Factors Affecting Overall Life Satisfaction for Work-From-Home Employees: Evidence From India

Factors Affecting Overall Life Satisfaction for Work-From-Home Employees: Evidence From India

Munmun Goswami
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-8451-4.ch003
OnDemand:
(Individual Chapters)
Available
$37.50
No Current Special Offers
TOTAL SAVINGS: $37.50

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the way we live and work. The situation has exponentially increased the use of online platforms in every aspect. Work-from-home has become more prominent, more widespread, and a routine of life rather than the exception. Within this context, drawing support from the conservation of resources theory, a conceptual framework is proposed to list the various factors affecting the psychological capital (PsyCap) which in turn impacts overall life satisfaction. The model is empirically validated with data from the Indian working population using structural equation modeling. Specifically, it was observed that remote abusive supervision, family demands, and work demands negatively influence PsyCap. Simultaneously, social support from work and family (colleague, team, partner/spouse, and parent) positively influences PsyCap. PsyCap, in turn, influences their overall life satisfaction. Psychological detachment negatively moderates the relationship between remote abusive supervision and PsyCap. Implications and future scope of research are also highlighted.
Chapter Preview
Top

Introduction

Background – Covid19

Humanity has been grappling with the pandemic since early January 2020, created by a coronavirus (Covid19). With neither a known cure nor prevention, the only way to restrict the virus’ spread was through social distancing, i.e., isolating the sick (Sintema, 2020). Thus, most countries were placed under lockdown (Kaplan et al., 2020). The pandemic had changed the way of functioning for all, some drastically, most permanently. Though countries have started the vaccination process in early 2021, multiple strains created virus’ rapid mutation have forced governments across nations to follow social distancing measures, with lockdown restrictions extended (temporarily and intermittently) (Richardson, 2021). Public schools, colleges, public utility spaces like gyms, theatres, malls, etc.) are shut or re-shut after opening for a few weeks. In this scenario, online platforms came to the rescue for socially isolated human beings. Forced to stay at home and unable to venture out, people turned to online avenues for business, education, entertainment, and social interactions. Schools, colleges, and offices, whoever can, shifted to work-from-home arrangements (WFH). Multiple organizations have mandated their workforce to work from home. As per a McKinsey 2021 survey on executives from over 100 geographic locations, most of them are likely to follow a hybrid model of functioning post-pandemic (Alexander et al., 2021).

Since the onset of the pandemic, many organizations have shifted to remote working (work-from-home), in whichever role is possible. New-age stalwarts like Google, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon had mandated one-year or even lifetime work-from-home options. In India, too, companies like Citibank, BCG, HUL, KPMG, RPG Group, Cognizant, Infosys, Philips, Pfizer, Pidilite, and TCS (Basu, 2020), to name a few, have mandated that only essential workers are required to be physically present in the office premises. Tata Group has implemented work-from-anywhere for its employees in specific functions (sales, digital marketing, HR, IT support, etc.) (Bhalerao, 2020). While most preferred to work-from-home during the early lockdown period (as per a survey conducted by Lenovo in July 2020 (Caramela, 2020), the increase in productivity also led to more stress and difficulty in maintaining work-life balance. In addition, people also faced toxic workplace behaviour, albeit online, including incivility, aggressive behaviour, and poor interpersonal treatment (Liu, 2020).

In this context, work-from-home has obtained unprecedented importance, especially being the ‘new normal’ way of functioning, especially for the workforce. Earlier, work-from-home was considered an employer-provided benefit, given as a way of showing support, to enable employees with family life constraints (young child/ children, aged/ sick parents, dependant family members, self-illness, etc.), and were not utilized much by the workforce. In a country like India, this was more so, especially with the negative connotations associated with working from home (the fear of not being treated at par with other employees, considered ‘not sincere/ dedicated enough’ towards career, projecting the image that career was not ‘as important’) made this a paper policy in most organizations. However, the work environment has changed with the pandemic, and work-from-home has become the norm rather than the exception. Organizations, as well as individuals, have awakened to the various advantages of working from home. While many have resumed working from the physical office, others continue to work from home and are comfortable doing so. Hence, the area of work-from-home is more relevant now than ever.

Key Terms in this Chapter

Work-From-Home (WFH): It comes under the ‘flexplace’ (or ‘flexspace’) kind of flexible work arrangements, where the individual is allowed to work from their home premises, not requiring to be physically present in the office premises.

Abusive Supervision (AS): It is defined as “subordinates’ perceptions of the extent to which supervisors engage in the sustained display of hostile verbal and nonverbal behaviours, excluding physical contact” ( Tepper 2000 , p. 178).

Flexible Work Arrangements (FWA): Flexible work arrangements are defined as “employer provided benefits that permit employees some level of control over when and where they work outside of the standard workday” ( Lambert et al., 2008 , p. 107). It is broadly demarcated as ‘flextime’ and ‘flexplace’ (or ‘flexspace’) the former meaning having flexibility in the time of work. In contrast, the latter meant flexibility in the location where one does the work.

Psychological Capital (PsyCap): It is based on the concepts of positive psychology in general, and, specifically, positive organizational behaviour ( Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017 ). The four constructs, hope, efficacy, resilience, and optimism, defines positive organizational behaviour the best, and PsyCap is an integration of these four combined resources (collectively termed as the HERO within).

Psychological Detachment (PD): It is defined as an “individual’s sense of being away from work situations” ( Etzion et al., 1998 , p. 579).

Overall Life Satisfaction (LS): It is one of the key desired outcomes in HR & OB literature, used extensively as a measure of hedonic well-being (Ryff & Keye, 1995 AU74: The in-text citation "Ryff & Keye, 1995" is not in the reference list. Please correct the citation, add the reference to the list, or delete the citation. ). Hedonic well-being as a concept was ideated by Greek philosopher Epicurus, who opined that the ultimate aim of life was to achieve as much happiness as possible, and little or no pain.

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book:
Reset