FIELD STUDY REPORT

ON

A STUDY ON “Quality of Life of Private Sector Employees Aged 21-45 in

BENGALURU”

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF FIFTH SEM. BACHELOR

OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION DEGREE COURSE OF BENGALURU

CITY UNIVERSITY

BY

Mr. SACHIN B S

Reg No: B1913372

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF

Mr. VISHWESH MENSUMANE

GAIN MORE KNOWLEDGE

REACH GREATER HEIGHTS

PRESIDENCY COLLEGE, KEMPAPURA, HEBBAL,

BENGALURU -560024

(Affiliated to Bangalore City University)

Re-Accredited with NAAC A+

2021-2022
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that this Field Study report “A STUDY ON Quality of Life of

Private Sector Employees Aged 21-45 in BENGALURU”

has been prepared by SACHIN B S Reg. No: B1913372 under my guidance and

supervision. It has not formed the basis for the award of any degree, associate ship,

fellowship of any other Institution. This is in partial fulfilment of the requirements of

Bachelors of Business Administration Fifth semester degree course of Bangalore city

University conducted by Department of Commerce and Management, Presidency

College, Bangalore.

Mr./Ms. ………………….

Guide
 LIST OF CONTENT

SL NO. CONTENT PAGE NO.

1. CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION 01-07
1.2 OVERVIEW 07-08

2. CHAPTER 2: DESIGN OF THE STUDY

2.1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 08-09
2.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 10
2.3 SCOPE OF THE STUDY 10
2.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY 11
2.5 METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION 12-13
2.6 SAMPLE DESIGN 13
2.7 SAMPLE SIZE 13
2.8 TOOLS USED FOR ANALYSIS 13

3. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 14-66

4. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

4.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 68-71
4.2 CONCLUSION 72
4.3 RECOMMENDATIONS 73

ANNEX 75-81

BIBLIOGRAPHY 81
 LIST OF TABLES WITH PAGE NUMBERS

TABLE PARTICULARS PAGE NO.

NO.
3.01 Table showing the gender of the respondents 21

3.02 Table showing the highest education completed by the 22

respondents

3.03 Table showing the marital status of the respondents 24

3.04 Table showing the job level of the respondents 26

3.05 Table showing the hours worked per week by the 28

respondents

3.06(a) Table showing the self-assessment on various factors by the 30-31

respondents

3.06(b) Table showing the self-assessment on various factors by the 33

respondents

3.06(c) Table showing the self-assessment on various factors by the 35-36

respondents

Table showing the self-assessment on various factors by the

3.06(d) 38
respondents

3.07 Table showing the private financial situation over the past 40
 three months of the respondents

3.08 Table showing the effect of family life while working from 42

home of the respondents

3.09 Table showing the balance of the respondents between work 44

and private life while remote working during COVID-19

3.10 Table showing the importance of disconnecting from digital 46

devices outside working hours/after completing their work

task

3.11 Table showing the additional housework incurred by the 48

respondents during COVID 19

3.12 Table showing the change in housework responsibilities of 50

the respondents during COVID 19

3.13 Table showing the changes made to respondents’ household 52-53

in daily routine during COVID-19 to enhance work–life

balance

3.14 Table showing how often the respondents work on the 55

weekend
3.15 Table showing hours slept by the respondents on an average 57

work night

3.16 Table showing changes in the daily routine of the 59

respondents while working remotely

3.17 Table showing the respondents’ self-assessment of their 61

physical health over the past two years

3.18 Table showing the respondents’ self-assessment of their 63

mental health over the past two years

3.19 Table showing the respondents’ satisfaction with the work 65

schedule post COVID 19

3.20 Table showing how often the respondents find enough time 67

to spend with family/friends when you work from home

3.21 Table showing respondents’ tiredness/depression because 69

of work post COVID-19

3.22 Table showing respondents’ satisfaction with work from 70-71

home arrangement post COVID-19

Page 0
 Chapter – 1

Introduction

“A Comparative Study on Quality of Life of Private Sector Employees Aged 21-45

In Bengaluru Before and During the Covid Pandemic”

COVID-19 had a devastating and profound impact worldwide. The business

world has been turbulent, and countries' economic landscape has shown dismal

performance. There have been massive downsizing of employees and deductions of

pay in most organizations as the pandemic outbreak negatively impacted the

business environment. The study aimed to analyze the impact of COVID-19 on the

quality of life of employees working in private organizations. A comparative

analysis was conducted with 50 Indian employees aged 21-45 employed in private

sector organizations. Content analysis was performed from the transcripts and

themes; coding categories were developed. Participation in the study was voluntary

and was carried out through informed consent. The results demonstrated that the

participants experienced psychological stress, social disconnectedness, and a sense

of loneliness over the lockdown period.

Furthermore, the questionnaire also revealed the perceptions of the job, career

prospects, and the fear of the imminent looming future ahead. The pandemic has

raised serious questions on the employee’s mental health and engagement issues.
Page 1
Managerial implications have been discussed with suggestions to alleviate the

current professional and psychological challenges.

The World Health Organization (WHO) had officially named the disease COVID–

coronavirus disease—where CO stands for corona, VI stands virus, and D for disease

(CDC, 2020). Within a short period, it had reached across the borders and in

different countries and continents worldwide. There were only 80,151 cases as of

March 2, 2020 (Jian Bo et al., 2020). There has been a tremendous surge of person-

to-person contamination and infection even outside China within a short period; by

30 March 2020, the confirmed cases increased to 498,945 (WHO dashboard, 2020).

The World Health Organization declared that the COVID-19 pandemic could be

described as a critical and dangerous disease worldwide (World Health Organization

statement, 2020, issued on January 30). The emergence of COVID-19 catalyzed the

already sluggish conditions prevailing in the Indian economy, as evident in recent

months. The entire supply chain network has suffered a collapse affecting the

tourism, hospitality, and aviation sectors. Even the sudden closure of malls and

shopping complexes reflects on the detrimental effect on the retail business. Other

sectors negatively affected are automobiles, consumer durables, and chemical

products (Hasan, 2020).

Page 2
The study's need is manifold as it aimed to explore the quality of life of the private

sector employees of a leading Indian metro city, Bangalore. At the onset, there were

virtually no researches carried out except fragmented resources from online news

and resources. It needs to be mentioned that Indian private sector employees have

mostly been overworked, stressed, and involved in multi-tasking in work. Above all,

the ominous lockdown's inception had frozen the normal process of working and

living, sending panic signals to everyone. The previously demarcated existence

between work and personal life was now blurred and had triggered a sense of

ambiguity and lack of clarity about life itself. This research aimed to understand the

psychological desolation, anguish, fear of the unknown, balance between work and

home, level of satisfaction, need fulfillment and sum up the employees' quality of

life. In such a precarious situation, the focus on work–life priorities were

questionable. The research also tried to understand the HR/organizational support

system that should have been given to the employees for better house and work

engagement practices. The study has explored the impact of the lockdown on

psychological well-being and effects on the private sector’s employees' work–life

balance pre and during Covid-19.

Employees at the grass-root level experiences a sense of frustration because of low

level wages, poor working conditions, unfavorable terms of employment, inhuman

treatment by their superiors and the like whereas managerial personnel feel frustrated
Page 3
because of alienation over their conditions of employment, interpersonal conflicts,

role conflicts, job pressures, lack of freedom in work, the absence of challenging

work etc. Certain values were attributed to work in the past. Quality of work life can

mean difficult things to different people but in recent years it has come to stand for a

participative philosophy of work and organization-a people and bottom-line

philosophy. The quality of work life organizational philosophy centres on the dignity

of respect accorded employees, the nature of their involvement in their work and the

goal of excellence for their organizations. The quality of work life is employees at

the levels in an organization to use their knowledge, Skills, and abilities more

efficiency in their work at their new workplace. Quality of work life is not only a

very broad approach to job enrichment but also an interdisciplinary field of inquiry

and action combining industrial and organizational psychology and sociology,

industrial engineering, organizational theory and development motivation and

leadership theory and industrial relations. Quality of work life has received

enthusiastic support from a number of sources.

Regarding the public health impact of the COVID-19 crisis, several studies suggest

that working conditions have deteriorated and that employees are more likely to

experience mental health problems, such as stress, depression, and anxiety. In

particular, women, young adults, people with chronic diseases, and those who have

lost their jobs as a result

Page 4
of the crisis seem to be the most affected. One of the common stressors that research

has highlighted is the fear of losing one’s job and, consequently, one’s income.

Moreover, social isolation, conflicting messages from authorities, and an ongoing

state of uncertainty have been described as some of the main factors contributing to

emotional distress and negatively affecting mental health and well-being.

Indisputably, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a strong impact on many aspects of

our lives and will continue to do so for months and years to come. However, the

consequences of the crisis and societal reactions to the challenges posed by the virus

are not deemed solely negative. The new situation also holds opportunities for

positive shifts in our work and private lives that were impossible before the COVID-

19 crisis. Many may see this crisis as an opportunity to learn how to cope with

profound changes in everyday life and even to adopt new pro-active behaviors. For

instance, some employees may discover that the new ways of working (e.g., WFH)

facilitate more productivity and are more satisfying compared to working in an

office. Participants also reported several advantages of working from home, such as

perceived control over the workday, working more efficiently, or saving time

previously spent commuting. In contrast, some reported disadvantages of WFH

included social isolation, loss of the value of work, and a lack of important work

equipment. Nonetheless, respondents reported overall relatively more positive

experiences of WFH than negative ones. Thus, we argue that more balanced studies
Page 5
are needed that examine both the negative and positive impact of the COVID-19

crisis on peoples’ lives, health, and well-being, considering differential effects in

diverse subgroups. Such studies have the potential to conclude how to diminish the

negative and enhance the positive outcomes of the current and future pandemic-

related crises in the working population.

Overview

Though big brands like P&G and Microsoft anticipated the psychological challenges

of coping with the turbulent times, such gestures are still far-fetched for medium and

small organisations. These large companies have already engaged psychological

counsellors and mental health practitioners to offer assistance to their employees

working from home due to the long lockdown period and the repeated emphasis on

social distancing after the announcement on 24 March 2020. Companies in the

majority have been silent and unconcerned about the mental health of their

employees’ post-pandemic and during the pandemic period. Some exceptions were

there, and the examples were Microsoft (who has brought experts to talk to

employees and supervisors on emotional well-being); Deloitte (set up counselling

helpline offered by the HR); and P& G (hosting webinars and asking experts)–

Dave, 2020.

One of the severe manifestations of the COVID-19 is the acute sense of loneliness

and strain that have affected

Page 6
people's psychological well-being across the globe. The need for social distancing

has also resulted in psychological damage. The feeling of loneliness resulting from

pandemic can also trigger depression, physical health complaints, and even deaths,

especially in older people, as loneliness can also affect the immunity system

(Chen, 2015). Throughout the country, people are working from home. Schools and

higher education institutions have taken the resort to virtual classes. All individuals

have been strictly prohibited from meeting in groups—videos of suggestions, advice,

and consequences of not following the enforced rules and regulations have been

circulated in official and social media sources. One cannot blame the policymakers

as these are the main plans/steps undertaken to prevent the transmission rate.

Nevertheless, social and mental health issues are enormous as directives lead to more

emotional isolation and disconnectedness. Under the current unfortunate

circumstances, individual employees are experiencing acute loneliness and social

isolation, which is the primary focus of this research.

Page 7
 CHAPTER: 2

DESIGN OF THE STUDY

“A Comparative Study on Quality of Life of Private Sector Employees Aged 21-45

In Bengaluru Before and During the Covid Pandemic”

Statement of the Problem:

COVID-19 had a devastating and profound impact worldwide. The business world

has been turbulent, and countries' economic landscape has shown dismal

performance. There have been massive downsizing of employees and deductions of

pay in most organizations as the pandemic outbreak negatively impacted the

business environment. The study aimed to analyze the impact of COVID-19 on the

quality of life of employees working in private organizations. A comparative

analysis was conducted with 50 Indian employees aged 21-45 employed in private

sector organizations

The study's need is manifold as it aimed to explore the quality of life of the private

sector employees of a leading Indian metro city, Bangalore. At the onset, there were

virtually no researches carried out except fragmented resources from online news

and resources. It needs to be mentioned that Indian private sector employees have

mostly been overworked, stressed, and involved in multi-tasking in work. Above all,

the ominous lockdown's inception had frozen the normal process of working and

Page 8
living, sending panic signals to everyone. The previously demarcated existence

between work and personal life was now blurred and had triggered a sense of

ambiguity and lack of clarity about life itself. This research aimed to understand the

psychological desolation, anguish, fear of the unknown, balance between work and

home, level of satisfaction, need fulfillment and sum up the employees' quality of

life. In such a precarious situation, the focus on work–life priorities were

questionable. The research also tried to understand the HR/organizational support

system that should have been given to the employees for better house and work

engagement practices. The study has explored the impact of the lockdown on

psychological well-being and effects on the private sector’s employees' work–life

balance pre and during Covid-19.

Quality of work life can mean difficult things to different people but in recent years

it has come to stand for a participative philosophy of work and organization-a people

and bottom-line philosophy. The quality of work life is employees at the levels in an

organization to use their knowledge, Skills, and abilities more efficiency in their

work at their new workplace. Quality of work life is not only a very broad approach

to job enrichment but also an interdisciplinary field of inquiry and action combining

industrial and organizational psychology and sociology, industrial engineering,

organizational theory and development motivation and leadership theory and

industrial relations.

Page 9
Objectives of the study:

1. To evaluate the flexibility of reconciling work and private life of Bangalorean

employees during the COVID-19.

2. To investigate how family life influenced employees’ ability to perform work

duties workload change concerning housework amount during the COVID-19.

3. Examine the actual and perceived overall impact of the COVID-19 crisis on

work and private life, mental well-being (MWB), and self-rated health (SRH)

in Bengaluru’s private sector employees.

4. To investigate the perceived positive and negative impact of the COVID-19 as

well as to assess the self-reported changes in work and private life routines

induced by the crisis.

Scope of the study:

Quality of work life is the extent to which workers can satisfy important personal

needs through their experiences in the organization. It focuses strongly on providing

a work environment conducive to satisfy individual needs. It is assumed that if

employees have more positive attitudes about the organization and their productivity

increases the present piece of work was conducted to examine whether work related

and personal factors have any relationship with the perception of quality of life and

also to compare the relationship of 50 employees from private sector. This study

Page 10
examines the differences found between private association's employees' ratings of

their quality-of-life experience. The results are thoroughly analyzed and discussed.

Limitations of the study:

❖ A small sample size makes it difficult to determine if a particular outcome is

a true finding and in some cases a type II error may occur, i.e., the null

hypothesis is post-COVID in total incorrectly accepted and no difference

between the study groups is reported.

❖ The research is narrowed to the virtual world due to the COVID 19 pandemic.

❖ Limitation of time and resource.

❖ Lack of interaction with the experts.

❖ Lack of sample size limited to 50 numbers only.

❖ Area of is not penetrated deeply due to limited sample size.

❖ Accuracy of report cannot be justified due to low sample and lack of

interaction constraints.

❖ Lack of prior research studies on the topic.

Page 11
Method of Data Collection:

The present study used a cross-sectional online survey design. We report our study

following the checklist for reporting results of internet e-surveys.

The selected participants were ordinary individuals who have been working in

different sectors of private organizations, mainly in junior and middle-level

positions. The study's purpose was to understand how the respondents were

dealing with the crisis. The employees' perception of their job responsibilities

then and the day-to-day life of overlapping professional and personal

obligations, especially in the Indian context, were the research's predominant

focus.

• Primary Data

❖ Survey method through Google Form

• Secondary Data

❖ Journals

❖ Website articles

❖ E- Newspaper article

Primary data: Primary data consists of a collection of original primary data

collected by the researcher. The primary data for the research study were collected
Page 12
through structured questionnaire from different consumers. The questions were

structured and direct as to make the respondents understand it easily. The

questionnaire has been prepared in such a way that it has taken into consideration all

possible ways to get maximum information. In our study the primary data was

collected through survey method.

Secondary data: Secondary data are those data that have been collected by someone

else and which have already been passed through the statistical process. Secondary

data here has been collected from, E-newspapers, journals and websites.

Sampling design: It refers to the technique or the procedure the researcher would

adopt in selecting items for the sample i.e., the size of the sample. Same design is

determined before data are collected. There are many sample designs from which a

researcher can choose.

Sample size: The sample size used in this study is 50 private-sector employees aged

21-45.

Tools used for analysis: Percentage charts, graphs and other tools and other various

tools.

Page 13
 CHAPTER 3

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

DATA

Data refers to distinct pieces of information, usually formatted and stored in a way that

is concordant with a specific purpose. Data can exist in various forms: as numbers or

text recorded on paper, as bits or bytes stored in electronic memory, or as facts living

in a person’s mind. Since the advent of computer science in the mid-1900s, however,

data most commonly refers to information that is transmitted or stored electronically.

Grammatically, data is the plural form of the singular datum, but in practice data is

widely used as a mass noun, like sand or water. For example, one might say the data

proves something to be true in this case, “data” is referring to many pieces of

information that are being used collectively to validate a cl aim.

DATA ANALYSIS

Data Analysis is the process of systematically applying statistical and/or logical

techniques to describe and illustrate, condense and recap, and evaluate data. According

to Shamoo and Resnik (2003) various analytic procedures “provide a way of drawing

inductive inferences from data and distinguishing the signal (the phenomenon of

interest) from the noise (statistical fluctuations) present in the data”.

While data analysis in qualitative research can include statistical procedures, many
Page 14
times analysis becomes an ongoing iterative process where data is continuously

collected and analyzed almost simultaneously. The form of the analysis is determined

by the specific qualitative approach taken (field study, ethnography content analysis,

oral history, biography, unobtrusive research) and the form of the data (field notes,

documents, audiotape, videotape). An essential component of ensuring data integrity

is the accurate and appropriate analysis of research findings. Improper statistical

analyses distort scientific findings, mislead casual readers (Shepard, 2002), and may

negatively influence the public perception of research. Integrity issues are just as

relevant to analysis of non-statistical data as well.

DATA INTERPRETATION

Data interpretation is the process of reviewing data through some predefined

processes which will help assign some meaning to the data and arrive at a relevant

conclusion. It involves taking the result of data analysis, making inferences on the

relations studied, and using them to conclude. Data analysis is usually the first step

taken towards data interpretation.

It is evident that the interpretation of data is very important, and as such needs to be

done properly. Therefore, researchers have identified some data interpretation

methods to aid this process.

Page 15
Table 3.01: Table showing the gender of the respondents.
SL No. GENDER NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. Male 28 56%

2. Female 22 44%

3. Other - -

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 56% of the respondents are male,

44% are female and 0% of other genders.

Pie Chart 3.01: Pie Chart showing the percentage of the gender of the

respondents

INTERPRETATION: From the above pie chart it is understood that the majority of

the respondents are male (56%) followed by female (44%).

Page 16
Table 3.02: Table showing the highest education completed by the respondents.

SL NO. HIGHEST EDUCATION NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. Some high school or diploma 2 4%

2. High school graduate 4 8%

3. Bachelor’s degree 25 50%

4. Master’s degree 18 36%

5. Doctorate degree 1 2%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 2% of the respondents have done

some form of high school or diploma, 4% have graduated high school, 50% have

completed their Bachelor’s degree, 36% have completed their Master’s Degree and

2% have completed their Doctorate degree.

Page 17
Pie Chart 3.02: Pie Chart showing the percentage of the highest level of

education completed by the respondents.

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that the 50% of the respondents have

completed their Bachelor’s Degree making the majority, while only 2% have

completed their Doctorate.

Page 18
Table 3.03: Table showing the marital status of the respondents.

SL NO. MARITAL STATUS NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. Single/Never married 21 42%

2. In a committed relationship 6 12%

3. Married 16 32%

4. Prefer not to say 7 14%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 42% of the respondents are

single/never married, 12% of the respondents are in a committed relationship, 32%

of the respondents are married and 14% of the respondents prefer not to disclose.

Page 19
Pie Chart 3.03: Pie Chart showing the percentage of the marital status of the

respondents

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that the 42% of the respondents being

single/never married make the majority followed by 32% of the married respondents,

14% of the respondents who prefer not to say and lastly, 12% of the respondents in a

committed relationship being the minority.

Page 20
Table 3.04: Table showing the job level of the respondents.

SL NO. JOB LEVEL NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. Entry-level 28 57%

2. Intermediate 11 23%

3. Mid-level 3 6%

4. Senior or executive level 7 14%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 57% of the respondents work

entry-level jobs, 23% of the respondents work in the intermediate job level, 14% of

the respondents work in Mid-level jobs and 14% of the respondents work in Senior

or Executive level.

Page 21
Pie Chart 3.04: Pie Chart showing the percentage of the job level of the

respondents

Total
14%

6% Entry-level
Intermediate

57% Mid-level
23%
Senior or Executive level

Clustered Bar 3.1: Clustered Bar showing the number of respondents belonging

to a particular job level

Count of 4. What is your Job level?

Senior or Executive level

Mid-level

Intermediate

Entry-level

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

INTERPRETATION:

From the above charts it is understood that the respondents are from various job

levels with the majority of the respondents work in entry-level jobs (57%).

Page 22
Table 3.05: Table showing the hours worked per week by the respondents

SL NO. HOURS PER NO. OF PERCENTAGE

WEEK RESPONDENTS

1. Less than 20 hours 4 8%

2. 20-30 hours 9 18%

3. 31-40 hours 27 54%

4. 41+ hours 10 20%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 8% of the respondents work less

than 20 hours, 18% of the respondents work for 20-30 hours, 54% of the

respondents work for 31-40 hours and 20% of the respondents work more than 41

hours.

Page 23
Pie Chart 3.05: Pie Chart showing the percentage of hours worked per week by

the respondents

TOTAL

8%
18%

21% 20-30 hours

31-40 hours
41+ hours
Less than 20 hours

53%

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that majority of the respondents work for 31 to

40 hours per week (53%) followed by 21% of the respondents working for more than

41 hours.

Page 24
Table 3.06(a): Table showing the self-assessment on various factors by the

respondents.

Happiness:

Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly TOTAL

Disagree Agree

Particulars

My job is 5 4 19 16 6 50

the most

significant

factor to

my

happiness

My salary 1 4 19 18 8 50

is the most

significant

factor to

my

happiness

Page 25
 My family 1 2 6 20 21 50

is the most

significant

factor to

my

happiness

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that,

For the first question- 19 respondents neither agree nor disagree, 16 respondents

agree, 6 respondents strongly agree, 5 respondents strongly disagree and 4

respondents disagree.

For the second question- 19 respondents neither agree nor disagree, 18 respondents

agree, 8 respondents strongly agree, 1 respondent strongly disagrees and 4

respondents disagree.

For the third question- 6 respondents neither agree nor disagree, 20 respondents

agree, 21 respondents strongly agree, 1 respondent strongly disagrees and 2

respondents disagree.

Page 26
Chart 3.06(A): Chart showing the happiness assessment done by the

respondents

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that:

For the first question, majority of the respondents (19) take a neutral stance,

For the second question, majority of the respondents (19) take a neutral stance and

For the third question, majority of the respondents (21) strongly agree.

Page 27
Table 3.06(b): Table showing the self-assessment on various factors by the

respondents.

WORK SATISFACTION:

Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly TOTAL

Disagree Agree

Particulars

I feel 6 3 16 17 8 50

fulfilled by

my job

I enjoy my 2 4 12 21 11 50

job

My job 4 4 14 18 10 50

positively

contributes

to my

overall

happiness

Page 28
ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that,

For the first question- 16 respondents neither agree nor disagree, 17 respondents

agree, 8 respondents strongly agree, 6 respondents strongly disagree and 3

respondents disagree.

For the second question- 12 respondents neither agree nor disagree, 21 respondents

agree, 11 respondents strongly agree, 2 respondents strongly disagrees and 4

respondents disagree.

For the third question- 14 respondents neither agree nor disagree, 18 respondents

agree, 10 respondents strongly agree, 4 respondents strongly disagrees and 4

respondents disagree.

Chart 3.06(B): Chart showing the work satisfaction assessment done by the

respondents

Page 29
INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that:

For the first question, majority of the respondents (17) agree,

For the second question, majority of the respondents (21) agree and

For the third question, majority of the respondents (18) agree.

Table 3.06(c): Table showing the self-assessment on various factors by the

respondents.

Personal Life Satisfaction:

Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly TOTAL

Disagree Agree

Particulars

I am satisfied 3 3 15 20 9 50

with the time I

spend with my

family

I am happy 1 5 6 26 12 50

with my home

Page 30
 life

I use my time 3 4 7 19 17 50

at home to

connect with

family and

friends

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that,

For the first question- 15 respondents neither agree nor disagree, 20 respondents

agree, 9 respondents strongly agree, 3 respondents strongly disagree and 3

respondents disagree.

For the second question- 6 respondents neither agree nor disagree, 26 respondents

agree, 12 respondents strongly agree, 1 respondent strongly disagrees and 5

respondents disagree.

For the third question- 7 respondents neither agree nor disagree, 19 respondents

agree, 17 respondents strongly agree, 3 respondents strongly disagree and 4

respondents disagree.

Page 31
Chart 3.06(C): Chart showing the personal life satisfaction assessment done by

the respondents

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that:

For the first question, majority of the respondents (20) agree,

Page 32
For the second question, majority of the respondents (26) agree and

For the third question, majority of the respondents (19) agree.

Table 3.06(d): Table showing the self-assessment on various factors by the

respondents

BALANCE:

Strongly Disagr Neutr Agree Strongl TOTAL

Disagree ee al y

Particulars Agree

I prioritize my job 5 11 16 11 7 50

over my personal

and family life

I prioritize my 3 9 19 16 3 50

family over my

work life

I sacrifice sleep to 12 9 9 15 5 50

make up time with

my family

Page 33
ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that,

For the first question- 16 respondents neither agree nor disagree, 11 respondents

agree, 7 respondents strongly agree, 5 respondents strongly disagree and 11

respondents disagree.

For the second question- 19 respondents neither agree nor disagree, 16 respondents

agree, 3 respondents strongly agree, 3 respondents strongly disagree and 9

respondents disagree.

For the third question- 9 respondents neither agree nor disagree, 15 respondents

agree, 5 respondents strongly agree, 12 respondents strongly disagree and 9

respondents disagree.

Chart 3.06(D): Chart showing the life balance assessment done by the

respondents

Page 34
INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that:

For the first question, majority of the respondents (16) neither agree nor disagree,

For the second question, majority of the respondents (19) neither agree nor disagree,

For the third question, majority of the respondents (15) agree.

Table 3.07: Table showing the private financial situation over the past three

months of the respondents

SL NO. FINANCIAL NO. OF PERCENTAGE

SITUATION RESPONDENTS

1. Improved 19 38%

2. Remains the same 26 52%

3. Worse 5 10%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 52% of the respondents saw no

change in their financial situation, 38% of the respondents’ financial situation

improved while 10% of the respondents’ financial situation worsened.

Page 35
Chart 3.07: Chart showing the financial situation over the past 3 months of the

respondents

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that majority of the respondents saw no

changes in their private financial situation over the past three months (52%) while

38% of the respondents’ financial situation had improved.

Page 36
Table 3.08: Table showing the effect of family life while working from home of

the respondents.

SL NO. PARTICULARS NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. Yes 24 48%

2. No 16 32%

3. Maybe 10 20%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 48% of the respondents felt that

family life affected their ability to perform work responsibilities while, 32% of the

respondents did not feel the same and 20% of the respondents were not sure.

Page 37
Chart 3.08: Chart showing the effect of family life on work performance of the

respondents

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that majority of the respondents felt that family

life affected their ability to perform work responsibilities (48%) while 32% of the

respondents felt no effect of family life on work performance.

Page 38
Table 3.09: Table showing the balance of the respondents between work and

private life while remote working during COVID-19.

SL NO. BALANCE NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. Improved 18 36%

2. Did not change 13 26%

3. Became worse 19 38%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 36% of the respondents had an

improved balance between their work and private life while remote working during

COVID 19 while, 26% of the respondents had no change in the balance and 38%

had their balance worsened.

Page 39
Chart 3.09: Chart showing the respondents’ balance between work and private

life while remote working during COVID-19.

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that majority of the respondents could not

balance their work and private while remote working during the lockdown (38%)

while 36% of the respondents saw an improvement in their balance of work and

private life.

Page 40
Table 3.10: Table showing the importance of disconnecting from digital devices

outside working hours/after completing their work task.

SL NO. IMPORTANCE NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. Yes 30 60%

2. No 20 40%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 60% of the respondents think it is

important for them to disconnect from digital devices after working hours/after

completing their work tasks while, 40% of the respondents did not feel the same.

Page 41
Chart 3.09: Chart showing the respondents’ thoughts on disconnecting from

digital devices after working hours/after completing work tasks.

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that majority of the respondents consider it

important to disconnect from digital device outside working hours/after completing

work tasks (60%) while rest of the respondents do not find it important to disconnect

their digital devices outside working hours/after completing their work tasks.

Page 42
Table 3.11: Table showing the additional housework incurred by the

respondents during COVID 19.

SL NO. ADDITIONAL NO. OF PERCENTAGE

HOUSEWORK RESPONDENTS

INCURRED

1. Yes 33 66%

2. No 17 34%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 66% of the respondents incurred

additional housework during COVID 19 while 34% of the respondents did not incur

any additional housework during COVID 19.

Page 43
Chart 3.10: Chart showing the additional housework incurred by the

respondents during COVID 19.

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that majority of the respondents incurred

additional housework during COVID 19 (66%) while rest of the respondents (34%)

did not incur any additional housework during COVID 19.

Page 44
Table 3.12: Table showing the change in housework responsibilities of the

respondents during COVID 19.

SL NO. CHANGE IN NO. OF PERCENTAGE

HOUSEHOLD RESPONDENTS

RESPONSIBILITIES

1. Significantly reduced 5 10%

2. Slightly reduced 4 08%

3. Did not change 12 24%

4. Slightly increased 21 42%

5. Significantly increased 8 16%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 42% of the respondents had their

household responsibilities slightly increased, 16% of the respondents saw significant

increase in household responsibilities, 24% of the respondents saw no change in

household responsibilities, 8% of the respondents had their household

responsibilities slightly reduced and 10% of the respondents saw significant

reduction in household responsibilities.

Page 45
Chart 3.11: Chart showing the change in household responsibilities of the

respondents during COVID 19.

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that majority of the respondents (42%) had

their household responsibilities slightly increased during COVID 19.

Page 46
Table 3.13: Table showing the changes made to respondents’ household in daily

routine during COVID-19 to enhance work–life balance. (Check box)

SL CHANGE IN HOUSEHOLD NO. OF PERCENTAGE

NO. RESPONSIBILITIES RESPONSES

1. There were changes in work pattern (for 28 56%

example, it was coordinated with other

family members, a flexible, result-

oriented work pattern was applied, etc.)

2. Redistribution of household 28 56%

responsibilities among household

members (for example, house cleaning,

doing homework with children,

babysitting, etc.)

3. Involvement of assistants in household 12 24%

maintenance and tidying work (for

example, relatives or friends)

4. Use of outsourced services (for example, 16 32%

delivery of food and ready meals,

babysitter services, etc.)

Page 47
 5. The place of residence was changed (for 4 8%

example, moving from the city to the

countryside)

6. Other changes 6 12%

7. Hard to say 2 4%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 56% of the respondents have seen

changes in work pattern, 56% of the respondents redistribute their household

responsibilities among household members, 24% of the respondents had the

involvement of assistants in household maintenance and tidying work, 32% of the

respondents used outsourced services like food delivery or babysitters, 8% of the

respondents changed their residence, 12% had other changes and 4% of the

respondents found it hard to say.

Page 48
Chart 3.12: Chart showing the changes made to respondents’ household in daily

routine during COVID-19 to enhance work–life balance.

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that the respondents (56%) majorly saw two

changes in their household routine during COVID 19, them being changes in work

pattern like flexible work pattern and redistribution of household responsibilities

among household members.

Page 49
Table 3.14: Table showing how often the respondents work on the weekend.

SL NO. FREQUENCY NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. Always 4 8%

2. Often 11 22%

3. Sometimes 20 40%

4. Rarely 10 20%

5. Never 5 10%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 8% of the respondents always

work on the weekend, 22% of the respondents often work on weekends, 40% of the

respondents work sometimes on weekends, 20% of the respondents rarely work on

weekends and 10% of the respondents never had to work on weekends.

Page 50
Chart 3.13: Chart showing the frequency of responds working on weekends

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that the majority of the respondents (40%)

sometimes work on the weekends while only 8% always work on weekends.

Page 51
Table 3.15: Table showing hours slept by the respondents on an average work

night.

SL NO. FREQUENCY NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. 2-4 Hours 5 10%

2. 4-6 Hours 13 26%

3. 6-8 Hours 30 60%

4. 8-10 Hours 2 4%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that on an average work night 10% of

the respondents sleep for 2-4 hours, 26% of the respondents sleep for 4-6 hours,

60% of the respondents sleep for 6-8 hours and 4% of the respondents sleep for 8-10

hours.

Page 52
Chart 3.13: Chart showing the frequency of responds working on weekends

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that the majority of the respondents (60%)

sleep for 6-8 hours on an average work night.

Page 53
Table 3.16: Table showing changes in the daily routine of the respondents while

working remotely. (Check box)

SL NO. CHANGES NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONSES

1. Working hours 36 72%

2. I moved from a shared 11 22%

office to a shared

workplace (with family

/roommates)

3. I moved from a shared 15 30%

office to an isolated

workplace at home

4. Nothing noticeable than 8 16%

the workplace

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 72% of the respondents have seen

changes in working hours, 22% of the respondents moved from a shared office to a

shared workplace, 30% of the respondents moved from a shared office to an isolated

Page 54
workplace at home and 16% of the respondents saw no noticeable changes other

than workplace.

Chart 3.14: Chart showing the changes in daily routine while working remotely

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that the respondents (72%) majorly saw one

change in their household routine while working remotely, that being change in

working hours.

Page 55
Table 3.17: Table showing the respondents’ self-assessment of their physical

health over the past two years.

RATING NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. 0 -

2. 6 12%

3. 12 24%

4. 22 44%

5. 10 20%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 12% of the respondents rate their

physical health to be 2, 24% of the respondents rate their physical health to be 3,

44% of the respondents rate their physical health to be 4, 20% of the respondents

rate their physical health to be 5 and none of the respondents rate their physical

health as 1 which is the lowest.

Page 56
Chart 3.14: Chart showing the respondents’ self-assessment of their physical

health over the past two years.

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that the majority of the respondents (44%) rate

their physical health over the past two years as a 4 (1 being the lowest and 5 being

the highest).

Page 57
Table 3.18: Table showing the respondents’ self-assessment of their mental

health over the past two years.

RATING NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. 1 2%

2. 7 14%

3. 25 50%

4. 8 16%

5. 9 18%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 14% of the respondents rate their

physical health to be 2, 50% of the respondents rate their physical health to be 3,

16% of the respondents rate their physical health to be 4, 18% of the respondents

rate their physical health to be 5 and 2% of the respondents rate their physical health

as 1 which is the lowest.

Page 58
Chart 3.15: Chart showing the respondents’ self-assessment of their mental

health over the past two years.

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that the majority of the respondents (50%) rate

their physical health over the past two years as a 3 (1 being the lowest and 5 being

the highest).

Page 59
Table 3.19: Table showing the respondents’ satisfaction with the work schedule

post COVID 19.

SL NO. SATISFACTION NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. Yes 27 54%

2. No 23 46%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 54% of the respondents were

satisfied with the work schedule post COVID 19 while, 46% of the respondents did

not feel the same.

Page 60
Chart 3.16: Chart showing the respondents’ satisfaction with the work schedule

post COVID 19.

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that majority of the respondents (54%) were

satisfied with the work schedule post COVID 19 while rest of the respondents (46%)

were not satisfied with the work schedule post COVID 19.

Page 61
Table 3.20: Table showing how often the respondents find enough time to spend

with family/friends when you work from home.

SL NO. FREQUENCY NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. Always 9 18%

2. Often 15 30%

3. Sometimes 21 42%

4. Rarely 5 10%

5. Never - -

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 18% of the respondents always

find enough time with their family while working from home, 30% of the

respondents often find enough time, 42% of the respondents sometimes find enough

time, 10% of the respondents rarely find enough time with their family while

working from home and None of the respondents never find enough time with their

family while working from home.

Page 62
Chart 3.17: Chart showing how often the respondents find enough time to spend

with family/friends when you work from home.

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that the majority of the respondents (42%)

sometimes find time with their family while working from home.

Page 63
Table 3.21: Table showing respondents’ tiredness/depression because of work

post COVID-19.

SL NO. FREQUENCY NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. Always 3 6%

2. Often 16 32%

3. Sometimes 13 26%

4. Rarely 13 26%

5. Never 5 10%

TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 6% of the respondents always

feel tired/depressed because of work post COVID 19, 32% of the respondents often

feel tired/depressed because of work post COVID 19, 26% of the respondents

sometimes feel tired/depressed because of work post COVID 19, 26% of the

respondents rarely feel tired/depressed because of work post COVID 19 and 10% of

the respondents never feel tired/depressed because of work post COVID 19.

Page 64
Chart 3.18: Chart showing respondents’ tiredness/depression because of work

post COVID-19.

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that the majority of the respondents (32%)

often feel tired/depressed because of work post COVID 19.

Table 3.22: Table showing respondents’ satisfaction with work from home

arrangement post COVID-19.

SL NO. SATISFACTION NO. OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1. Yes 28 56%

2. No 22 44%

Page 65
 TOTAL 50 100%

ANALYSIS:

The data represented in the table above shows that 56% of the respondents were

satisfied with the work from home arrangement post COVID 19 while, 44% of the

respondents were not satisfied.

Chart 3.19: Chart showing the respondents’ satisfaction with the work from

home arrangement post COVID 19.

INTERPRETATION:

From the above chart it is understood that majority of the respondents (56%) were

satisfied with the work from home arrangement post COVID 19 while rest of the

respondents (44%) were not satisfied with the work from home arrangement post

COVID 19

Page 66
 CHAPTER-04

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Summary of Findings

From this study, I have had several findings to better know about the situation and

thoughts of private employees in Bengaluru.

1. It is understood that the majority of the Respondents are male (56%).

2. It is found that most of the respondents have completed their Bachelor’s

degree (50%).

3. Majority of the respondents are single/never married (42%).

4. Most of the respondents work in entry-level jobs (57%).

5. It is found that majority of the respondents work for 31-40 hours every week.

6. Regarding the questions on happiness,

a. Most of the respondents take a neutral stance on their job being the most

significant factor to their happiness.

b. Most of the respondents neither agree nor disagree to their salary being

the most significant factor to their happiness.

Page 67
 c. Most of the respondents strongly agree to their family being the most

significant factor to their happiness.

7. Regarding the questions on work satisfaction,

a. Most of the respondents feel fulfilled by their job.

b. Most of the respondents enjoy their job.

c. Most of the respondents agree that their job positively contributing to

their overall happiness.

8.Regarding the questions on personal life satisfaction,

a. Most of the respondents are satisfied with the time they spent with their

family.

b. Most of the respondents are happy with their home life.

c. Most of the respondents agree on using their time at home to connect with

their family and friends.

9.Regarding the questions on balance,

a. Most of the respondents are neutral on whether they prioritize their job

over their personal and family life.

b. Most of the respondents are neutral on whether they prioritize their

family over their work life.

Page 68
 c. Most of the respondents agree that they sacrifice sleep to make up time

with their family.

10.It is found that the majority of the respondents have seen no change in their

financial situation.

11.When working remotely, most of the respondents felt that family life affected

their ability to perform work responsibilities.

12.It is found that most of the respondents found it hard to balance between their

work and private life while remote working during COVID 19.

13.Majority of the respondents felt that it was important for them to disconnect

from digital devices outside working hours/after completing the assigned

work tasks.

14.Most of the respondents incurred additional housework during the COVID-

19 emergency situation.

15.Most of the respondents saw their workload slightly increase in terms of

household responsibilities during COVID-19.

16.Regarding the changes made to their household’s daily routine during

COVID-19 to enhance work-life balance, most of the respondents brought

two changes, them being changes in work pattern and redistribution of

household responsibilities among household members.

Page 69
17.Majority of the respondents sometimes work on weekends.

18.It is found that majority of the respondents sleep for 6-8 hours on an average

work night.

19.While working remotely, majority of the respondents had their working

hours changed.

20.Majority of the respondents rated their physical health over the past two years

to be 4, with 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest.

21.Majority of the respondents rated their mental health over the past two years

to be 3, with 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest.

22.It is understood that majority of the respondents were satisfied with their

work schedule post COVID-19.

23.Most of the respondents could sometimes find time to spend with

friends/family when working from home.

24.Majority of the respondents often feel tired/depressed because of work post

COVID-19.

25.It is also seen that majority of respondents were satisfied with the work from

home arrangement done post COVID-19.

Page 70
CONCLUSION

The study revealed various factors which impacted the quality of life of private

employees in Bangalore during COVID-19, their life before pre and post COVID 19.

From the analysis and findings, the following conclusions are made: The analysis

revealed that, the balance between work and personal life was ruined due to the

COVID 19 emergency situation, it brought about major changes in the respondents’

lives with its fair share of positive and negative aspects. The respondents were from

various levels of job and various working hours, most of the respondents were

satisfied with their work life as well as their personal life but couldn’t find the right

balance. According to the study most of the respondents felt tired/depressed with their

work and also considered it important to disconnect from digital devices outside

working hours. This shows that most of the private sector employees in Bangalore

were affected largely by the COVID-19 emergency situation but were able to able to

adapt to remote working albeit incurring additional work as well as household

responsibilities. It is observed that majority of the respondents were satisfied with the

work from home arrangement as well as their work schedule post COVID-19 showing

signs of normalcy with some effects on their mental health.

Page 71
RECOMMENDATIONS

• It is observed that while working remotely, family life affected the

respondents’ ability to perform work responsibilities. This negative effect

can be overcome to moving from a shared workplace at home to an isolated

workplace to good ventilation to improve their work efficiency.

• Majority of the respondents saw their balance of work and private life

worsen while remote working, to bring back the balance it is recommended

to clearly draw a line between work responsibilities and household

responsibilities and move to a better location while working and

redistribute their responsibilities with their family members to lessen the

burden.

• It is noticed that the respondents’ mental health over the past two years has

not been good compared to their physical health. It is recommended for the

respondents to properly schedule and take short breaks and socialize with

their family/friends and have a change of pace. If their mental health gets

worse, it is better to consult with therapist or even confide in their friends

or family.

Page 72
ANNEX

Page 73
 QUESTIONNAIRE

Section 1 of 2

Quality of Life Survey

A Survey on the Quality of Life of private-sector employees pre and post
COVID-19

This form is collecting email addresses.

1. Please select your gender
a) Male
b) Female
c) Other…

2. What is your highest education level completed?

a) Some high school or diploma
b) High school graduate
c) Bachelor’s degree
d) Master’s degree
e) Doctorate degree

3. What is your marital status?

a) Single/Never married
b) In a committed relationship
c) Married
d) Prefer not to say

4. What is your Job title?

a) Entry-level
b) Intermediate
c) Mid-level
d) Senior or executive level

5. How many hours do you work per week?

a) Less than 20 hours
b) 20-30 hours
c) 31-40 hours
d) 41+ hours

Page 74
After section 1
Section 2 of 2

On a scale of 1 to 5 (with 1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree),

please rate your level of agreement with the following statements: (Multiple choice
grid)
6. Happiness:

• My job is the most significant factor to my happiness

a) Strongly Disagree
b) Disagree
c) Neutral
d) Agree
e) Strongly Agree

• My salary is the most significant factor to my happiness

a) Strongly Disagree
b) Disagree
c) Neutral
d) Agree
e) Strongly Agree

• My family is the most significant factor to my happiness

a) Strongly Disagree
b) Disagree
c) Neutral
d) Agree
e) Strongly Agree

7. Work Satisfaction:

• I feel fulfilled by my job

a) Strongly Disagree
b) Disagree
c) Neutral
d) Agree
e) Strongly Agree

• I enjoy my job
a) Strongly Disagree
Page 75
 b) Disagree
c) Neutral
d) Agree
e) Strongly Agree

• My job positively contributes to my overall happiness

a) Strongly Disagree
b) Disagree
c) Neutral
d) Agree
e) Strongly Agree

8. Personal Life Satisfaction:

• I am satisfied with the time I spend with my family

a) Strongly Disagree
b) Disagree
c) Neutral
d) Agree
e) Strongly Agree

• I am happy with my home life

a) Strongly Disagree
b) Disagree
c) Neutral
d) Agree
e) Strongly Agree

• I use my time at home to connect with family and friends

a) Strongly Disagree
b) Disagree
c) Neutral
d) Agree
e) Strongly Agree

9. Balance:

• I prioritize my job over my personal and family life

a) Strongly Disagree
b) Disagree
c) Neutral
Page 76
 d) Agree
e) Strongly Agree

• I prioritize my family over my work life

a) Strongly Disagree
b) Disagree
c) Neutral
d) Agree
e) Strongly Agree

• I sacrifice sleep to make up time with my family

a) Strongly Disagree
b) Disagree
c) Neutral
d) Agree
e) Strongly Agree

10. Please assess your private financial situation over the past three months:
a) Improved
b) Remains the same
c) Worse

11. When working remotely, did you feel that family life affects your ability to
perform work responsibilities?
a) Yes
b) No
c) Maybe

12. Please evaluate how the balance between your work and private life has changed
considering your remote working experience during the COVID-19 emergency
situation
a) Improved
b) Did not change
c) Became worse

13. Is it important for you be able to disconnect from digital devices outside working
hours/after completing the assigned work tasks?

a) Yes
b) No

Page 77
14. Did you incur any additional housework during the COVID-19 emergency
situation?

a) Yes
b) No

15. Please evaluate how your workload changed in terms of the household
responsibilities during the COVID-19 emergency situation
a) Significantly reduced
b) Slightly reduced
c) Did not change
d) Slightly increased
e) Significantly increased

16. Please mark what changes were made to your household’s daily routine during
COVID-19 to enhance work–life balance? (Checkboxes)
a) There were changes in work pattern (for example, it was coordinated with
other family members, a flexible, result-oriented work pattern was applied,
etc.)
b) Redistribution of household responsibilities among household members (for
example, house cleaning, doing homework with children, babysitting, etc.)
c) Involvement of assistants in household maintenance and tidying work (for
example, relatives or friends)
d) Use of outsourced services (for example, delivery of food and ready meals,
babysitter services, etc.)
e) The place of residence was changed (for example, moving from the city to the
countryside)
f) Other changes
g) Hard to say

17.How often do you work on the weekend?

a) Always
b) Often
c) Sometimes
d) Rarely
e) Never

18. How many hours do you sleep on an average work night?

a) 2-4 Hours
b) 4-6 Hours
c) 6-8 Hours
Page 78
 d) 8-10 Hours

19.What has changed in your daily routine while working remotely?

a) Working hours
b) I moved from a shared office to a shared workplace (with family / roommates)
c) I moved from a shared office to an isolated workplace at home
d) Nothing noticeable than the workplace

20. How would you rate your physical health over the past 2 years? (Linear scale)
Poor
1
2
3
4
5
Excellent

21. How would you rate your mental health over the past 2 years?
Poor
1
2
3
4
5
Excellent

22. Are you satisfied with your work schedule post COVID-19?
a) Yes
b) No

23.Do you find enough time to spend with family/friends when you work from
home?
a) Always
b) Often
c) Sometimes
d) Rarely
e) Never

24. Do you feel tired/depressed because of work post COVID-19?

a) Always
b) Often
Page 79
 c) Sometimes
d) Rarely
e) Never

25. Were you satisfied with work from home arrangement done post COVID-19?
a) Yes
b) No

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Websites:

• How About the Psychological Pandemic? Perceptions of COVID-19 and Work–Life of Private

Sector Employees—A Qualitative Study | SpringerLink

• https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC269997/

Page 80