 2003; Komarraju, 1997; Rajadhyaksha & Bhatnagar, 2000; Ramu, 1989; Sekharan, 1992). In response to these changes, employers have introduced innovative practices that allow employees to find greater work-life balance (Friedman, Christensen, & DeGroot, 1998). Increasing attrition rates and increasing demand for work-life balance have forced organisations to look beyond run of the mill HR interventions. As a result, initiatives such as flexible working hours, alternative work arrangements, leave policies and benefits in lieu of family care responsibilities and employee assistance programmes have become a significant part of most of the company benefit programmes and compensation packages. Such policies, practices and benefit programmess are generally referred as family-friendly policies (FFPs) or work-life benefits and practices (WLBPs) in literature (Kopelman et al., 2006; Kossek & Ozeki, 1998). The significance and implications of such HR interventions are many. Research findings suggest that WLBPs not only help employees better manage their work and family roles (Thomas & Ganster, 1995), but also affect employee attitude and behaviors such as organisational commitment (Grover & Crooker, 1995), job satisfaction (Kossek & Ozeki, 1998) and intention to quit (Lobel & Kossek, 1996). Provision of WLBPs also contributes to organisational performance and effectiveness (Sands & Harper, 2007).

34 Baral and Bhargava / International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2011, pp. 33-42

However, employers concern for employees family lives is not a recent phenomenon. Employers have been providing various welfare measures such as good working conditions, health, safety, and security provisions to employees since industrialization. These welfare practices became norms of most factories and organisations either as a result of employers pragmatic concern for employees and their families or unions conscious bargain for employee welfare. In true sense, World War II brought a considerable interest in employee work-family issues worldwide because of the increase of women employees in defense industries which led the federal government to provide facilities such as child care facilities (Glass & Estes, 1997). Post war era saw the increase of government mandated provisions being offered to employees such as health and life insurance, social security like pension plans, and disability protection in forms of workers compensation for accidents, and diseases institutionalizing the notion that employers had at least some obligations to provide security to employees families (Glass & Estes, 1997). In due course of time employers family-friendliness has gone beyond providing mere welfare provisions. Though, work-life balance as a concept has got considerable attention and as a campaign has been practiced by various organisations as a matter of policy and strategy, still we are not sure of what constitutes WLBPs. Some organisations provide a bundle of policies and programmes such as alternative work arrangements, leave policies, child-care centers while some provide services such as gymnasiums and recreation facilities at work in the name of WLBPs. We are not sure if the policies and practices are similar across organisations. Since employee work-life balance as a concept has got recognition from employers and HR managers in India only in recent years, the organisational initiatives in this regard are hardly known. Given this, the present paper has made an effort to understand the meaning and concept of WLBPs, prevalent policies and practices across the countries and in India in particular. Moreover, despite the numerous benefits of such initiatives as demonstrated in empirical studies across countries, only a few organisations have introduced WLBPs. It raises the question: what are the reasons behind an organisations decision to introduce WLBPs? Furthermore, among those organisations that have implemented WLBPs only a few have reaped the acclaimed benefits. Unless and until we have an understanding about the contextual as well as individual factors that might influence effective implementation and use of WLBPs, it will be difficult to advocate such practices. To address the above concern, the present paper has made an attempt to identify the factors, which influence the adoption, implementation and utilization of WLBPs on the basis of extant literature to provide suggestions and a road map for organisations in India. The paper begins by outlining the theoretical and empirical literature giving an overview of WLBPs and demonstrating the impacts of WLBPs on both organisations and employees. It then identifies several explanations found in the literature as to effective implementation and utilization of WLBPs. Finally the paper discusses the origin, growth and current status of WLBPs in India and their future prospects. 2. HR interventions for employee work-life balance (WLBPs) Achieving work-life balance may be a priority and desire of an individual employee; however, its not his or her sole responsibility. Work-life balance issue has become important for organisations to consider (Tenbrunsel et al., 1995). Employers being the advocates of setting norms and conditions at the workplace are considered to be the facilitators of combining work and family of employees. It is believed that when a management strategy relieves the interference from one domain, the demands of the second domain may be better met and prove to be less disruptive to the first domain (Kirchmeyer & Cohen, 1999). It is with this philosophy and against the changing demographic trends as seen in the changing participation rates for working women and working mothers, the rise in dual-career couples, the increase in single-parent families (Goodstein, 1994; Morgan & Milliken, 1992; Osterman, 1995), organisations have crafted many policies and practices to address the changing needs and demands of employees and help them achieve better work-life balance. Such interventions are typically defined as family-friendly policies (FFPs) or work-life benefits and programmes (WLBPs). WLBPs are those institutionalized structural and procedural arrangements, as well as formal and informal practices that make it easier for individuals to manage the often-conflicting worlds of work and family lives (Osterman, 1995). WLBPs can be organised into three major categories, policies, benefits and services. Policies cover the formal and informal ways by which employees work and leave schedules are handled, including part-time work, flexitime, and parental/family leave. Benefits cover different forms of compensation that protect against loss of earnings, payment of medical expenses and sponsored vacation. Services include on-site or near-site childcare centers, medical facilities and counseling. WLBPs also include government mandated statutory policies such as maternity leaves and benefits as well as discretionary policies and benefits offered by various organisations such as flexitime, telecommuting and employee assistance programmes such as stress management programmes (Ingram & Simons, 1995; Osterman, 1995; Perry-Smith & Blum, 2000; Zedeck & Mosier, 1990). Although employers often define work-family integration as a parenting or dependent care issue, over time, many firms are broadening the policies and practices to support employees participation in many life roles and even personal developments. There is a growing recognition of the need to support not only those with visible family needs and responsibilities (e.g., working mothers having child care responsibilities), but all employees at many life stages who may experience work-life stresses regardless of their family status. Earlier, adoption of WLBPs has largely been viewed as practical response to the increasing proportion of women employees in the workforce, employees with caring responsibilities and the problems such as absenteeism, turnover associated with that (Lambert, 2000). However, in recent years, adoption of such programs and policies are being considered as a part of high commitment work systems (Osterman, 1995) required for ensuring high levels of employee commitment and

35 Baral and Bhargava / International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2011, pp. 33-42

innovation. WLBPs are increasingly being considered as strategic, innovative, crucial and progressive (Lambert, 2000; PerrySmith & Blum, 2000, Tenbrunsel et al., 1995). 2.1 Benefits of WLBPs for Employees: WLBPs have been found to increase employee control over time and place of work (Thomas & Ganster, 1995) and reduced work-family conflict (Kossek & Ozeki, 1998) and stress (Thompson & Prottas, 2006). Despite the strong support for WLBPs, cautionary examples suggest these benefits are not universal and some policies that appear to be family-friendly may in fact be detrimental to the working conditions of employees. For example, telecommuting and flexible work schedules are arrangements that may allow or encourage employees to work more (Glass & Fujimoto, 1995). 2.2 Benefits of WLBPs for Organisations: Organisations do see a lot of benefits in providing WLBPs. Research findings suggest a strong positive relationship between WLBPs and reduced absenteeism (Dex & Scheibl, 1999; Lobel & Kossek, 1996; Osterman, 1995; Thompson, Beauvais & Lyness, 1999), increased productivity (Sands & Harper, 2007), improved recruitment and retention rates (Allen, 2001; Anderson, Coffey & Byerly, 2002; Honeycut & Rosen 1997; Konrad & Mangel, 2000; Kossek & Ozeki, 1998). However, despite the empirical evidences showing the benefits, WLBPs are not so well established organisational practices (Lobel, 1999; Osterman, 1995). Systematic evaluations of the impact of WLBPs are far from reaching a common conclusion (Glass & Finley, 2002), which makes it imperative to understand the challenges to effectiveness of WLBPs. Effectiveness of WLBPs can be evaluated by considering the extent of adoption and implementation by employers and use by employees. In the following section we will discuss the impediments during the adoption and implementation of WLBPs. Then we will discuss the various cultural, institutional and individual impediments that might influence the use of WLBPs. 3. Explanations for WLBP provision differences Organisations do vary in their implementation of work-life balance policies and practices because of many reasons. Those are discussed in detail in the following paragraphs. 3.1 Size, nature and type of organisations: Large organisations are more visible and receive more attention from regulators, media, and public. Because of the institutional pressures, large organisations are likely to be more responsive to work-family issues and provide more WLBPs (Goodstein, 1994; Ingram & Simons, 1995; Osterman, 1995). Public sector organisations were early innovators in work-family accommodations and continue to promote WLBPs (Goodstein, 1994) because of their goal of delivering social service and because they are not held to exclusively economic standards of performance (Oliver, 1991). 3.2 Family responsiveness of employers and HR managers: Organisations are more likely to offer WLBPs when work and family issues are salient to senior HR staff as well as employers (Milliken, Martines, & Morgan, 1998). 3.3 Salience to work-family conflict problems: Employers adopt WLBPs in order to respond to workforce problems linked to work/family issues, such as absenteeism, tardiness and work stress (Osterman, 1995) and because of the growing awareness problems associated with increasing number of women in the workforce and the costs associated with work-family conflict problems (Rodgers, 1992). 3.4 Gender composition of the workplace: Work-family problems are likely to be more in organisations where female employee population is bigger. Moreover, managerial women employees negotiate certain working arrangements from their employers in a better way as compared to their male counterparts (Ingram & Simons, 1995). Hence, it is observed that organisations with greater proportion of female managers offer a comprehensive WLBP package such as extended maternity leave, schedule flexibility, and childcare assistance (Glass & Fujimoto, 1995; Goodstein, 1994; Osterman, 1995). 4. Challenges to effective utilization of WLBPs Although the benefits of WLBPs have been widely cited in literature, it is seen that all employees do not avail these benefits. The following section is structured around the explanations that account for variations in the utilization of WLBPs. 4.1 Family-supportive culture: It has been argued that managers play an important role in the success of WLBPs because they make implicit or explicit choices regarding the adoption of workplace practices and are therefore, in a position to actively encourage or discourage employees efforts to balance their work and family lives (Thompson et al., 1999). When supervisors are supportive, employees are likely to take up available WLBPs. The fear of negative career consequences also discourages employees to utilize WLBPs such as working flexitime. Co-workers perceive employees who utilize WLBPs to be less committed and that significantly influences subsequent reward allocation, advancement opportunities and salary increases (Allen, 2001). For example, an employee might hesitate to use the full period of maternity leave due to concerns of not being promoted. Such perceptions suggest compelling reasons why WLBPs tend to be underutilized by employees. Another construct that is purported to

36 Baral and Bhargava / International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2011, pp. 33-42

influence the utilization of WLBPs is, the time demands or norms concerning the number of hours, which employees are supposed to devote to work or work-related activities (Thompson et al., 1999) and because of the strong norms of face time and workaholic hours (Blair-Loy & Wharton, 2002). 4.2 Congruence between individual needs and organisations solutions: Sometimes such programs may look impressive but in reality they might not be of any help to employees who do not see any value in them. For example, hardly efforts are taken to understand the needs of employees and design the programs accordingly. Personal values may discourage employees from using WLBPs. An ambitious employee may decide to concentrate on his/her career waiving the advantages of these programs (Glass & Finley, 2002). Incongruence between individual work and family values and organisational responsiveness towards work-family issues is certainly a challenge to effectiveness of WLBPs. 5. History and growth of WLBPs in India: Welfare provisions to family-friendly initiatives History of industrial labour in India shows, during earlier stages of industrialization, rules of workplace were governed by the employers being the powerful player in the whole system. In several cases society perceived those rules as too exploitative. It was at that time when Government was pressurized to protect the weaker party, the workers. During that period, the growth of trade unions, enactment of several labour legislations, implementation of some of the ILO conventions and recommendations substantially influenced the industrial relations system in the country. Labour and management were gradually brought under the umbrella of governments labour policy. The directive principles of state policy embodied in the constitution of India (Articles 41 and 42), places upon the government the responsibility of securing by legislation or economic organisation, or any other way, to all workers, industrial or otherwise, work, living wages, conditions of work ensuring a decent standard of life, equal pay for equal work for both men and women, education, human conditions of work, maternity relief, public assistance in case of unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement, full employment, leisure and cultural opportunities and participation of workers in the management of undertaking. Such intensive government involvement led to over a number of pieces of labour legislations in the country covering various aspects of employer-employee relations from providing guidelines for setting the work place norms to providing better working conditions, welfare, health and safety measures for employees and their families. The concept of employee welfare and benefits actually began to evolve in the Indian industrial scene from the later part of the 19th century. Welfare, which refers to anything for the comfort and improvement in intellectual and social well-being of the employees over and above the wages paid, has a broad scope to include any policies and provisions that help employees live comfortably. These provisions were either statutory that refers to the bare minimum facilities provided by the organisation to comply with the labour legislations imposed by the government (e.g. The Factories Act, 1948) or voluntary which were the schemes undertaken by the employers on their free will or through negotiations with trade unions and associations (Mamoria, Mamoria, & Ganker, 2000). A first of its kind was to improve the productivity of workers especially in the textile industry, which was a major source of employment during that period. Care was taken to improve the working conditions and provision of other amenities. During the early stages of industrialization, employers were forced to provide housing facilities to workers coming from distant villages. Enactment of legislations to provide certain welfare provisions can be considered to be family-friendly as these provisions certainly helped employees to maintain their health and safety thereby making them productive workers as well as better family members. Some of the government mandated welfare provisions as prescribed by labour legislations are: 5.1 Working hours: The Factories Act, 1948 regulates the working hours of employees including leave, holidays, overtime, and employment of children, women and young persons. This is the first of its kind legislation in India that has regulated the working conditions in factories and has ensured basic minimum requirements for the safety, health and welfare of factory workers. The working hours for an adult worker are prescribed not to exceed 48 hours in a week and 9 hours a day. This Act also restricts the working time of women employees and adolescents during evening that is 7 pm to 6 am. It provides for weekly holidays of one day so that the total workdays do not exceed 10 consecutive days. In case of requirement to work on a holiday a worker should be allowed a compensatory holiday (Secs. 52, 53 and 71). 5.2 Crches: The Factories Act, 1948 also requires having crches in factories employing more than 30 women workers to take care of their children (Sec. 40) which can be considered as a kind of WLBP since it helps women workers to better integrate their work and family demands. 5.3 Leave Provisions: Various kinds of leave provisions and benefits are available under Factories Act, 1948, Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 and Employee State Insurance Act, 1948. These include, 1) Earned Leave (the convenient leave sought by individual employee) 2) Casual Leave (leave for some family related purpose e.g. burials, weddings etc.) 3) Sick Leave (most times with doctors recommendations) 4) Compensatory leave (compensated with leave with wages for the absence from duty against the work performed by worker on any other day than normal working day). Under Employee State

37 Baral and Bhargava / International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2011, pp. 33-42

Insurance (ESI) Act, 1948 every insured employee is entitled to get cash benefits for the period of sickness occurring during the benefit period and certified by a duly appointed medical officer. 5.4 Maternity Benefits: Another much acclaimed benefit considered to be family-friendly is, maternity benefit provided to working women for certain periods before and after childbirth. In western countries much talked statutory provision for maternity benefit comes from the Family & Medical Leave Act (FMLA), 1993 which mandates that all eligible employees of a covered employer can take up to twelve weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave during any 12-month period to care for a newborn child or newly adopted child; to take care of a child, parent, or spouse with a serious health problem; or to recover from ones own serious health problem. Some of these benefits are also provided to working women in India under Maternity Benefit Act, 1961. The Act extends to the whole of India and is applicable to every factory, mines or plantation (including those belonging to Government) and to every shop or establishment wherein 10 or more persons are employed or were employed on any day of the preceding 12 months. Every woman shall be entitled to, and her employer shall be liable for, the payment of maternity benefit, which is the amount payable to her at the rate of the average daily wage for the period of her actual absence. As per this Act, any woman shall be entitled to maternity leave of 12 weeks in all whether taken before or after childbirth. However, one cannot take more than six weeks before the expected delivery as per the amendment made in the act in 1989. The ESI Act, 1948 ensures comprehensive health coverage for employees below a certain income level. A periodical cash benefit is payable to an insured woman employee, in case of confinement, miscarriage, medical termination of pregnancy, premature birth of a child, or sickness arising from pregnancy, miscarriage, etc., occurring or expected to occur in a benefit period. Medical bonus or expense in lieu of medical expenditure or confinement expenses (up to a certain limit) is paid to an insured woman and an insured person in respect of his wife, if confinement occurs at a place where necessary medical facilities under ESI scheme are not available. Apart from these statutory provisions, many other provisions are provided by organisations voluntarily to their employees either as a result of unions bargain or as pragmatic concerns of employers. These provisions include high standards of working condition, housing facility to more encompassing benefit packages that include health, dental and life insurance, vacation and leave policies, investment and retirement plans. 6. Need to go beyond welfare: From employee-friendly to family-friendly practices India has seen dramatic economic and social changes in recent years. Women constitute nearly 48% of the population and womens labor force participation has increased considerably (Census of India, 1991, 2001). At the same time, remarkable changes are seen at the family front too. In urban India, traditional large combined and extended families are giving way to nuclear families. While this change is providing couples with more independence, it is taking away the traditional support system from family members, especially for childcare and household work (Ramu, 1989). Recent studies (Aryee, Srinivas, & Tan, 2005) point out the coexistence of traditional and modern gender role expectations where men are taking some household responsibility while maintaining their breadwinning role and women are managing to bear household responsibilities regardless of their employment status. These changes in typical Indian family structure have increased pressure on men and women alike to manage both work and family (Komarraju, 1997; Poster, 2005; Rajadhyaksha & Bhatnagar, 2000). At organisational level and broader economic level, increasing number of emerging organisations in services sector like Busniness Process Outsourcing Organizations (BPOs), call centers, health care services, software services has set new challenges for HR managers. At one hand, these sectors have become the biggest employment generators with the number of jobs almost doubling each year, on the other hand, they have seen high attrition rates because of the work pressures and time demands. Changes in working hours e.g. night shifts in BPOs and call centers to balance the time zone in western countries and comparatively longer working hours in software sectors and private companies have made work and family management a crucial issue. Only Information Technology (IT) or BPO industry does not suffer from the global work hours syndrome. Because of the improved telecommunication systems, working hours have increased in most of the organisations. As it gets cheaper and easier to organise audio and video conference calls, more number of managers are increasingly participating in meetings even after their scheduled working hours and on weekends. Even though technology like broadband, etc. has provided additional flexibility to strike a better work-life balance, everyone is not able to achieve such efficiency levels, because of the increased pressures from customers and senior managers. Hence, organisations today are bound to require different kind of policies and regulations because of the prevalence of these nontraditional, non-standard and atypical employment patterns and practices. It is argued that the information, communication and technology (ICT) industries should have flexible working hours and differential approach to leave and paid holidays etc. (Gayathri & Antony, 2002). ICT sector is hailed to be a gender-neutral industry given its almost complete dependence on knowledge skills rather than physical skills. But unless this is supported by family-friendly policies, the old gender biases will persist (Gayathri & Antony, 2002). Therefore, it has become all the more important to encompass policies and provisions beyond mere welfare facilities to tackle with the growing problem of work-life balance among these new economy organisations. Yesterday's innovative practices are routine today. The concept of welfare has to change from being a hygiene factor to be a motivational factor.

38 Baral and Bhargava / International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2011, pp. 33-42

Keeping the changing scenario in mind, organisations are not restricting themselves to the mandatory welfare practices as stipulated by law but they are becoming more conscious towards the need, desire and growth of their employees, their families and society as a whole. Companies are providing amenities at their premises, which are open 24 hours like cafeterias, gymnasiums and medical clinics. Organisations in India like IBM, NIIT, Intel, Accenture, Cummins and TATA have introduced flexible work practices among other initiatives to attract and retain talent and to help them achieve healthy work-life balance. Companies are providing high standard of welfare facilities and benefit programs as a part of employee compensation packages and they advocate these programmes as family-friendly policies or work-life benefits and programmes. The following section outlines some of such policies and provisions certain organisations are offering to their employees. The data are taken from secondary sources such as newspaper reports, survey results as reported in magazines and newspapers and from primary sources through interviews and discussions with HR managers in some of the leading organisations in India as a part of a larger study by the authors. 7. Current status of WLBPs in India As a strategic response to the significant changes that have taken place in work and family spheres, Intel India is committed to provide tools and work environment solutions to reduce work and personal life challenges, maximizing employee contributions and enhancing Intel's Great Place to Work value. Apart from providing five-day working and flexible working hours, it also provides certain benefits for employees and their families. Such benefits include 1) Hospitalization Insurance Policy, which covers reimbursement of hospital expenses, incurred due to illness/injury where all employees and their nominated dependants (spouse, children, parents or in-laws) are covered under a floater policy of Rs. 500,000 per annum. Intel pays 100 percent of the premium for employees and 80 percent of the premium for dependents. 2) Under Business Traveler Medical Plan, Intel provides medical coverage to full-time and part-time Indian employees, at no cost, while they travel on business outside of India for a period of up to 90 days. 3) Group Term Life Insurance ensures payment of a lump sum to the employee's legal heir in the event of the insured employee's death and Intel pays the whole 100% of the premium. 5) Intel India's Hospitalization Insurance covers maternity insurance for employees and their spouse from day one. In the case of pregnancy, Intel India allows each female employee a paid maternity leave of 84 days. 6) Under Annual Leave Time employees in their first two years with Intel, receive 15 working days of leave per calendar year. After two years with Intel, employees receive 20 days of leave per calendar year excluding 12 paid public or festival holidays in a calendar year. Other programs are claimed to be global and they are specifically tailored according to the needs of a specific country, and are based upon the market needs and statutory requirements of each location. The range of options includes flexible work schedules, compressed workweeks and alternate work schedules, telecommuting, home office, part-time employment, childcare assistance, resource and referral services and health and wellness benefits etc. To best address the unique childcare needs of their employees, Intel takes a site-based approach to childcare. For example, in Israel, Intel has partnered with the community to support childcare centers located near Intel facilities providing services that match the needs of its employees. In Ireland, Intel has implemented an on-site resource and referral service to help employees locate childcare. In the United States Intel offers resource and referral services, a pretax dependent care spending account and discounts to national childcare chains. IBM India offers its employees options such as flexible workweek schedules, working from home, part time employment, family counseling, and leave of absence programmes under WLBPs. IBMs policy manual says that the organisation is serious about helping employees achieve career/life balance1. Other provisions include study reimbursements, global opportunities, recreational activities, clubs and helping employees deal with life events, from getting married to taking a career break. Work/Life balance is a strategic initiative that helps IBM to attract, motivate and retain the very best talent in the technology industry.2 The TATA Group is one of India's oldest, largest and most respected business conglomerates. Generally known as the most people-focused company, TATA scores high on almost all the welfare parameters. Employees of different strata work in TATA and hence, the initiatives are tailored towards their unique needs and requirements. For example, since a larger proportion of workforce in manufacturing plants of TATA is illiterate and belong to the lower strata of society, the company has introduced adult education programmes and education about family planning as a part of welfare programme for them. Crche facility is provided where the percentage of female employees is more than 20. TATA group of companies has extended the domain of welfare practices to outside the workplace by involving their employees in social responsibilities like community development programs. Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) is an emerging new economy organization under Tata group which has a pool of educated executive class employees. TCS provides the options to its employees to work flexitime with certain mandatory hours of work and five-day working provisions. It conducts regular seminars on nutrition, better living and stress management. Realizing the impact of long working hours, extensive travel and desk-bound jobs that skew the delicate work-life balance of many a TCSers, the company has encouraged the formation of groups with similar interests to come together to conduct various activities like book reading. Maitree is an initiative for the spouses of employees and it has helped in bringing together the families of the employees. Zensar Technologies provides child care arrangements such as crche facility to its employees. It arranges Pizza and Coke an informal meeting where associates (they refer employees as associates) can meet their seniors and discuss anything and
1 2

http,//www-8.ibm.com/employment/in/ep/worklife.html http,//www.expressitpeople.com/20020408/careers5.shtml

39 Baral and Bhargava / International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2011, pp. 33-42

everything. It has a facility called Madat Online a 24/7 service which is available for employees to take care of some of their personal day-to-day activities (e.g. dropping cheques, drawing cash, pay telephone bills and school fees of employees children). It provides information services such as information regarding housing/education facilities for children. It organises stress management programmes, arranges social events such as family day and fun days at work regularly. Agilent Technologies, identified as one of the great places to work by a survey conducted by Times Group and Great Place to Work Institute in 2008 has been very supportive for employee work-life balance3. It provides freedom and flexibility in deciding time and place of work to its employees and rewards employee performance than working more number of hours. According to a recent survey by Great Place to Work Institute, Intel Technology India Pvt Ltd., Intelenet Global Services, and Qualcomm India Pvt Ltd. were recognized as the best companies in India for work-life balance.4 Shell being one of the multinational companies believes and practices employee diversity and work-life balance. Employees are given options such as flexitime and work from home. Employees perception about work-life balance is assessed every year in their Annual Global People Survey to see where the company stands and what should they do to help employees achieve a healthy work-life balance. It advocates video or teleconferences to reduce business related travel. It also organises midweek meetings to avoid weekend travel. It discourages overtime work and taking work home on weekends. Personal leaves cannot be carried over to next year and are not encashable so that employees will use personal leaves for self and family. These practices show the organisations concern for employee work-life balance. Analysis of interviews with some of the HR managers in India suggests that most common policies and benefits across organisations in manufacturing and software sectors are maternity benefits and comprehensive health and medical insurance policies. Quite a few organisations offer flexitime, leave options like paternity leave and so on to employee benefits like child care facilities, video conferencing to reduce travel, not scheduling work events during weekends and so on. However, flexitme and telecommuting are not well documented policies across organisations although they are offered discretionarily to selective few (in most cases to the senior managers). In some cases flexitime refers to half-an-hour or one hour flexibility in arriving at office keeping core working hours intact. Policies and practices found to vary considerably across organizations where we conducted our study. Multinational organisations in our study are found to be more responsive towards work-life balance issues and are found to have provided more WLBPs. Organisations are offering few policies for employees beyond employer owned options like canteen facilities, more lively and employee friendly office interiors and programmes for family and children of employees. Yoga classes and stress management workshops are conducted on a regular basis as a part of employee well-being programmes. However, according to few employees who are respondents in our study, providing recreation facility or conducting social events at work place might relieve the stresses of long working hours, but it hardly has any impact on employees family well-being. Perceptions of these kinds really question the good intentions of employers behind offering WLBPs. Through a questionnaire survey on perceived organisational work-life balance support, we have found that many employees (study participants) are not even aware of certain policies even if those are available in their respective organisations. It reflects the poor communications made by organisations. Along the lines of previous study reports (e.g. Arulappan, 2005) it seems except organisations in IT industry who are probably the first movers in terms of introducing WLBPs, hardly few organisation provide bundle of WLBPs. Earlier studies (Buddhapriya, 2009; Poster 2005; Wang, Lawler, Shi, Walumbwa, & Piao, 2008) also affairm that employers in India, provide little formal family support programs (WLBPs) for their employees compared to their counterparts in Western countries. 8. The road ahead The analysis of secondary reports and primary data collected through interviews and questionnaire surveys suggest that organisations in India have certainly realized the need for work-life balance of employees and have started offering policies and programs that are more employee growth oriented and family-friendly than mere welfare and safety oriented. Although, these policies and programs differ across organizations, but it surely has provided new directions for organisations in similar sectors to adopt such progressive HR initiatives to recognize and accommodate the diverse needs of the employees. Since balancing work and nonwork roles is likely to remain one of the key issues in the foreseeable future, organisations should look for innovative ways to cater to the diverse employee needs and these programs should not be seen as optional extras but as integral to core business strategies in both the public and the private sectors. However, utmost care should be taken before taking decisions to adopt and implement these innovative practices as the effectiveness of such policies and practices are contingent on many individual and organisational factors which are discussed in the earlier sections of the paper. Proper communication should be made to employees about various policies, practices and they should be encouraged to use them. Due importance should be given to employee needs to reap the benefits of a particular policy or programme. Even though the growth of WLBPs in India has not been commendable, however, senior HR mangers in our study are extremely positive about its future. They emphasized that that it would become a distinct part of organisations HR policy and corporate

3 4

Want to work for the best? 19/05/ 2008, Economic Times http://www.pluggd.in/best-company-india-297/

40 Baral and Bhargava / International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2011, pp. 33-42

strategy and will have a positive impact on business. Preventing employees to misuse the provisions such as flexitme and costbenefit analysis are some of the concerns raised by them. 9. Conclusions and implications for practice and research Unavailability of well designed evaluative studies on WLBPs in Indian context and inclusion of only few organisations in the current study certainly limit us to provide a concrete state of WLBPs in India. Nevertheless, some general conclusions can be drawn. Critical analysis of the history and growth of employment policies in India suggest that WLBPs have their roots in the statutory and voluntary welfare practices offered by many employers during and post industrialization era. Provisions such as working hour regulations, maternity benefits, crches, and leave policies have received continued attention in governmentmandated provisions. Governments intervention to protect employees from exploitative workplace terms and conditions made by employers and in some cases employers pragmatic concerns for their employees health, safety and welfare can be considered as the major reasons behind introduction of such policies. The socio demographic and economic changes have pressurized employers to look beyond welfare practices and provide more humane and family-friendly concerns so that employees can accommodate both their family and work needs thereby maintaining a healthy work-life balance and being productive at the work place. Organisations are increasingly becoming conscious about these issues and applying managerial interventions such as WLBPs. However, it is seen that despite the recognition of the fact that WLBPs would create a healthier, productive and motivated workforce reducing work-family conflict and help position the organisation as an employer of choice, many organisations in India have no stated formal WLBPs. There is still a long way to see WLBPs as strategic initiatives in Indian organisations. The slow and differential policy response in India as compared to western countries can be attributed to the political ideologies, slow pace of change in socio demographic structure, attitude of employers and lack of empirical studies showing the impact of such initiatives on organisational performance. Notwithstanding the methodological limitations, it can be suggested that employers and HR managers should consider work-life balance as a strategic concern. However, implementing HR interventions for work-life balance without making a normative change in the philosophy and belief of the company is not going to reap positive results. The paper has made an attempt to provide the conditions and challenges to effectiveness of WLBPs based on the literature largely focusing on the WLBPs in western countries. However, the results are in a position to provide some directions to HR professionals in India to review their present policies and practices regarding work-life balance and redesign them accordingly. Certain cautions and proactive actions should be taken before implementing WLBPs in order to reap the benefits of the same. Policies and programs offered in pieces may not help in general neither a common program fits for all. Organisations in India need to take lessons from organisations across countries and design their benefit plans keeping in mind the nature of the industry, profile of the work force, gender specific needs, individual initiated bargains, local culture and environment as well as policy implications. While a growing number of studies find that WLBPs benefit employees, empirical support for the business cases in India for investing in such initiatives is less developed which needs immediate concern of researchers. A few questions need to be answered before talking about the effectiveness and use of WLBPs in India. Future research agenda could be to understand if WLBPs are able to reduce work-family conflict and if they really add to company bottom line. Efforts should be taken to understand if employees perceive their organisations providing these policies to be family-friendly and whether the culture of the company is supportive towards using such programs. This paper is just an attempt to set the base for further research in this area in the Indian context. References Allen T. D. 2001. Family-supportive work environments: The role of organisational perspectives, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol.58, pp.414-435. Anderson S. E., Coffey B. S. and Byerly R. T. 2002. Formal organisational initiatives and informal workplace practices, Links to work-family conflict and job-related outcomes, Journal of Management, Vol.28, pp. 787810. Arulappan M. 2005. When Its Work...And Not Life, Work-Life Balance, A Critique, available at http://www.employersforwork-lifebalance.org.uk/pdf/International_Arulappan.pdf Aryee S., Srinivas E. S. and Tan, H.H. 2005 Rhythms of Life, Antecedents and Outcomes of Work-Family Balance in Employed Parents, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.90, pp.32-146. Bharat S. 1995. Attitudes and sex-role perceptions among working couples in India. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, Vol.26, pp.371-388. Bharat, S. 2003. Women, work, and family in urban India, Towards new families? in J. W. Berry, R. C. Mishra, and R. C. Tripathi ed., Psychology in human and social development, Lessons from diverse cultures pp.155-169 New Delhi, India, Sage. Blair-Loy, M. and Wharton, A.S. 2002. Employees use of work-family policies and the workplace social context, Social Forces, Vol.80, pp.813-845. Buddhapriya, S. 2009. Work-Family Challenges and Their Impact on Career Decisions: A Study of Indian Women Professionals. The Journal for Decision Makers, Vol. 34, pp. 31-45.

41 Baral and Bhargava / International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2011, pp. 33-42

Dex S. and Scheibl F. 1999. Business Performance and Family-Friendly Policies, Journal of General Management, Vol.24, pp.2237. Friedman S.D., Christensen P. and DeGroot J. 1998. Work and Life, The End of the Zero-Sum Game, Harvard Business Review, Nov-Dec, pp.119-129. Gayathri V., and Piush A. 2002. Ricocheting Gender Equations, Women and ICT Careers, Paper presented in the International Seminar on ICTs and Indian Development, Processes, Prognoses and Policies, Bangalore, 9-11 December 2002, Institute of Social Studies, The Hague and Institute for Human Development, New Delhi. Glass, J. and Estes S. B. 1997. The family responsive workplace. Annual Review of Sociology, Vol.23, pp. 289-313 Glass J.L., and Finley A. 2002. Coverage and effectiveness of family responsive workplace policies. Human Resource Management Review, Vol.12, pp. 313-337. Glass, J.L., and Fujimoto, T. 1995. Employer characteristics and the provision of family responsive policies. Work and Occupations, Vol.22, pp.380-411. Goff, S. J., Mount, M. K., and Jamison, R. L. 1990. Employer supported child care, work/family conflict, and absenteeism, A field study. Personnel Psychology, Vol.43, pp.793-809. Goodstein, J.D. 1994. Institutional Pressures and Strategic Responsiveness, Employer Involvement in WorkFamily Issues. Academy of Management Journal, Vol.37, pp.350-382. Grover, S.L., and Crooker, K.J. 1995. Who appreciates family-responsive human resource policies, The impact of familyfriendly policies on the organisational attachment of parents and non-parents, Personnel Psychology, Vol.48, pp.271-288. Honeycut, T. L., and Rosen, B. 1997. Family friendly human resource policies, salary levels, and salient identity as predictors of organisational attraction, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol.50, pp.271-290. Ingram P., and Simons, T. 1995. Institutional and resource dependence determinants of responsiveness to work-family issues, Academy of Management Journal, Vol.38, pp.1466-1482. Kirchmeyer, C., and Cohen, A. 1999. Different strategies for managing the work/non-work interface, A test for unique pathways to work outcomes. Work and Stress, Vol.13, pp.59-73. Komarraju M. 1997. The workfamily interface in India, in S. Parasuraman and J. H. Greenhaus Eds., Integrating work and family, Challenges for a changing world pp. 104114. Westport, CT, Quorum Books. Konrad, A. and Mangel R. 2000. The impact of work-life programs on firm productivity, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21, pp.1225-1237. Kopelman R.E., Prottas D.J., Thompson C.A. and Jahn, E.W. 2006. A multilevel examination of work-life practices, Is more always better? Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol.18, pp. 232-253. Kossek E. E. and Ozeki C. 1998. Work-family conflict, policies, and the job-life satisfaction relationship, A review and directions for organisational behavior-human resources research, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.83, pp.139-149. Lambert S. J. 2000. Added Benefits, The Link between Work-Life Benefits and Organisational Citizenship Behavior, Academy of Management Journal, Vol.43, pp. 801-815. Lobel S. A. 1999. Impacts of diversity and work-life initiatives in organisations, in G. N. Powell ed., Handbook of gender and work pp. 453-474. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage. Lobel, S.A., and Kossek, E.E. 1996. Human resource strategies to support diversity in work and personal lifestyles, Beyond the family friendly organisation, in, Kossek, E.E. and Lobel, S.A., ed., Managing diversity, Human resource strategies for transforming the workplace pp. 221243, Blackwell, Cambridge, MA. Mamoria C.B. Mamoria S., and Ganker S.V. 2000. Dynamics of Industrial Relations 14th ed.. Mumbai, Himalaya Publishing House. Milliken F.J., Martines L.L., and Morgan H. 1998. Explaining organisational responsiveness to work-family issues, the role of human resource managers as issue interpreters, Academy of Management Journal, Vol.41, pp.580592. Morgan H. and Milliken F. 1992. Keys to action, Understanding differences in organisations responsiveness to work-and-family issues, Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 31, pp.227-248. Poster, W.R. 2005. Organizational Change, Globalization, and Work-Family Programs: Case Studies from India and the United States. In S. Poelmans (Ed.). Work-Family Interface in International Perspective (pp. 173-209). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Press. Oliver, C. 1991. Strategic responses to institutional processes, Academy of Management Review, Vol.16, pp.145-179. Osterman P. 1995. Work/family programmes and the employment relationship, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.40, pp. 681700. Perry-Smith J.E. and Blum, T.C. 2000. Work-family human resource bundles and perceived organisational performance, Academy of Management Journal, Vol.43, pp.1107-1117. Poster, W.R. 2005. Organisational change: Globalization, and work-family programs: Case studies from India and the United States, in, Poelmans. S.A.Y. ed, Work and Family: An International Research Perspective, pp. 211-240, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London. Rajadhyaksha U. and Bhatnagar, D. 2000. Life role salience, A study of dual career couples in the Indian context. Human Relations, Vol.53, pp.489-511.

42 Baral and Bhargava / International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2011, pp. 33-42

Ramu G. N. 1989. Indian husbands: Their role perceptions and performance in single- and dual-earner households. Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol.49, pp.903-915. Rodgers S. 1992. The flexible workplace: What have we learned? Human Resource Management, Vol.31, pp. 157-169. Sands J., and Harper T.L. 2007. Family-Friendly Benefits and Organisational Performance. Business Renaissance Quarterly, Vol.2, pp.107-126. Sekaran U. 1992. Middle-class dual-earner families and their support systems in urban India, in S. Lewis, D. N. Izraeli, and H. Hootsmans ed., Dual-earner families, International perspectives. pp. 4661. Newbury Park, CA, Sage. Tenbrunsel A.E., Brett J.M., Maoz E., Stroh L.K. and Reilly A.H. 1995. Dynamic and static work-family relationships. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, Vol.63, pp.233-246. Thomas L.T. and Ganster D.C. 1995. Impact of family-supportive work variables on work-family conflict and strain: A control perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.80, pp.6-15. Thompson C. A., Beauvis L. L. and Lyness K. S. 1999. When work-family benefits are not enough, The influence of work-family culture on benefit utilization, organisational attachment, and work-family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol.54, pp.392-415. Thompson C. A. and Prottas, D. J. 2006. Relationships among organisational family support, job autonomy, perceived control, and employee well-being. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 11, pp.100-118. Wang, P. Lawler, J.J, Shi. K., Walumbwa.F., and Piao, M. 2008. Family-friendly employment practices: Importance and effects in India, Kenya, and China. Advances in International Management, Vol. 21, pp. 235-265. Zedeck S. and Mosier, K.L. 1990. Work in the family and employing organisation. American Psychologist, Vol.45, pp.240-251.

Biographical notes Dr. R. Baral received Ph.D. from Indian Institute of Technology Mumbai, India. Currently she is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Management Studies, IIT Madras, Chennai, India. Her research interests include Strategic Human Resource Management, Work-Family Dynamics, and Career Management. Prof. S. Bhargava is a Professor of Organisational Behavior and Human Resource Management at the Shailesh J Mehta School of Management, IIT, Bombay. His past teaching and research association also has been at the IIM, Lucknow and Ahmedabad. His current area of research includes Giftedness & Talent Management, Competency Analysis and Assessment, Developing Entrepreneurship, Creating Emotionally Intelligent Leaders, Knowledge Management, Reward Management, Management of Human Service Organisations: NGOs, Issues of Outsourcing & Call Centers, Balancing Work-Family and Managing Career. He has published more than fifty papers in referred national and international journals. He has also presented a number of research articles in national and international conferences. He has written few books related to his research work. He has completed over a dozen of sponsored research and consulting projects for the government/private organisations. He is member of the Australian and Newzealand Academy of Management, American Psychological Association and Founder Member and Secretary of the Lucknow Chapter of the National Human Resource Development Network. He is also founder member of the National Academy of Psychology, India.

Received November 2010 Accepted December 2010 Final acceptance in revised form February 2011