Chapter –VI

Data Analysis ,
Interpretations
and
Hypothesis Testing
 CHAPTER VI
Data Analysis , Interpretations & Hypothesis Testing
Introduction :

Questionnaires were distributed to female employees in different organizations falling under

service sector in Pune City through mentor, friends , relatives and students and also
personally .

A total of 342 out of 510 questionnaires distributed were returned, yielding a response rate
of 67.06 % . Out of 342 only 263 questionnaires were considered for the analysis. Other
questionnaires were discarded for the reasons of incompleteness and irrelevance .

Tabulation and the graphical presentation is carried out using MS Excel. Descriptive and
inference statistics is carried out using SPSS 17.00 .

6.1 Elements of Research : Concepts , Constructs ,Variables & Hypothesis in research :

Concept :
A concept is an abstraction representing an object, a property of an object, or a phenomenon.
In the present research Female employee , Organization are the concepts .
Constructs :
A construct is a concept which does not have objects to point out . In the present research
there are many constructs as level of respondent in the organization. It is abstraction formed
from position of individuals in the society which is ascertained by certain indicators such as
level of education, social group, and recognition by the society etc.
Variables :
It is abstraction formed from position of individuals in the society, which is ascertained by
certain indicators such as level of education, social group, and recognition by the society
etc.
Hypothesis :

A hypothesis is the assumption that we make about the population parameter. This can be
any assumption about a population parameter not necessarily based on statistical data . An
hypothesis is a specific statement of prediction. It describes in concrete (rather than
theoretical) terms what you expect will happen in your study.

There are three hypothesis formulated by the researcher for the undertaken study .

Hypothesis 1 :

H1o : Use of work life balance policies is not influenced by marital status

H1a : Use of work life balance policies is influenced by marital status

Hypothesis 2 :

H2o : Use of work life balance policies is not influenced by age level

H2a : Use of work life balance policies is influenced by age level

Hypothesis 3 :

H3o: Use of work life balance policies is not influenced by number of dependents

H3a: Use of work life balance policies is influenced by number of dependents

6.2 Questionnaire Distribution and Collection :

Five hundred and ten questionnaire were distributed to six different types of organizations
falling under service sector viz Banking and Financial services , Hospitals , Hotels , IT &
ITES and Education and other . After eliminating the invalid questionnaires , 263 valid
questionnaires were used for further analysis

Total Questionnaires Distributed 510

Total Questionnaires Received 342

Response Rate % 67.06

Total Questionnaires Considered for Analysis

263

No Of Questionnaires Discarded 79

6.3 Codification

Once the information is tabulated, it is easy to perform various statistical tests for their
validity, accuracy and significance. This step seems very simple, although it is not so.
Gathered information should be presented in such a manner that even a layman understands
what, why, when and how of information . It is the process of taking completed
questionnaires and putting them into a form that can readily be analyzed.

For codification details Please refer to ANNEXURE C

6.4 Master Chart

After the codification , the data is entered in the SPSS software . The data is entered for
each respondent and master chart is prepared.
 6.5 Data Analysis –Descriptive Statistics , Inference Analysis

6.5.1 Frequency Tables :

Table No :09
Organization wise number of respondents
Frequency Percentage
Type of Organization
Banking & Financial Services 55 20.91
IT & ITES 47 17.87
Hospitals 42 15.97
Hotels 33 12.55
Education 70 26.62
Other 16 6.08
Total 263 100.00

Graph No : 01
Organisation No Of Respondent
80 70
70
60 55
47
50 42
40 33
30
16
20
10
0
Banking & IT & ITES Hospitals Hotels Education Other
Financial
Services

Interpretations : 26.62 % respondents are from education and 20.91 % from Banking and
Financial Services Sector . 6 % respondents are considered in the other which come from
any other type of organization besides the 5 mentioned above but which form part of service
sector e.g. respondents from construction sites , cellular cervices etc.
 Table No : 10
Qualification of Respondent
Frequency Percentage
Qualification :
UG(Undergraduate) 17 6.46
GR (Graduate) 39 14.83
PG(Post Graduate) 207 78.71
Total 263 100.00

Graph No : 02
Qualification Of Respondent

UG
6% GR
15%

PG
79%

Interpretation : 78% of respondents are post graduates . This indicates that female
employees working in service sector are well educated . 15 % of the female employees are
graduates . After the personal discussion it was revealed by these female employees that
they strive for pursuing further education .
 Table No :11
Previous Experience of respondent

Frequency Percentage

Previous Experience :(In Years)

Less than or equal to 1 24 9.13
More than 1 but less than or equal to 3 123 46.77
More than 3 but less than or equal to 5 47 17.87
More than 5 69 26.24
Total 263 100.00

Graph No :03
Previous experience of Respondent
140 123
120
100
80 69
60 47
40 24
20
0
Less than or equal More than 1 but More than 3 but More than 5
to 1 less than or equal less than or equal
to 3 to 5

Interpretation : 46.77 % of respondents are having experience prior joining the present
organization in between 1 to 3 year . 26.24 % respondents are having experience more than
5 years .
 Table No :12
Tenure in present organization
Frequency Percentage
Previous Experience :(In Years)
Less than or equal to 1 33 12.55
More than 1 but less than or equal to 3 165 62.74
More than 3 but less than or equal to 5 47 17.87
More than 5 18 6.84
Total 263 100.00

Graph No :04
Tenure in present organisation
180 165
160
140
120
100
80
60 47
33
40 18
20
0
Less than or equal More than 1 but More than 3 but More than 5
to 1 less than or equal less than or equal
to 3 to 5

Interpretation : 62.74 % of the respondents are working in their present organizations

from 1 to 3 years.
 Table No : 13
Level of respondent
Frequency Percentage
Level
Top 5 1.90
Middle 216 82.13
Lower 42 15.97
Total 263 100.00

Graph No :05
Level Of Respondent
250
216
200

150

100
42
50
5
0
Top Middle Lower

Interpretation : 82.13 % respondents are working in middle level positions . There is very
few ( 1.90 % ) representation of female employees at the top level management .
 Table No :14
Type of Job
Percentage
Frequency (w.r.t.30
sample)
Type Of Job
Part Time 2 0.76
Full Time 261 99.24
Total 263 100.00

Graph No : 06
Type of Job
2

Part Time
Full Time
261

Interpretations : 99.24 % respondents are working on a full time basis .

 Table No :15
Term Of Contract
Frequency Percentage
Term Of Contract
Permanent 213 80.99
Temporary 29 11.03
No Response 21 7.98
Total 263 100.00

Graph No :07
Term Of Contract
250
213
200

150

100

50 29 21

0
Permanent Temporary No Response

Interpretations : 80.99 % or respondents are permanent in the organizations But still 21

(7.98 %) employees are unaware if they are permanent or temporary . This indicates a lack
of communication on the part of employer and management.
 Table No :16
Present Salary (Annual in Rs.)
Frequency Percentage
Present Salary

(Annual in Rs.)
Less or equal to 1,00,000/- 13 4.94
1,00,001 to 2,00,000 29 11.03
2,00,001 to 3.00,000 157 59.70
3,00,001 to 4,00,000 54 20.53
More than 4,00,000 10 3.80
Total 263 100.00

Graph No :08
Present Annual Income(Rs)
180
157
160
140
120
100
80
60 54

40 29
20 13 10
0
Less or equal 1,00,001 to 2,00,001 to 3,00,001 to More than
to 1,00,000/- 2,00,000 3.00,000 4,00,000 4,00,000

Interpretation : 59.70 % of respondents are having salaries in the range of Rs. 2 to 3 lacs
per annum .
 Table No :17
Marital Status
Frequency Percentage
Marital Status
Un-Married 52 19.77
Married 210 79.85
Divorced 1 0.38
Widow 0 0.00
Total 263 100

Graph No :09
Marital Status
250
210
200

150

100
52
50
1 0
0
Un-Married Married Divorced Widow

Interpretation : 79.85 % of respondents are married . Also through personal discussion it

was revealed that those female respondents who are not married have plans to be getting
married soon.
 Table No :18
Married since how many years .
Frequency Percentage
Married Since
0 to 1 Years 43 16.35
More than 1 but less than equal to 2 years 39 14.83
More than 2 but less equal than 5 years 54 20.53
More than 5 years 68 25.86
No Response 6 2.28
Total 210 77.57

Graph No :10
Married Since

0 to 1 Years
43
68 More than 1 but less than
equal to 2 years
More than 2 but less
39 euqal than 5 years
More than 5 years
54

Interpretation : Among the female employees who are married 25.86 % are married since
more than 5 years .
 Table No :19
Type of Family
Frequency Percentage
Type Of Family
Joint 49 18.63
Nuclear 214 81.37
Total 263 100.00

Graph No :11
Type Of Family

49

Joint
Nuclear
214

Interpretation : 81.37 % of female employees specially those who are married live in
nuclear family .
 Table No :20
No of Members in family
Frequency Percentage
No of Members in family
1 to 2 17 6.46
3 to 4 217 82.51
5 to 7 28 10.65
More than 7 1 0.38
Total 263 100.00

Graph No :12
No Of Members in family
250
217
200

150

100

50 28
17
1
0
1 to 2 3 to 4 5 to 7 More than 7

Interpretation : 82.51 % of female employees are having 3 to 4 members in their families .

 Table No :21
No and Age of Children
Frequency Percentage
No Of Children
Zero 63 23.95
One 47 17.87
Two 37 14.07
Three 3 1.14
Four 0 0.00
Total 150 57.03

Type of Children in
terms of age

Infant/ Toddlers 37 14.07

Pre-School Going 24 9.13
Primary School 19 7.22
College Going 7 2.66
Total 87 33.08

Graph No :13
No Of Children
100 63 47 37
3 0
0
Zero One Two Three Four

Graph No :14
Age Of KIDs
37
40
30 24
19
20
7
10
0
Infant/ Pre-School Primary College
Toddlers Going School Going

Interpretation : Seeing the above table we can find majority of the kids are infants or pre-
school going .
 Table No :22
No Of Dependents
Frequency Percentage
No of Dependants (Other than KIDs )
Zero 179 68.06
One 18 6.84
Two 47 17.87
Three 0 0.00
Four 0 0.00
More than 4 0 0.00
No Response 19 7.22
Total 263 92.78

Graph No :15
No Of Dependents
200 179

150

100
47
50
18 19
0 0 0
0
Zero One Two Three Four More than No
4 Response

Interpretations : 68.06 % of the female employees don’t have any other dependent than
KIDs
 Table No :23
Age of respondent
Frequency Percentage
Age
18 to 30 Years 37 14.07
31 to 40 Years 213 80.99
41 to 50 Years 12 4.56
> 50 Years 1 0.38
Total 263 100

Graph NO :16
Age Of Respondent
250
213
200

150

100

50 37
12
1
0
18 to 30 Years 31 to 40 Years 41 to 50 Years > 50 Years

Interpretation : 80.99 % of respondents are having age between 31 to 40 years . The mean
is approximately 35 years . This indicates that the mean age of the respondent is lies
between class 31 to 40 years .
6.5.2 Presence of imbalance between work and family life : Researcher tried to find out if
there is imbalance between the work and family life among the female employees in service
sector For this researcher has framed 25 statements where the response have been given on 5
Point rating scale . The participants have been asked to indicate how frequently the
statements mentioned occur in their life . The responses range from 1- Never to 5-All the
times . Higher the scores indicate high level of work/family conflict .

Table No : 24
Presence of imbalance between work and personnel life

Standard Deviation
Most Of the times

All the times

Don’t know
Sometimes
Never

Mean
Statements for knowing if there is imbalance in work life
and personal life of female respondents

1 2 3 4 5 Total
By the time I come home from work I am so much No 0 209 0 54 0 263
1 exhausted that I am left with no energy to interact with my 2.41 0.809
%
family members . 0 79.5 0 20.5 0 100

The amount of time my job takes up makes it difficult for No

32 119 0 112 0 263
2 me to get sufficient time for myself or for my family , 2.73 1.139
relatives and friends . % 12.2 45.2 0 42.6 0 100

I have to work on vacations . No 33 131 0 99 0 263

3 2.63 1.115
% 12.5 49.8 0 37.6 0 100

My job prevents me from giving the time I want to my No

43 110 0 110 0 263
4 spouse or family and friends. 2.67 1.178
% 16.3 41.8 0 41.8 0 100

Due to the household responsibilities that I have to attend No

98 55 0 110 0 263
to , I am late for my work .
5 2.46 1.356
%
37.3 20.9 0 41.8 0 100

Due to the demands at home , I cannot give my best at No

120 44 0 99 0 263
6 work . 2.30 1.372
% 45.6 16.7 0 37.6 0 100

My responsibilities towards my family prevent me from No

131 33 99 0 0 263
completing my job -related work on time.
7 2.25 1.395
% 49.8 12.5 37.6 0 0 100

I find it difficult to concentrate at work because of family No

8 88 76 0 99 0 263 2.42 1.293
responsibilities and commitments.
 %
33.5 28.9 0 37.6 0 100

I get annoyed with my colleagues without his/her fault due No

109 55 0 99 0 263
to tensions at home .
9 2.34 1.346
%
41.4 20.9 0 37.6 0 100

My responsibilities and commitment at family affect my No

208 55 0 0 0 263
behavior at work.
10 1.21 0.407
%
79.1 20.9 0 0 0 100

I bring office work to home. No

67 84 0 81 31 263
11 2.71 1.430
%
25.5 31.9 0 30.8 11.8 100

At work I feel disturbed because of the thought about what No

7 256 0 0 0 263
is happening at home.
12 1.97 0.161
%
2.66 97.3 0 0 0 100

My family responsibilities take precedence over my work No

64 199 0 0 0 263
commitments .
13 1.76 0.430
%
24.3 75.7 0 0 0 100

I discuss family problems with my colleagues at work . No

175 88 0 0 0 263
14 1.33 0.473
%
66.5 33.5 0 0 0 100

I keep talking on phone to my family members when am at No

37 225 0 1 0 263
work.
15 1.87 0.372
%
14.1 85.6 0 0.38 0 100

After having done my office work , I am so much mentally No

97 122 0 41 3 263
drained that I have no enthusiasm to attend any social
16 1.98 1.048
function . %
36.9 46.4 0 15.6 1.14 100

My work arrangements have acted as a barrier to taking up No

29 155 10 68 1 263
voluntary activities .
17 2.46 1.006
%
11 58.9 3.8 25.9 0.38 100

I miss family and social occasion because of extended work No

45 175 0 37 6 263
schedule.
18 2.18 0.954
%
17.1 66.5 0 14.1 2.28 100

My work arrangements have acted as a barrier to taking up No

177 19 13 47 7 263
further education and training courses .
19 1.81 1.284
%
67.3 7.22 4.94 17.9 2.66 100

I don’t find much time for my hobbies . No

13 182 0 61 7 263
20 2.49 0.988
%
4.94 69.2 0 23.2 2.66 100
 Many times I feel quitting my job as am not able to manage No
208 45 0 3 7 263
with job responsibilities and personal life.
21 % 1.31 0.778
79.1 17.1 0 1.14 2.66 100

My job responsibilities doesn't allow me to get enough No

78 98 0 80 7 263
sleep, exercise and healthy food .
22 2.39 1.267
%
29.7 37.3 0 30.4 2.66 100

I don’t get much support from organization when its utmost No

119 120 0 17 7 263
important to pay attention to family responsibilities .
23 1.76 0.946
%
45.2 45.6 0 6.46 2.66 100

My biggest worry is the child care . No

0 18 123 14 58 213
24
%
3.64 1.352
0 6.84 46.8 5.32 22.1 80.989

My work hours has affected my physical fitness . No 45 109 0 102 7 263

25 2.68 1.224
% 17.1 41.4 0 38.8 2.66 100

Interpretation of Table No :24

The above table shows that most of the respondents have agreed to the happenings of the
statements either sometimes or most of the times . This indicates that there is imbalance
between work life and personnel life and very sure there is interference of work in life and
life into work .

The highest mean (3.64 ) is found for the response to the statement number 24 (My biggest
worry is the child care ). This indicates that married women find the more imbalance
between the work and personal life .

The mean for the statement number 25 (My work hours has affected my physical fitness.) is
2.68 which reveals that multiple role playing have negative effects on the mental and
physical health of working women .
 6.5.3 Correlation Analysis :

A Correlation matrix is a rectangular array of the correlation coefficients of the variables

with each other .

Table No : 25
Correlation Matrix for Various Variables of Imbalance

IMB10

IMB11

IMB12

IMB13

IMB14

IMB15

IMB16

IMB17

IMB18

IMB19

IMB20

IMB21

IMB22

IMB23

IMB24

IMB25
IMB1

IMB2

IMB3

IMB4

IMB5

IMB6

IMB7

IMB8

IMB9

IMB1 1.00 0.32 0.29 0.37 0.24 0.33 0.31 0.40 0.35 0.02 0.18 0.03 0.22 0.10 0.13 0.18 0.02 0.34 0.16 0.17 0.07 0.33 0.13 0.01 0.08

IMB2 0.32 1.00 0.69 0.87 0.80 0.76 0.77 0.75 0.76 0.18 0.06 0.09 0.23 0.23 0.09 0.19 0.11 0.31 0.20 0.21 0.25 0.33 0.12 0.05 0.23

IMB3 0.29 0.69 1.00 0.86 0.89 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.05 0.01 0.07 0.09 0.10 0.17 0.01 0.16 0.21 0.12 0.18 0.24 0.19 0.17 0.26 0.21

IMB4 0.37 0.87 0.86 1.00 0.93 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.20 0.08 0.09 0.21 0.09 0.09 0.16 0.04 0.30 0.26 0.26 0.30 0.25 0.18 0.20 0.26

IMB5 0.24 0.80 0.89 0.93 1.00 0.89 0.91 0.89 0.88 0.22 0.11 0.06 0.20 0.10 0.11 0.06 0.05 0.29 0.18 0.21 0.29 0.24 0.14 0.22 0.32

IMB6 0.33 0.76 0.95 0.91 0.89 1.00 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.09 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.02 0.08 0.02 0.18 0.26 0.22 0.20 0.25 0.18 0.13 0.17 0.21

IMB7 0.31 0.77 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.99 1.00 0.96 0.98 0.09 0.04 0.06 0.12 0.03 0.07 0.02 0.16 0.26 0.19 0.22 0.26 0.19 0.12 0.20 0.23

IMB8 0.40 0.75 0.95 0.91 0.89 0.97 0.96 1.00 0.98 0.06 0.03 0.09 0.14 0.04 0.12 0.08 0.04 0.22 0.20 0.23 0.27 0.26 0.23 0.25 0.27

IMB9 0.35 0.76 0.95 0.91 0.88 0.99 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.09 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.01 0.09 0.08 0.13 0.22 0.23 0.26 0.29 0.17 0.21 0.18 0.20

IMB10 0.02 0.18 0.05 0.20 0.22 0.09 0.09 0.06 0.09 1.00 0.61 0.03 0.27 0.73 0.23 0.26 0.09 0.15 0.24 0.23 0.14 0.01 0.09 0.08 0.20

IMB11 0.18 0.06 0.01 0.08 0.11 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.61 1.00 0.17 0.47 0.38 0.22 0.06 0.22 0.03 0.08 0.04 0.06 0.20 0.12 0.15 0.06

IMB12 0.03 0.09 0.07 0.09 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.09 0.08 0.03 0.17 1.00 0.07 0.03 0.19 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.11 0.01 0.13 0.05

IMB13 0.22 0.23 0.09 0.21 0.20 0.08 0.12 0.14 0.10 0.27 0.47 0.07 1.00 0.35 0.20 0.33 0.33 0.15 0.12 0.27 0.11 0.27 0.19 0.29 0.27

IMB14 0.10 0.23 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.73 0.38 0.03 0.35 1.00 0.42 0.15 0.11 0.03 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.12 0.01 0.07 0.10

IMB15 0.13 0.09 0.17 0.09 0.11 0.08 0.07 0.12 0.09 0.23 0.22 0.19 0.20 0.42 1.00 0.13 0.03 0.14 0.18 0.16 0.10 0.12 0.09 0.23 0.12

IMB16 0.18 0.19 0.01 0.16 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.08 0.26 0.06 0.11 0.33 0.15 0.13 1.00 0.61 0.47 0.56 0.66 0.57 0.23 0.64 0.30 0.37

IMB17 0.02 0.11 0.16 0.04 0.05 0.18 0.16 0.04 0.13 0.09 0.22 0.10 0.33 0.11 0.03 0.61 1.00 0.20 0.27 0.44 0.34 0.40 0.45 0.26 0.35

IMB18 0.34 0.31 0.21 0.30 0.29 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.15 0.03 0.08 0.15 0.03 0.14 0.47 0.20 1.00 0.72 0.64 0.51 0.19 0.29 0.38 0.59

IMB19 0.16 0.20 0.12 0.26 0.18 0.22 0.19 0.20 0.23 0.24 0.08 0.04 0.12 0.08 0.18 0.56 0.27 0.72 1.00 0.87 0.69 0.04 0.57 0.23 0.53

IMB20 0.17 0.21 0.18 0.26 0.21 0.20 0.22 0.23 0.26 0.23 0.04 0.01 0.27 0.09 0.16 0.66 0.44 0.64 0.87 1.00 0.75 0.11 0.72 0.43 0.55

IMB21 0.07 0.25 0.24 0.30 0.29 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.29 0.14 0.06 0.04 0.11 0.07 0.10 0.57 0.34 0.51 0.69 0.75 1.00 0.27 0.78 0.24 0.43

IMB22 0.33 0.33 0.19 0.25 0.24 0.18 0.19 0.26 0.17 0.01 0.20 0.11 0.27 0.12 0.12 0.23 0.40 0.19 0.04 0.11 0.27 1.00 0.42 0.44 0.61

IMB23 0.13 0.12 0.17 0.18 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.23 0.21 0.09 0.12 0.01 0.19 0.01 0.09 0.64 0.45 0.29 0.57 0.72 0.78 0.42 1.00 0.38 0.53

IMB24 0.01 0.05 0.26 0.20 0.22 0.17 0.20 0.25 0.18 0.08 0.15 0.13 0.29 0.07 0.23 0.30 0.26 0.38 0.23 0.43 0.24 0.44 0.38 1.00 0.65

IMB25 0.08 0.23 0.21 0.26 0.32 0.21 0.23 0.27 0.20 0.20 0.06 0.05 0.27 0.10 0.12 0.37 0.35 0.59 0.53 0.55 0.43 0.61 0.53 0.65 1.00

** Correlation is significant at 0.01 level (2 Tailed )

* Correlation is significant at 0.05 level (2 Tailed )

Interpretations : From the above table ( Table No : 25 ) we can find that there is significant
correlation between variables of imbalance .
6.5.4 Factor Analysis : Factor analysis is a very popular technique to analyze
interdependence. Factor analysis studies the entire set of interrelationships without defining
variables to be dependent or independent. Factor analysis combines variables to create a
smaller set of factors. Mathematically, a factor is a linear combination of variables. A factor
is not directly observable; it is inferred from the variables. The technique identifies
underlying structure among the variables, reducing the number of variables to a more
manageable set. Factor analysis groups variables according to their correlation The factor
loading can be defined as the correlations between the factors and their underlying variables

Factor analysis is a statistical method that is based on the correlation analysis of multi
variables . The mail application of factor analytic techniques are 1.To reduce the number of
variables and 2.To detect structure in the relationships between variables , that is to classify
the variables. Therefore , factor analysis is applied as a data reduction or structure detection
method . Factors are formed by grouping the variables that have correlation with each other .
The factors are extracted from the correlation matrix based on the correlation coefficients of
the variables . The factors are rotated in order to maximize the relationship between the
variables and some of the factors . A factor with an Eigen value less than 1 is not as
important , from a covariance perspective , as an observed variable .

Factor analysis is applied on the response of the respondents towards various statements
related to work life balance issues .There are 25 statements to know is really there is
imbalance between work life and personal life .
 Table No : 26
Principal Component Analysis : Varimax Rotation Matrix
Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor
Statements Communalities
1 2 3 4 5
1 0.370 0.172 0.023 0.041 0.537 0.488
2 0.801 0.186 0.023 0.225 0.284 0.762
3 0.954 0.009 0.139 0.054 0.073 0.936
4 0.934 0.175 0.055 0.135 0.100 0.927
5 0.923 0.082 0.143 0.147 0.002 0.897
6 0.986 0.064 0.045 0.019 0.061 0.977
7 0.985 0.056 0.076 0.004 0.056 0.972
8 0.969 0.104 0.123 0.040 0.047 0.966
9 0.979 0.110 0.025 0.005 0.027 0.967
10 0.070 0.187 0.041 0.668 0.130 0.876
11 0.030 0.095 0.128 0.890 0.398 0.821
12 0.059 0.006 0.121 0.176 0.023 0.346
13 0.115 0.277 0.207 0.271 0.341 0.555
14 0.004 0.097 0.034 0.555 0.155 0.920
15 0.066 0.098 0.130 0.066 0.367 0.653
16 0.029 0.818 0.060 0.087 0.175 0.656
17 0.183 0.576 0.187 0.055 0.527 0.564
18 0.186 0.656 0.261 0.054 0.328 0.604
19 0.130 0.882 0.009 0.058 0.306 0.844
20 0.137 0.908 0.142 0.036 0.203 0.890
21 0.203 0.775 0.064 0.136 0.024 0.695
22 0.151 0.156 0.672 0.168 0.598 0.671
23 0.079 0.742 0.248 0.007 0.195 0.671
24 0.119 0.242 0.865 0.135 0.161 0.656
25 0.142 0.503 0.737 0.116 0.034 0.678
Eigen Values 12.938 5.511 2.786 1.796 1.461
Percent
Variance 45.247 19.275 9.745 6.282 5.111
Total
Variance 45.247 64.521 74.266 80.548 85.659
Extraction Method : Principal Component Analysis
Rotation Method : Varimax
5 Components Extracted

Table 26 above indicates that the total variance accounted for by all the factors with Eigen
values greater than 1 was 85.659 and the remaining variance was explained by other factors
Naming of the factors : All the five factor extracted have been given the names on the basis
of variables included in each case . By considering the factor loading , all statements are
loaded on five factors .

Tables No. 19 below shows the classification of the variables showing imbalance into 5
different factors .

Factor 1 : Work Interferences in family

4 statements out of 25 statements reveal that there is interference of work life into family
life.

Factor 2 : Other interests

5 statements of the 25 statements reveal that due to the long hours of work the female
employees don’t find sufficient time for their other interests as hobbies , social gatherings
and any other family functions .

Factor 3 :Physical and Mental Stress

5 statements of the 25 statements reveal that due to the long hours of work the physical and
mental health of female employees have been affected and they are not able to find time to
take care of their health aspects .

Factor 4 :Family Interfering work

10 statements of the 25 statements reveal that the family has interferences in the work life of
female employees and it affects the performance of employees at work place .

Factor 5 : Organizational Support

1 Statement with a factor loading of 0.195 reveals that there is less support from the many
organizations toward the work life balancing of female employees working in service sector.
 Table No : 27
Naming the factors revealing the imbalance between work and personal life among the female employees

Factor Statement Factor

Name of factor Statements
No No loading
The amount of time my job takes up makes it difficult for me to get
2 0.801
sufficient time for myself or for my family , relatives and friends .
Work
1 interference in 3 I have to work on vacations . 0.954
family My job prevents me from giving the time I want to my spouse or family
4 0.934
and friends.
11 I bring office work to home. 0.030
20 I don’t find much time for my hobbies . 0.908

My work arrangements have acted as a barrier to taking up further

19 0.882
education and training courses .
After having done my office work , I am so much mentally drained that I
2 Other Interest 16 0.818
have no enthusiasm to attend any social function .

18 I miss family and social occasion because of extended work schedule. 0.656

My work arrangements have acted as a barrier to taking up voluntary

17 0.576
activities .

24 My biggest worry is the child care . 0.865

25 My work hours has affected my physical fitness . 0.737

My job responsibilities doesn't allow me to get enough sleep, exercise

Physical and 22 0.672
3 and healthy food .
Mental Stress
By the time I come home from work I am so much exhausted that I am
1 0.023
left with no energy to interact with my family members .

Many times I feel quitting my job as am not able to manage with job
21 0.064
responsibilities and personal life.

6 Due to the demands at home , I cannot give my best at work . 0.019

My responsibilities and commitment at family affect my behavior at
10 0.668
work.
14 I discuss family problems with my colleagues at work . 0.555
My responsibilities towards my family prevent me from completing my
7 0.004
job -related work on time.

At work I feel disturbed because of the thought about what is

12 0.176
happening at home.
Family
4 interfering 15 I keep talking on phone to my family members when am at work. 0.066
work
Due to the household responsibilities that I have to attend to , I am late
5 0.147
for my work .
I get annoyed with my colleagues without his/her fault due to tensions
9 0.005
at home .

I find it difficult to concentrate at work because of family

8 0.040
responsibilities and commitments.

My family responsibilities take precedence over my work commitments

13 0.271
.
Organizational I don’t get much support from organization when its utmost important
5 23 0.195
Support to pay attention to family responsibilities .
6.5.5 Hypothesis testing :

There are three hypothesis formulated by the researcher for the undertaken study .

Hypothesis 1 :

H1o : Use of work life balance policies is not influenced by marital status

H1a : Use of work life balance policies is influenced by marital status

The t test is used to test the above hypothesis .

Table No:28 t-Test

Variable
t t
(Marital N Mean S.D. Std.Err. D.f. p
value critical
Status )
Married 210 1.21 0.404 0.028
262 2.52 1.96 Significant
Unmarried 52 1.2 0.412 0.057

From table no 28 ( t Test ) it is observed that the t calculated value is greater than the table
value or critical t value (1.96 at 95 % Confidence level i.e. 0.05 level of significance ) hence
the null hypothesis is rejected and therefore the alternate hypothesis is accepted . Hence it is
concluded that Use of work life balance policies is influenced by marital status.

From Table No. 29 , it is revealed that there is influence of marital status on the use of work
life balance initiatives .
 Table No : 29 ( Correlation between marital status and imbalance of work and
M.Stat. IMB1 IMB2 IMB3 IMB4 IMB5 IMB6 IMB7 IMB8 IMB9 IMB10 IMB11 IMB12 IMB13 IMB14 IMB15 IMB16

Marital Pearson
1.00 0.01 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.12 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.20 0.07 0.08 0.34 0.28 0.15 0.21
Status Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) . 0.86 0.22 0.50 0.41 0.05 0.84 0.45 0.61 0.98 0.00 0.26 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00
Pearson
0.01 1.00 0.32 0.29 0.37 0.24 0.33 0.31 0.40 0.35 0.02 0.18 0.03 0.22 0.10 0.13 0.18
IMB1 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.86 . 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.10 0.03 0.00
Pearson
0.08 0.32 1.00 0.69 0.87 0.80 0.76 0.77 0.75 0.76 0.18 0.06 0.09 0.23 0.23 0.09 0.19
IMB2 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.22 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00
Pearson
0.04 0.29 0.69 1.00 0.86 0.89 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.05 0.01 0.07 0.09 0.10 0.17 0.01
IMB3 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.50 0.00 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.91 0.24 0.15 0.10 0.00 0.91
Pearson
0.05 0.37 0.87 0.86 1.00 0.93 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.20 0.08 0.09 0.21 0.09 0.09 0.16
IMB4 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.13 0.00 0.13 0.14 0.01
Pearson
0.12 0.24 0.80 0.89 0.93 1.00 0.89 0.91 0.89 0.88 0.22 0.11 0.06 0.20 0.10 0.11 0.06
IMB5 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.36 0.00 0.10 0.08 0.37
Pearson
0.01 0.33 0.76 0.95 0.91 0.89 1.00 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.09 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.02 0.08 0.02
IMB6 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.31 0.26 0.17 0.78 0.21 0.77
Pearson
0.05 0.31 0.77 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.99 1.00 0.96 0.98 0.09 0.04 0.06 0.12 0.03 0.07 0.02
IMB7 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.49 0.30 0.05 0.67 0.29 0.78
Pearson
0.03 0.40 0.75 0.95 0.91 0.89 0.97 0.96 1.00 0.98 0.06 0.03 0.09 0.14 0.04 0.12 0.08
IMB8 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 0.00 0.35 0.58 0.14 0.02 0.56 0.06 0.18
Pearson
0.00 0.35 0.76 0.95 0.91 0.88 0.99 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.09 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.01 0.09 0.08
IMB9 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 0.16 0.53 0.21 0.09 0.91 0.14 0.20
Pearson
0.20 0.02 0.18 0.05 0.20 0.22 0.09 0.09 0.06 0.09 1.00 0.61 0.03 0.27 0.73 0.23 0.26
IMB10 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.16 0.35 0.16 . 0.00 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Pearson
0.07 0.18 0.06 0.01 0.08 0.11 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.61 1.00 0.17 0.47 0.38 0.22 0.06
IMB11 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.26 0.00 0.33 0.91 0.21 0.08 0.31 0.49 0.58 0.53 0.00 . 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33
Pearson
0.08 0.03 0.09 0.07 0.09 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.09 0.08 0.03 0.17 1.00 0.07 0.03 0.19 0.11
IMB12 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.20 0.60 0.17 0.24 0.13 0.36 0.26 0.30 0.14 0.21 0.66 0.01 . 0.25 0.59 0.00 0.08
Pearson
0.34 0.22 0.23 0.09 0.21 0.20 0.08 0.12 0.14 0.10 0.27 0.47 0.07 1.00 0.35 0.20 0.33
IMB13 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.05 0.02 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.25 . 0.00 0.00 0.00
Pearson
0.28 0.10 0.23 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.73 0.38 0.03 0.35 1.00 0.42 0.15
IMB14 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.13 0.10 0.78 0.67 0.56 0.91 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.00 . 0.00 0.01
Pearson
0.15 0.13 0.09 0.17 0.09 0.11 0.08 0.07 0.12 0.09 0.23 0.22 0.19 0.20 0.42 1.00 0.13
IMB15 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.02 0.03 0.13 0.00 0.14 0.08 0.21 0.29 0.06 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 . 0.04
Pearson
0.21 0.18 0.19 0.01 0.16 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.08 0.26 0.06 0.11 0.33 0.15 0.13 1.00
IMB16 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.91 0.01 0.37 0.77 0.78 0.18 0.20 0.00 0.33 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.04 .
Pearson
0.28 0.02 0.11 0.16 0.04 0.05 0.18 0.16 0.04 0.13 0.09 0.22 0.10 0.33 0.11 0.03 0.61
IMB17 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.69 0.08 0.01 0.56 0.45 0.00 0.01 0.47 0.03 0.14 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.07 0.62 0.00
Pearson
0.06 0.34 0.31 0.21 0.30 0.29 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.15 0.03 0.08 0.15 0.03 0.14 0.47
IMB18 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.58 0.19 0.01 0.65 0.02 0.00
Pearson
0.02 0.16 0.20 0.12 0.26 0.18 0.22 0.19 0.20 0.23 0.24 0.08 0.04 0.12 0.08 0.18 0.56
IMB19 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.77 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.49 0.04 0.21 0.00 0.00
Pearson
0.21 0.17 0.21 0.18 0.26 0.21 0.20 0.22 0.23 0.26 0.23 0.04 0.01 0.27 0.09 0.16 0.66
IMB20 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.54 0.83 0.00 0.13 0.01 0.00
Pearson
0.06 0.07 0.25 0.24 0.30 0.29 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.29 0.14 0.06 0.04 0.11 0.07 0.10 0.57
IMB21 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.34 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.34 0.56 0.07 0.27 0.09 0.00
Pearson
0.16 0.33 0.33 0.19 0.25 0.24 0.18 0.19 0.26 0.17 0.01 0.20 0.11 0.27 0.12 0.12 0.23
IMB22 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.86 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.06 0.05 0.00
Pearson
0.11 0.13 0.12 0.17 0.18 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.23 0.21 0.09 0.12 0.01 0.19 0.01 0.09 0.64
IMB23 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.09 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.05 0.90 0.00 0.85 0.14 0.00
Pearson
0.38 0.01 0.05 0.26 0.20 0.22 0.17 0.20 0.25 0.18 0.08 0.15 0.13 0.29 0.07 0.23 0.30
IMB24 Correlation
 Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00 0.87 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.00
Pearson
0.17 0.08 0.23 0.21 0.26 0.32 0.21 0.23 0.27 0.20 0.20 0.06 0.05 0.27 0.10 0.12 0.37
IMB25 Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.01 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.38 0.00 0.09 0.06 0.00
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Hypothesis 2 :

H2o : Use of work life balance policies is not influenced by age level

H2a : Use of work life balance policies is influenced by age level

To test the above hypothesis the researcher has used ANOVA table .

Table No : 30

ANOVA

Sum of Mean
df F
Squares Square
Sig.
Statistics Between Groups 3.70 1.234 8.153 0.000
262
Within Groups 39.21 0.151
Total 42.91

In the above ANOVA table, at 5% level of significance there is difference in

the variance among the various groups of age level .

Therefore, Null hypothesis is strongly rejected. Hence, use of work life

balance initiatives is influenced by Age level .
 Hypothesis 3 :

H3o: Use of work life balance policies is not affected by number of dependents

H3a: Use of work life balance policies is affected by number of dependents

From table no 23 below it is reveled that the work life balance is affected by the
number of dependents the female employees have .

Table No : 31
Correlation between the number of dependents and imbalance between work and family life of female employe
No.D. IMB1 IMB2 IMB3 IMB4 IMB5 IMB6 IMB7 IMB8 IMB9 IMB10 IMB11 IMB12 IMB13 IMB14 IMB15 IMB16 IMB17 IMB18 IM

No Of
1.00 0.15 0.36 0.09 0.19 0.24 0.19 0.17 0.24 0.20 0.11 0.06 0.04 0.01 0.20 0.10 0.08 0.11 0.01 0
Dependents

IMB1 0.15 1.00 0.32 0.29 0.37 0.24 0.33 0.31 0.40 0.35 0.02 0.18 0.03 0.22 0.10 0.13 0.18 0.02 0.34 0
IMB2 0.36 0.32 1.00 0.69 0.87 0.80 0.76 0.77 0.75 0.76 0.18 0.06 0.09 0.23 0.23 0.09 0.19 0.11 0.31 0
IMB3 0.09 0.29 0.69 1.00 0.86 0.89 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.05 0.01 0.07 0.09 0.10 0.17 0.01 0.16 0.21 0
IMB4 0.19 0.37 0.87 0.86 1.00 0.93 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.20 0.08 0.09 0.21 0.09 0.09 0.16 0.04 0.30 0
IMB5 0.24 0.24 0.80 0.89 0.93 1.00 0.89 0.91 0.89 0.88 0.22 0.11 0.06 0.20 0.10 0.11 0.06 0.05 0.29 0
IMB6 0.19 0.33 0.76 0.95 0.91 0.89 1.00 0.99 0.97 0.99 0.09 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.02 0.08 0.02 0.18 0.26 0
IMB7 0.17 0.31 0.77 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.99 1.00 0.96 0.98 0.09 0.04 0.06 0.12 0.03 0.07 0.02 0.16 0.26 0
IMB8 0.24 0.40 0.75 0.95 0.91 0.89 0.97 0.96 1.00 0.98 0.06 0.03 0.09 0.14 0.04 0.12 0.08 0.04 0.22 0
IMB9 0.20 0.35 0.76 0.95 0.91 0.88 0.99 0.98 0.98 1.00 0.09 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.01 0.09 0.08 0.13 0.22 0
IMB10 0.11 0.02 0.18 0.05 0.20 0.22 0.09 0.09 0.06 0.09 1.00 0.61 0.03 0.27 0.73 0.23 0.26 0.09 0.15 0
IMB11 0.06 0.18 0.06 0.01 0.08 0.11 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.61 1.00 0.17 0.47 0.38 0.22 0.06 0.22 0.03 0
IMB12 0.04 0.03 0.09 0.07 0.09 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.09 0.08 0.03 0.17 1.00 0.07 0.03 0.19 0.11 0.10 0.08 0
IMB13 0.01 0.22 0.23 0.09 0.21 0.20 0.08 0.12 0.14 0.10 0.27 0.47 0.07 1.00 0.35 0.20 0.33 0.33 0.15 0
IMB14 0.20 0.10 0.23 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.73 0.38 0.03 0.35 1.00 0.42 0.15 0.11 0.03 0
IMB15 0.10 0.13 0.09 0.17 0.09 0.11 0.08 0.07 0.12 0.09 0.23 0.22 0.19 0.20 0.42 1.00 0.13 0.03 0.14 0
IMB16 0.08 0.18 0.19 0.01 0.16 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.08 0.26 0.06 0.11 0.33 0.15 0.13 1.00 0.61 0.47 0
IMB17 0.11 0.02 0.11 0.16 0.04 0.05 0.18 0.16 0.04 0.13 0.09 0.22 0.10 0.33 0.11 0.03 0.61 1.00 0.20 0
IMB18 0.01 0.34 0.31 0.21 0.30 0.29 0.26 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.15 0.03 0.08 0.15 0.03 0.14 0.47 0.20 1.00 0
IMB19 0.09 0.16 0.20 0.12 0.26 0.18 0.22 0.19 0.20 0.23 0.24 0.08 0.04 0.12 0.08 0.18 0.56 0.27 0.72 1
IMB20 0.07 0.17 0.21 0.18 0.26 0.21 0.20 0.22 0.23 0.26 0.23 0.04 0.01 0.27 0.09 0.16 0.66 0.44 0.64 0
IMB21 0.11 0.07 0.25 0.24 0.30 0.29 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.29 0.14 0.06 0.04 0.11 0.07 0.10 0.57 0.34 0.51 0
IMB22 0.15 0.33 0.33 0.19 0.25 0.24 0.18 0.19 0.26 0.17 0.01 0.20 0.11 0.27 0.12 0.12 0.23 0.40 0.19 0
IMB23 0.18 0.13 0.12 0.17 0.18 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.23 0.21 0.09 0.12 0.01 0.19 0.01 0.09 0.64 0.45 0.29 0
IMB24 0.17 0.01 0.05 0.26 0.20 0.22 0.17 0.20 0.25 0.18 0.08 0.15 0.13 0.29 0.07 0.23 0.30 0.26 0.38 0
IMB25 0.21 0.08 0.23 0.21 0.26 0.32 0.21 0.23 0.27 0.20 0.20 0.06 0.05 0.27 0.10 0.12 0.37 0.35 0.59 0
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
6.5.6 Work Life Balance Index :

Table No : 32 WLB Index Indicators

Sr.No. Indicator Statement Agree Disagree

Time for family I get sufficient time per week for my

1 1 0
members family members .
2 Achievements I am happy with my achievements. 1 0
3 Hobbies I get sufficient time for my hobbies. 1 0
Personal Health I get sufficient time to do exercise
4 1 0
( Yoga and Exercises ) regularly .
5 Higher Education I get time to study further. 1 0
I need to work at home after office
6 Work at home 1 0
hours .
7 Time for friends I get sufficient time for my friends . 1 0
Time for social I find enough time for social
8 1 0
activities activities .
Work Interference in
9 My work interfere frequently my life. 1 0
Life
Life interference in My tensions at personal front affect
10 1 0
work my performance at work .

Table No : 33 Mean , S.D. and Variance of WLB Indicators

Sr.No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Total 53 51 60 41 23 256 5 4 263 260 1016
Mean 0.20 0.19 0.23 0.16 0.09 0.97 0.02 0.02 1.00 0.99 3.86
S.D. 0.40 0.40 0.42 0.36 0.28 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.00 0.11 1.53
Variance 0.16 0.16 0.18 0.13 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 2.35

Table No : 34 WLB Indicator Analysis

No Of
Respondents Percentage
No Of Respondents below Benchmark 207 79
No Of respondents above benchmark 42 16
No of respondents on benchmark 14 5
Total 263 100.00
Graphical representation of WLB Index :

Graph No : 17
WLB Index
12

10

8
WLB Index

6
WLB Index
4 Benchmark

0
1

100
111
122
133
144
155
166
177
188
199
210
221
232
243
254
12
23
34
45
56
67
78
89

No Of Respondent

Inference : 79 % (207) respondents WLB Index is below benchmark . Only 16 % (42)

respondents WLB Index is above benchmark . 5 % (14) respondent's WLB Index falls
exactly on the benchmark . Out of 207 respondents which are below benchmark 139 are
married females . This indicates that the female employees under consideration face the
problem of balancing Work and Personal life . More imbalance is observed among the
married females due to more family responsibilities.
Conclusion :

The above data analysis reveals that the Work Family Conflict ( WFC ) and Family Work
Conflict ( FWC ) are the very important factors in the life of female employees working in
service sector . Also the Marital Status , Age and the number of dependents are the crucial
deciding factors addressing the work life issues of female employees .