Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 169

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter explores data analysis and interpretation. It explains the profile of the
women employees working in both urban and rural area banks. It identifies important aspects of
factors of life-work balance and work-life balance of women employees both in urban and rural
area banks. Influence of demographics on factors of life-work balance and work-life balance of
women employees working in banking sector in urban and rural areas are examined. Association
between personal life satisfactions with factors of life-work balance is enumerated. Relationship
between work-life satisfactions with factors of work-life balance are established in this chapter. It
also identifies the predictor variables for personal life and work life satisfaction of women
employees working in banking sector in both urban and rural areas. A Model has been proposed
for the work-life satisfaction of women employees working in banking sector.

The information about the background of 600 women employees from selected banks
both in urban and rural areas is explored. A detailed questionnaire was prepared to collect the
required information from the bank employees.

54
4.1 PROFILE OF WOMEN EMPLOYEES WORKING IN BANKING SECTOR

4.1.1 Designation of women employees

Women employees working in banking sector from urban and rural areas are selected for
the study. Women employees are grouped under four categories according to their designations
as Officers, Deputy/Assistant Managers, Managers and Chief Managers. Table 4.1 gives the
designations of women employees against their bank locations.

Table 4.1
Designation of women employees

Urban Rural Total

Officer 66 66 132
22.0% 22.0% 22.0%
Deputy/Assistant 115 107 222
Designation Manager 38.3% 35.7% 37.0%
Manager 83 87 170
27.7% 29.0% 28.3%
Chief Manager 36 40 76
12.0% 13.3% 12.7%
Total 300 300 600
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Primary data

It is seen from the table 4.1 that the most of the women employees working in banks are
working as Deputy/Assistant manager (37.0 percent). This is more evident in urban (38.3
percent) as compared to rural areas (35.7 percent). The next significant designation group is
Managers in the study area (28.3 percent). Officers constitute 22.0 percent and those who are
designated as Chief Managers constituted 12.7 percent in the study area. It is also seen from the
table 4.1 that most of the employees in urban area were found to be Deputy/Assistant managers
(38.3 percent), 27.7 percent of the selected women employees are Managers, 22.0 percent
employees are Officers and 12.0 percent of the employees are Chief Managers. In rural area, 35.7
percent of the employees are Deputy/Assistant Managers, 29.0 percent of the employees are

55
Managers, 22.0 percent of the employees are Officer and 13.3 percent of the employees are Chief
Managers. This shows that most of the women employees (37.0 %) working in banking sector
are Deputy/Assistant Managers.

4.1.2 Service of women employees

Women employees working in banking sector from urban and rural areas are selected for
the study. Women employees are grouped under four categories according to their years of
services as less than 1 year, 1-10 years, 11-20 years and above 20 years. Table 4.2 gives the
details of services of women employees against their bank locations.

Table 4.2
Service of women employees

Urban Rural Total


Less than 1year 61 66 127
20.3% 22.0% 21.2%
1-10 years 110 104 214
Service 36.7% 34.7% 35.7%
11-20 years 93 99 192
31.0% 33.0% 32.0%
Above 20 years 36 31 67
12.0% 10.3% 11.2%
Total 300 300 600
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Primary data

It is observed from the table 4.2 that most of the employees have rendered their services
between 1-10 years in urban and rural areas (35.7 percent). This is more evident in urban (36.7
percent) as compared to rural areas (34.7 percent). 32.0 percent of the women employees have
completed their services from 11 to 20 years in the study area. Employees having service of less
than 1 year have constituted 21.2 percent and those who have rendered service above 20 years

56
have constituted 11.2 percent in the study area. It is also seen from the table 4.2 that most of the
employees in urban area were found to be either 1 10 years or 11 20 years of service. 36.7
percent of the employees rendered 1 10 years, 31.0 percent of the selected employees rendered
11 20 years of service, 20.3 percent employees are having less than 1 year and 12.0 percent of
the employees were finished above 20 years of service. In rural area, 34.7 percent of the
employees have rendered 1 10 years of service, 33.0 percent of the selected employees have
rendered 11 20 years of service, 22.0 percent employees have finished less than 1 year of
service and 10.3 percent of the employees have finished above 20 years of service. This shows
that most of the women employees (35.7 %) have rendered their services between 1-10 years.

4.1.3 Monthly salary of women employees

Women employees working in banking sector from urban and rural areas are selected for
the study. Women employees are grouped under four categories according to their monthly
salaries as less than Rs.20,000, Rs.20,001-Rs.30,000, Rs.30,001-Rs.40,000 and above Rs.40,000.
Table 4.3 gives the details of monthly salary of women employees against their bank locations.

Table 4.3
Monthly salary of Bank employees

Urban Rural Total


Less than Rs.20,000 64 66 130
21.3% 22.0% 21.7%
Rs.20,001-Rs.30,000 120 116 236
Monthly 40.0% 38.7% 39.3%
salary Rs.30,001-Rs.40,000 82 81 163
27.3% 27.0% 27.2%
Above Rs.40,000 34 37 71
11.3% 12.3% 11.8%
Total 300 300 600
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Primary data

57
It is seen from the table 4.3 that majority of the women employees monthly salary in
banks in rural and urban areas was Rs.20, 001 Rs.30, 000 in (39.3 percent). This is more
evident in urban areas (40.0 percent) as compared to rural areas (38.7 percent). The next
significant monthly salary group is Rs.30, 001 Rs.40, 000 in the study area (27.2 percent).
Employees having monthly salary of less than Rs.20, 000 constitute 21.7 percent and those who
are having monthly salary of above Rs.40, 000 constituted 11.8 percent in the study area. It is
also seen from the table 4.3, most of the employees in urban area were found to be either
Rs.20,001 Rs.30,000 or Rs.30,001 Rs.40,000 earning as monthly salary. 40.0 percent of the
employees are earning Rs.20,001 Rs.30,000, 27.3 percent of the selected employees are
earning Rs.30,001 Rs.40,000, 21.3 percent employees are earning less than Rs.20,001 and 11.3
percent of the employees are earning above Rs.40,000 as monthly salary. In rural area, 38.7
percent of the employees are earning Rs.20,001 Rs.30,000, 27.0 percent of the selected
employees are earning Rs.30,001 Rs.40,000, 22.0 percent employees are earning less than
Rs.20,000 and 12.3 percent of the employees are earning above Rs.40,000 as monthly salary.
This shows that majority of the women employees monthly salary (39.3%) is between Rs.20,
001 and Rs.30, 000.

4.1.4 Marital status of women employees

Women employees working in banking sector from urban and rural areas are selected for
the study. Women employees are grouped under two categories according to their marital status
as single and married. Table 4.4 gives the details of marital status of women employees against
their bank locations.

58
Table 4.4
Marital status of Bank employees

Urban Rural Total

Single 69 73 142
Marital 23.0% 24.3% 23.7%
status Married 231 227 458
77.0% 75.7% 76.3%
Total 300 300 600
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Primary data

From the table 4.4, most of the women employees working in banks in rural and urban
areas were married (76.3 percent). This is more evident in urban (77.0 percent) as compared to
rural areas (75.7 percent). Employees having marital status as single are 23.7 percent. It is also
seen from the table 4.4, most of the employees in urban area 77.0 percent of the employees were
married and 23.0 percent of the employees are living as single. In rural area, 75.7 percent of the
employees were married and 24.3 percent of the employees are living as single. This shows that
majority of the women employees (76.3%) working in banking sector was married.

4.1.5 Number of children of women employees

Women employees working in banking sector from urban and rural areas are selected for
the study. Women employees are grouped under four categories according to their number of
children as nil, only one child, two children and more than two children. Table 4.5 gives the
details of number of children of women employees against their bank locations.

59
Table 4.5
Number of Children of Bank employees
Urban Rural Total
Nil 38 39 77
12.7% 13.0% 12.8%
Only one child 146 141 287
Number of 48.7% 47.0% 47.8%
Children Two children 115 117 232
38.3% 39.0% 38.7%
More than two 1 3 4
children 0.3% 1.0% 0.7%
Total 300 300 600
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Primary data

Table 4.5 shows the details of number of children of bank employees. Most of the women
employees working in rural and urban areas are having only one child (47.8 percent). This is
more evident in urban (48.7 percent) as compared to rural areas (47.0 percent). The next
significant group is women employees with two children in the study area (38.7 percent).
Employees who dont have children are 12.8 percent and those who are having more than two
children constituted 0.7 percent in the study area. It is also seen from the table 4.5; most of the
employees in urban area were found to be having either one or two children. 48.7 percent of the
employees are having only one child, 38.3 percent of the selected employees are having two
children, 12.7 percent employees dont have any issues and 0.3 percent of the employees are
having more than two children. In rural area, 47.0 percent of the employees are having only one
child, 39.0 percent of the selected employees are having up to 2 children, 13.0 percent employees
dont have any issues and 1.0 percent of the employees are having more than two children. This
shows that majority of women employees (47.8) working in banking sector is having one child.

60
4.1.6 Family size of women employees

Women employees working in banking sector from urban and rural areas are selected for
the study. Women employees are grouped under three categories according to their family sizes
as up to 3 members, 3-5 members and above 5 members. Table 4.6 gives the details of family
size of women employees against their bank locations.

Table 4.6
Family size of women employees

Urban Rural Total

Up to 3 members 119 96 215


39.7% 32.0% 35.8%
Family 3-5 members 127 120 247
size 42.3% 40.0% 41.2%
Above 5 members 54 84 138
18.0% 28.0% 23.0%
Total 300 300 600
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Primary data

It is seen from the table 4.6, major item of employees family size observed among the
women employees in banking in rural and urban areas were 3 5 members (41.2 percent). This
is more evident in urban (42.3 percent) as compared to rural areas (40.0 percent). The next
significant family size group is up to 3 members in the study area (35.8 percent) and with family
size of above 5 members in the study area (23.0 percent). It is also seen from the table 4.6, most
of the employees in urban area were found to be either having 3 5 members or up to 3 members
in their family. 42.3 percent of the employees are having family size of 3 5 members, 39.7
percent of the employees are having family size of up to 3 members, and 18.0 percent of the
employees are having family size of above 5 members. In rural area, 40.0 percent of the
employees are having family size of 3 5 members, 32.0 percent of the employees are having
family size of up to 3 members, and 28.0 percent of the employees are having family size of

61
above 5 members. This shows that majority of the women employees (41.2%) family sizes are
between 3-5 members.

4.1.7 Dependents of women employees

Women employees working in banking sector from urban and rural areas are selected for
the study. Women employees are grouped under three categories according to their dependents as
up to 1 member, 2 members and more than 2 members. Table 4.7 gives the details of number of
dependents of women employees against their bank locations.

Table 4.7
Dependents of women employees

Urban Rural Total


Up to 1 members 140 96 236
46.7% 32.0% 39.3%
Number of 2 members 104 111 215
dependents 34.7% 37.0% 35.8%
More than 2 56 93 149
members 18.7% 31.0% 24.8%
Total 300 300 600
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Primary data

It is seen from the table 4.7; the major item of employees dependents observed among
the women employees in banking in rural and urban areas was up to 1 member (39.3 percent).
This is more evident in urban (46.7 percent) as compared to rural areas (32.0 percent). The next
significant number of dependent group is up to 3 members in the study area (35.8 percent) and
with number of dependents of more than 2 in the study area (24.8 percent). It is also seen from
the table 4.7, most of the employees in urban area were found to be either having up to 1 or 2
dependents. 46.7 percent of the employees are having dependent up to 1 member, 34.7 percent of

62
the employees are having dependent up to 2 members, and 18.7 percent of the employees are
having dependent of more than 2. In rural area, 37.0 percent of the employees are having
dependent of up to 2 members, 32.0 percent of the employees are having dependent of up to 1
member, and 31.00 percent of the employees are having dependent of more than 2 members.
This shows that most of the women employees (39.3 %) working in banking sector are having up
to one dependent.

4.1.8 Banks of women employees

Women employees working in banking sector from urban and rural areas are selected for
the study. Women employees are grouped according to their banks which they work. Table 4.8
gives the details of banks of women employees against their bank locations.

Table 4.8
Banks of women employees

Urban Rural Total


Indian bank 70 45 115
23.3% 15.0% 19.2%
State bank of India 70 45 115
23.3% 15.0% 19.2%
Indian overseas bank 64 45 109
Bank 21.3% 15.0% 18.2%
HDFC 35 45 80
11.7% 15.0% 13.3%
ICICI 30 60 90
10.0% 20.0% 15.0%
Axis bank 31 60 91
10.3% 20.0% 15.2%
Total 300 300 600
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Primary data

63
It is inferred from the table 4.8 that majority of the employees working in banks in rural
and urban areas are Indian bank and State bank of India (19.2 percent). This is more evident in
urban (23.3 percent) as compared to rural areas (15.0 percent). The next significant bank group is
Indian overseas bank in the study area (18.2 percent), employees working in Axis banks (15.2
percent), employees working in ICICI bank (15.0 percent) and employees working in HDFC is
(13.3 percent). It is also seen from the table 4.8 that most of the employees in urban area were
found to be either working in Indian bank or State bank of India. 23.3 percent of the employees
are working in Indian bank, 23.3 percent of the employees are working in State bank of India,
21.3 percent of the employees are working in Indian overseas bank, 11.7 percent of the
employees are working in HDFC bank, 10.3 percent of the employees are working in axis bank
and 10.0 percent of the employees are working in ICICI bank. In rural area, 20.0 percent of the
employees are working in ICICI bank, 20.0 percent of the employees are working in Axis bank,
15.0 percent of the employees are working in Indian bank, 15.0 percent of the employees are
working in State bank of India, 15.0 percent of the employees are working in Indian overseas
bank and 15.0 percent of the employees are working in HDFC bank.

4.1.9 Type of banks of women employees

Women employees working in banking sector from urban and rural areas are selected for
the study. Women employees are grouped under two categories nationalized banks and private
banks. Table 4.9 gives the details of types of banks of women employees against their bank
locations.

64
Table 4.9
Type of banks of women employees

Urban Rural Total

Nationalised 204 135 339


Bank 68.0% 45.0% 56.5%
Private 96 165 261
32.0% 55.0% 43.5%
Total 300 300 600
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Primary data

It is observed from the table 4.9 that women employees working in nationalized banks in
rural and urban area constitutes 56.5 percent. This is more evident in urban (68.0 percent) as
compared to rural areas (45.0 percent). Employees working in private banks are 43.5 percent. It
is also seen from the table 4.9 that 68.0 percent employees working in urban area are working in
Nationalised banks and 32.0 percent of the employees are working in Private Banks in urban
areas. In rural area, 55.0 percent of the employees are working in Private Banks and 45.0 percent
of the employees are working in Nationalised banks. This shows that majority of the women
employees (56.5 %) are working in Nationalised banks.

65
4.2 CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS FOR FACTORS OF LIFE-WORK AND
WORK-LIFE BALANCE

Confirmatory factor analysis was performed for factors of Life-Work balance and Work-
Life balance of women employees working in banking sector by using Analysis of moment
structure (AMOS 16.1) to verify factor structure of the variables. The Goodness of fit index
ranges between 0 to 1 and closer to one point to a perfect fit model (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1984).
Root-Mean square error approximation (RMSEA) ranges from 0 to 1 with a smaller value
indicating a better model (Browne&Cudeek 1993). Expected Cross Validation Index (ECVI) is
an estimate of how well the result obtained from one sample can be generalized to other samples.
This measure always remains positive and closer to zero indicating a better model
(Browne&Cudeek 1993). Chi square is sensitive to larger sample size and power of the test.
Therefore it is suggested the use of ratio of Chi square to degree of freedom. Carmines&
Mclver(1981) suggest that 2 to 1 or 3to 1 is indicative of acceptable model between hypothetical
model and sample data. Ratio approximately five or less is considered to be reasonable
(Wheaton, Muthen, Alwin & Summers 1977). The results of Confirmatory factor analysis carried
out for above said factors are displayed in the table 4.10

Table 4.10
Confirmatory factor analysis for factors of Life-Work and Work-Life balance

Factors GFI AGFI RMSEA ECVI 2 d.f


Life Work balance
Family support .901 .884 .078 2.748 3.236
Child Care/ Dependent care .889 .864 .096 2.349 4.555
Self Management .901 .884 .083 1.083 4.712
Work- Life Balance
Work life balance policies .891 .876 .084 1.258 3.578
Work support .921 .904 .091 1.365 4.152
Work load .909 .888 .102 1.415 1.258
Financial assistance .910 .876 .095 1.258 2.859

66
The GFI for Family support is .901 and the AGFI value is .884, indicating a reasonably
good fit, the RMSEA value is .078 which is within the range, indicating a better model fit, the
ECVI value is 2.748, which is positive and within the limit, the Chi-square ratio value of this
model is 3.236 indicating reasonably good fit. (Refer Figure 4.16.2)

The GFI value for Child Care/ Dependent care is .889 and AGFI value is .864, indicating
good fit, RMSEA value is .096 a smaller value indicating a better model and ECVI is 2.349,
which are within the acceptable range indicating a better model fit, the Chi-square ratio value
4.555 indicating reasonably good fit. (Refer Figure 4.16.3)

The GFI value for Self Management is .901 and AGFI value is .884, indicating good fit,
RMSEA value is .083, a smaller value indicating a better model and ECVI is 1.083, which is
positive and closer to zero indicating a better model, the Chi-square ratio value is 4.712
indicating reasonably good fit. (Refer Figure 4.16.4)

The GFI for Work life balance policies is .891 and the AGFI value is .876, indicating a
reasonably good fit, the RMSEA value is .084 which is within the range, indicating a better
model fit, the ECVI value is 1.258, which is positive and within the limit, the Chi-square ratio
value of this model is 3.578 indicating reasonably good fit. (Refer Figure 4.16.5)

The GFI value for Work support is .921 and AGFI value is .904, indicating good fit,
RMSEA value is .091 a smaller value indicating a better model and ECVI is 1.365, which are
within the acceptable range indicating a better model fit, the Chi-square ratio value is 4.152
indicating reasonably good fit. (Refer Figure 4.16.6)

The GFI value for Work load is .909 and AGFI value is .888, indicating good fit, RMSEA
value is .102, a smaller value indicating a better model and ECVI is 1.415, which is positive and
closer to zero indicating a better model, the Chi-square ratio value is 2.258 indicating reasonably
good fit. (Refer Figure 4.16.7)

67
The GFI value for Financial assistance is .910 and AGFI value is .876, indicating good
fit, RMSEA value is .095, a smaller value indicating a better model and ECVI is 1.258, which is
positive and closer to zero indicating a better model, the Chi-square ratio value is 2.859
indicating reasonably good fit. (Refer Figure 4.16.8)

4.3 IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF LIFE - WORK BALANCE IN URBAN AREAS

4.3.1 Important aspects of support given by the family to the women employees working in
banks in urban areas

Test for significance of various aspects of support given by the family to the women
employees working in urban area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to
study the relationships between various aspects of support given by the family to the women
employees working in urban area banks.

Null hypothesis H01(a): All the aspects of support given by the family to the women
employees working in urban areas carry equal importance.

68
Table 4.11
Support given by the family to the women employees working in banks in urban areas

Mean Chi square


Rank value
Spouse shares household activities 12.47
Purchasing vegetables purchased by me or by my spouse 12.56
Cutting vegetables in the evening 12.54
Maintaining kitchen clean 12.53
Able to give healthy food to my spouse and kids 11.66
Spouse pays school fees to my kids 11.33
Family members helps to keep house clean 11.22
Spouse equally concentrates on children studies 10.51
Cup of coffee/tea at least once in a day 10.58
Tasty food with family once in a day 10.59
Support for cooking activity 11.01 86.601**
Support from paid maid for washing work 10.74 (p<.001)
Support from paid maid for cleaning vessels 10.99
Paying electricity, water, phone bill through my family members 11.31
Consulting family members before purchasing valuable asset 11.84
Assistance to purchase grocery items 11.68
Help for preparing sweets & snacks during festivals 11.02
Attention for urgent family issues 11.44
Spouse take care of picking/dropping the kids 11.81
Family support for childrens homework 11.48
Family support for kids to make them ready for school 11.82
Spouse help for pickup/drop to my office 11.88
** Significant at 1% level

The results in the table 4.11 show that the null hypothesis H 0 1(a) is rejected at 1% level.
All the aspects of support given by the family to the women employees working in urban areas
do not carry equal importance.

Further the mean ranks in the table 4.11 shows clearly that Purchasing vegetables
purchased by me or by my spouse, Cutting vegetables in the evening and Maintaining
kitchen clean are the important aspects of support given by the family and Spouse equally

69
concentrates on children studies, Cup of coffee/tea at least once in a day and Tasty food with
family once in a day carries least importance in support given by the family to the women
employees working in urban area banks.

4.3.2 Important aspects of Child care/Dependent care of women employees working in


banks in urban areas

Test for significance of various aspects of Child care/Dependent care of women


employees working in urban area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to
study the relationships between various aspects of Child care/Dependent care of women
employees working in urban area banks.

Null hypothesis H01(b): All the aspects of Child care/Dependent care of women employees
working in urban areas carries equal importance.

Table 4.12
Child care/Dependent care of women employees working in banks in urban areas

Mean Chi square


Rank value
Talk to my children politely 4.39
Patience to hear kid's conversation 4.42
Chat and play with kids 4.30
Taking care of aged parents 4.29 22.852**
Manage elder care through social network 4.49 (p=.002)
Full attention towards children 4.64
Take leave when my child is ill 4.70
Take leave to give attention to dependent 4.78
** significant at 1% level

The result in the table 4.12 shows that the null hypothesis H 0 1(b) is rejected at 1% level.
All the aspects of Child care/Dependent care of women employees working in urban areas do not
carry equal importance. This shows that all the aspects under Child care/Dependent care do not

70
play equal role.

Further the mean ranks in the table 4.12 shows clearly that Taking leave to give attention
to dependent and Taking leave when the child is ill are the important aspects of
Child care/Dependent care and Taking care of aged parents and Chat and play with kids
carries least importance in Child care/Dependent care of women employees working in urban
area banks.

4.3.3 Important aspects of Self management of women employees working in banks in


urban areas

Test for significance of various aspects of Self management of women employees


working in urban area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to study the
relationships between various aspects of Self management of women employees working in
urban area banks.

Null hypothesis H01(c): All the aspects of Self management of women employees working in
urban areas carry equal importance.

Table 4.13
Self-Management of women employees working in banks in urban areas

Mean Chi square


Rank value
Spend time for self development 4.18
Enough time to think, plan for daily activities 4.17
Sufficient time to take care of myself 4.18 15.856*
Engage in my leisure activities 3.82
(p=.015)
Do prayer either in the morning/evening 3.86
Sufficient time to relax myself 3.89
Undergo physical exercise regularly 3.90
* significant at 5% level

71
The result in the table 4.13 shows that the null hypothesis H0 1(c) is rejected at 5% level.
All the aspects of Self management of women employees working in urban areas do not carry
equal importance.

Further the mean ranks in the table 4.13 shows clearly that Spend time for self
development and Sufficient time to take care of myself are the important aspects of Self-
Management and Engage in my leisure activities and Do prayer either in the
morning/evening carries least importance in Self-Management of women employees working in
urban area banks.

4.4 IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF LIFE - WORK BALANCE IN RURAL AREAS

4.4.1 Important aspects of support given by the family to the women employees working in
banks in rural areas

Test for significance of various aspects of support given by the family to the women
employees working in rural area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to
study the relationships between various aspects of support given by the family to the women
employees working in rural area banks.

Null hypothesis H02(a): All the aspects of support given by the family to the women
employees working in rural areas carry equal importance.

72
Table 4.14
Support given by the family to the women employees working in banks in rural areas

Mean Chi square


Rank Value
Spouse shares household activities 13.29
Purchasing vegetables purchased by me or by my spouse 13.42
Cutting vegetables in the evening 13.16
Maintaining kitchen clean 13.06
Able to give healthy food to my spouse and kids 12.39
Spouse pays school fees to my kids 10.44
Family members helps to keep house clean 10.51
Spouse equally concentrates on children studies 10.08
Cup of coffee/tea at least once in a day 10.98
Tasty food with family once in a day 11.74
Support for cooking activity 11.38 221.959**
Support from paid maid for washing work 10.51 (p<.001)
Support from paid main for cleaning vessels 10.31
Paying electricity, water, phone bill through my family members 11.12
Consulting family members before purchasing valuable asset 11.43
Assistance to purchase grocery items 11.24
Help for preparing sweets & snacks during festivals 11.75
Attention for urgent family issues 10.48
Spouse take care of picking/dropping the kids 10.71
Family support for childrens homework 11.60
Family support for kids to make them ready for school 11.35
Spouse help for pickup/drop to my office 12.04
** significant at 1% level

The result in the table 4.14 shows that the null hypothesis H0 2(a) is rejected at 1% level.
All the aspects of support given by the family to the women employees working in rural areas do
not carry equal importance.

Further the mean ranks in the table 4.14 shows clearly that Purchasing vegetables
purchased by me or by my spouse, Spouse shares household activities and Cutting
vegetables in the evening are the important aspects of support given by the family and Spouse
equally concentrates on children studies, Support from paid main for cleaning vessels and

73
Spouse pays school fees to my kids carries least importance in support given by the family to
the women employees working in rural area banks.

4.4.2 Important aspects of Child care/Dependent care of women employees working in


banks in rural areas

Test for significance of various aspects of Child care/Dependent care of women


employees working in rural area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to
study the relationships between various aspects of Child care/Dependent care of women
employees working in rural area banks.

Null hypothesis H02(b): All the aspects of Child care/Dependent care of women employees
working in rural areas carries equal importance.

Table 4.15
Child care/Dependent care of women employees working in banks in rural areas

Mean Rank Chi square


value
Talk to my children politely 4.37
Patience to hear kid's conversation 4.44
Chat and play with kids 4.56
Taking care of aged parents 4.44 4.939
Manage elder care through social network 4.47 (p = .667)
Full attention towards children 4.51
Take leave when my child is ill 4.57
Take leave to give attention to dependent 4.63

The result in the table 4.15 shows that the null hypothesis H 0 2(b) is accepted at 5% level.
All the aspects of Child care/Dependent care of women employees working in rural areas carry
equal importance. This shows that all the aspects under Child care/Dependent care plays equal
role.

74
4.4.3 Important aspects of Self management of women employees working in banks in rural
areas

Test for significance of various aspects of Self management of women employees


working in rural area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to study the
relationships between various aspects of Self management of women employees working in rural
area banks.

Null hypothesis H02(c): All the aspects of Self management of women employees working in
rural areas carry equal importance.

Table 4.16
Self management of women employees working in banks in rural areas

Mean Rank Chi square


value
Spend time for self development 3.96
Enough time to think, plan for daily activities 4.26
Sufficient time to take care of myself 4.07 14.633*
Engage in my leisure activities 3.86
(p = .023)
Do prayer either in the morning/evening 3.82
Sufficient time to relax myself 4.13
Undergo physical exercise regularly 3.89
* significant at 5% level

The result in the table 4.16 shows that the null hypothesis H0 2(c) is rejected at 5% level.
All the aspects of Self management of women employees working in rural areas do not carry
equal importance.

Further the mean ranks in the table 4.16 shows clearly that Enough time to think, plan
for daily activities and Sufficient time to relax myself are the important aspects of Self-
Management and Do prayer either in the morning/evening and Engage in my leisure
activities carries least importance in Self-Management of women employees working in rural
area banks.

75
4.5 IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF WORK - LIFE BALANCE IN URBAN AREAS

4.5.1 Important aspects of Work-Life balance policies of women employees working in


urban area banks

Test for significance of various aspects of Work-Life balance policies of women


employees working in urban area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to
study the relationships between various aspects of Work-Life balance policies of women
employees working in urban area banks.

Null hypothesis H03(a): All the aspects of Work-Life balance policies of women employees
working in urban areas carries equal importance.

Table 4.17
Work-Life balance policies of women employees working in urban area banks

Mean Chi square


Rank value
Specific WLB has been established 5.16
Employees expected to sign WLB policy 5.03
Organization provide family-friendly policies 4.57
Various programmes offered by organization 4.61 65.514**
Access flexible work schedule in my organization 4.88
(p < .001)
Employees expected to attend training programmes 4.82
Employees expected to work from home 5.04
WLB implemented in the organization 5.01
All the employees are aware of WLB policies 5.89
** significant at 1% level

The result in the table 4.17 shows that the null hypothesis H0 3(a) is rejected at 1% level.
All the aspects of Work-Life balance policies of women employees working in urban areas do
not carry equal importance.

Further the mean ranks in the table 4.17 shows clearly that All the employees are aware
of WLB policies and Specific WLB has been established are the important aspects of Work-
Life balance policies and Organization provide family-friendly policies and Various

76
programmes offered by organization carries least importance in Work-Life balance policies of
women employees working in urban area banks.

4.5.2 Important aspects of Workplace Support got by the women employees working in
banks in urban areas

Test for significance of various aspects of Workplace Support got by the women
employees working in urban area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to
study the relationships between various aspects of Workplace Support got by the women
employees working in urban area banks.

Null hypothesis H03(b): All the aspects of Workplace Support got by the women employees
working in urban areas carries equal importance.

Table 4.18
Workplace Support got by the women employees working in banks in urban areas

Mean Chi square


Rank value
All the employees treated equally 7.86
Employees very clear about expectation to be fulfilled 7.39
My superior give important towards well-being of employees 8.38
My attention for urgent family or personal issues 8.46
Organization support for both professional & family life 7.32
Open discussion for work life balance with my superior 7.07
Encouragement to take own decisions 6.98 88.825**
High degree of respect & fair treatment from my boss 6.50 (p < .001)
superior gives me more guidelines to perform my job 7.23
I receive good quality of supervision 7.20
Colleagues understand others non-work situation 7.29
Subordination assist me for successful completing my work 7.42
Good relationship among the employees in my workplace 7.71
Good understanding with my team members 8.19
** significant at 1% level

77
The result in the table 4.18 shows that the null hypothesis H 0 3(b) is rejected at 1% level.
All the aspects of Workplace Support got by the women employees working in urban areas do
not carry equal importance.

Further the mean ranks in the table 4.18 shows clearly that My attention for urgent
family or personal issues, I receive good quality of supervision and Good understanding
with my team members are the important aspects of Workplace Support and High degree of
respect & fair treatment from my boss, Encouragement to take own decisions and Open
discussion for work life balance with my superior carries least importance in Workplace
Support got by the women employees working in urban area banks.

4.5.3 Important aspects of Work load faced by the women employees working in banks in
urban areas

Test for significance of various aspects of Work load faced by the women employees
working in urban area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to study the
relationships between various aspects of Work load faced by the women employees working in
urban area banks.

Null hypothesis H03(c): All the aspects of Work load faced by the women employees
working in urban areas carries equal importance.

78
Table 4.19
Work load faced by the women employees working in banks in urban areas

Mean Chi square


Rank Value
My job keeps me away from my family too much 6.13
My job keeps me away from my family too much 6.28
Feel more respected because of my responsibilities 6.04
My responsibility at work increases my workload 6.47
New ideas to get appreciated in organization create work pressure 5.90 20.659*
I often come home late in the evening 5.81
(p = .024)
I get disturbed when there is delay in completion of work 5.79
I plan my work and perform orderly without any delay 5.78
I am ready to take too many tasks at a full stretch 5.76
I will always finish my work without pending 6.20
I prepare work schedule to fulfill my personal commitment 5.85
* significant at 5% level

The result in the table 4.19 shows that the null hypothesis H0 3(c) is rejected at 5% level.
All the aspects of Work load faced by the women employees working in urban areas do not carry
equal importance.

Further the mean ranks in the table 4.19 shows clearly that My responsibility at work
increases my workload, My job keeps me away from my family too much and I will always
finish my work without pending are the important aspects of work load and I am ready to take
too many tasks at a full stretch, I plan my work and perform orderly without any delay and I
get disturbed when there is delay in completion of work carries least importance in Work load
faced by the women employees working in urban area banks.

79
4.5.4 Important aspects of Financial Assistance offered to the women employees working in
banks in urban areas

Testing the significance of various aspects of Financial Assistance offered to the women
employees working in urban area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to
study the relationships between various aspects of Financial Assistance offered to the women
employees working in urban area banks.

Null hypothesis H03(d): All the aspects of Financial Assistance offered to the women
employees working in urban areas carries equal importance.

Table 4.20
Financial Assistance offered to the women employees working in banks in urban areas

Mean Chi square


Rank Value
Organization provides good compensation for my work 5.20
Enrich my kitchen by financial support from my job 4.60
I can assist my family to buy fixed assets 4.16
I can assist my family to buy household appliances 4.05 74.777**
Repayment of loans is easier for me through my good package 4.14 (p < .001)
I can help my family to solve any problem relevant to money 4.32
I solve my financial problems through my colleagues sometimes 4.68
I get stressed often due to my income level 4.86
** significant at 1% level

The result in the table 4.20 shows that the null hypothesis H 0 3(d) is rejected at 1% level.
All the aspects of Financial Assistance offered to the women employees working in urban areas
do not carry equal importance.

Further the mean ranks in the table 4.20 shows clearly that Organization provides good
compensation for my work and I get stressed often due to my income level are the important
aspects of Financial Assistance and I can assist my family to buy household appliances and
Repayment of loans is easier for me through my good package carries least importance in
Financial Assistance offered to the women employees working in urban area banks.

80
4.6 IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF WORK - LIFE BALANCE IN RURAL AREAS

4.6.1 Important aspects of Work-Life balance policies of women employees working in


rural area banks

Test for significance of various aspects of Work-Life balance policies of women


employees working in rural area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to
study the relationships between various aspects of Work-Life balance policies of women
employees working in rural area banks.

Null hypothesis H04(a): All the aspects of Work-Life balance policies of women employees
working in rural areas carries equal importance.

Table 4.21
Work-Life balance policies of women employees working in rural area banks

Mean Chi square


Rank value
Specific WLB has been established 5.54
Employees expected to sign WLB policy 5.09
Organization provide family-friendly policies 4.49
Various programmes offered by organization 4.90 49.577**
Access flexible work schedule in my organization 5.09
(p < .001)
Employees expected to attend training programmes 5.34
Employees expected to work from home 5.08
WLB implemented in the organization 4.98
All the employees are aware of WLB policies 4.48
** significant at 1% level

The result in the table 4.21 shows that the null hypothesis H0 4(a) is rejected at 1% level.
All the aspects of Work-Life balance policies of women employees working in rural areas do not
carry equal importance.

Further the mean ranks in the table 4.21 shows clearly that Specific WLB has been
established and Employees expected to attend training programmes are the important aspects
of Work-Life balance policies and All the employees are aware of WLB policies and

81
Organization provide family-friendly policies carries least importance in Work-Life balance
policies of women employees working in rural area banks.

4.6.2 Important aspects of Workplace Support got by the women employees working in
banks in rural areas

Test for significance of various aspects of Workplace Support got by the women
employees working in rural area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to
study the relationships between various aspects of Workplace Support got by the women
employees working in rural area banks.

Null hypothesis H04(b): All the aspects of Workplace Support got by the women employees
working in rural areas carries equal importance.

Table 4.22
Workplace Support got by the women employees working in banks in rural areas

Mean Chi square


Rank Value
All the employees treated equally 7.00
Employees very clear about expectation to be fulfilled 7.24
My superior give importance towards well-being of employees 7.74
My attention for urgent family or personal issues 8.25
Organization support for both professional & family life 8.21
Open discussion for work life balance with my superior 8.06
Encouragement to take own decisions 7.92 87.116**
High degree of respect & fair treatment from my boss 7.96 (p < .001)
Superior gives me more guidelines to perform my job 6.78
I receive good quality of supervision 6.91
Colleagues understand others non-work situation 7.18
Subordinates assist me for successful completion of my work 7.50
Good relationship among the employees in my workplace 7.50
Good understanding with my team members 6.74
** significant at 1% level

82
The result in the table 4.22 shows that the null hypothesis H 0 4(b) is rejected at 1% level.
All the aspects of Workplace Support got by the women employees working in rural areas do not
carry equal importance.

Further the mean ranks in the table 4.22 shows clearly that My attention for urgent
family or personal issues, Organization support for both professional & family life and Open
discussion for work life balance with my superior are the important aspects of Workplace
Support and Good understanding with my team members, Superior gives me more guidelines
to perform my job and I receive good quality of supervision carries least importance in
Workplace Support got by the women employees working in rural area banks.

4.6.3 Important aspects of Work load faced by the women employees working in banks in
rural areas

Test for significance of various aspects of Work load faced by the women employees
working in rural area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to study the
relationships between various aspects of Work load faced by the women employees working in
rural area banks.

Null hypothesis H04(c): All the aspects of Work load faced by the women employees
working in rural areas carries equal importance.

83
Table 4.23
Work load faced by the women employees working in banks in rural areas

Mean Chi square


Rank Value
My job keeps me away from my family too much 6.27
My job keeps me away from my family too much 5.96
Feel more respected because of my responsibilities 6.17
My responsibility at work increases my workload 5.94
New ideas to get appreciated in organization create work pressure 6.04 25.087**
I often come home late in the evening 6.02
(p = .005)
I get disturbed when there is delay in completion of work 5.80
I plan my work and perform orderly without any delay 5.65
I am ready to take too many tasks at a full stretch 5.54
I will always finish my work without pending 6.18
I prepare work schedule to fulfill my personal commitment 6.45
** significant at 1% level

The result in the table 4.23 shows that the null hypothesis H0 4(c) is rejected at 1% level.
All the aspects of Work load faced by the women employees working in rural areas do not carry
equal importance.
Further the mean ranks in the table 4.23 shows clearly that I prepare work schedule to
fulfill my personal commitment, My job keeps me away from my family too much and I will
always finish my work without pending are the important aspects of Work load and I am ready
to take too many tasks at a full stretch, I plan my work and perform orderly without any delay
and I get disturbed when there is delay in completion of work carries least importance in Work
load faced by the women employees working in rural area banks.

84
4.6.4 Important aspects of Financial Assistance offered to the women employees working in
banks in rural areas

Testing the significance of various aspects of Financial Assistance offered to the women
employees working in rural area banks. Friedmans test for k-related samples was applied to
study the relationships between various aspects of Financial Assistance offered to the women
employees working in rural area banks.

Null hypothesis H04(d): All the aspects of Financial Assistance offered to the women
employees working in rural areas carries equal importance.

Table 4.24
Financial Assistance offered to the women employees working in banks in rural areas

Mean Chi square


Rank Value
Organization provides good compensation for my work 5.21
Enrich my kitchen by financial support from my job 4.57
I can assist my family to buy fixed assets 4.16
I can assist my family to buy household appliances 4.14 66.811**
Repayment of loans is easier for me through my good package 4.05 (p < .001)
I can help my family to solve any problem relevant to money 4.50
I solve my financial problems through my colleagues sometimes 4.59
I get stressed often due to my income level 4.78
** significant at 1% level

The result in the table 4.24 shows that the null hypothesis H 0 4(d) is rejected at 1% level.
All the aspects of Financial Assistance offered to the women employees working in rural areas
do not carry equal importance.
Further the mean ranks in the table 4.24 shows clearly that Organization provides good
compensation for my work and I get stressed often due to my income level are the important
aspects of Financial Assistance and Repayment of loans is easier for me through my good
package and I can assist my family to buy household appliances carries least importance in
Financial Assistance offered to the women employees working in rural area banks.

85
4.7 INFLUENCE OF DEMOGRAPHICS ON FACTORS OF LIFE - WORK BALANCE
OF WOMEN EMPLOYEES WORKING IN BANKS IN URBAN AREA

4.7.1 Testing for significant influence of women employees age on Life-work balance in
the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees age on Life-work balance in the
personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self management, Personal
life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in urban area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees age on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban
area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 5.1: There is no significant influence of women employees age on (a) Family support
(b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life expectations and (e)
Personal life satisfaction.

Table 4.25 shows the analysis of variance for influence of women employees age on
Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

86
Table 4.25
ANOVA for influence of women employees age on Life-work balance in urban area

Age N Mean SD F-value


Below 30 years 58 88.84 5.546
Family 30-40 years 102 88.15 5.160 1.111
support 41-50 years 102 87.67 4.885 (p=.345)
Above 50 years 38 87.10 4.342
Below 30 years 58 34.84 2.033
Child care/ 30-40 years 102 35.05 2.605 2.009
Dependent care 41-50 years 102 35.66 2.744 (p=.113)
Above 50 years 38 35.73 2.478
Below 30 years 58 27.65 2.474
Self 30-40 years 102 28.02 2.112 1.237
management 41-50 years 102 27.62 2.320 (p=.297)
Above 50 years 38 28.34 2.485
Below 30 years 58 78.20 2.640
Personal life 30-40 years 102 79.10 2.890 1.237
expectations 41-50 years 102 78.87 2.960 (p=.284)
Above 50 years 38 78.65 2.869
Below 30 years 58 71.17 4.222
Personal life 30-40 years 102 72.04 4.344 0.791
satisfaction 41-50 years 102 72.16 3.773 (p=.500)
Above 50 years 38 72.00 4.343

Family support
The obtained 'F' value is 1.111 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on family support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.1(a) that there is no significant influence of


women employees age on family support is accepted.

87
Child care/Dependent care
The obtained 'F' value is 2.009 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on child care/dependent care.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.1 (b) that there is no significant influence of
women employees age on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 'F' value is 1.237 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on self management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.1 (c) that there is no significant influence of
women employees age on self management is accepted.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 'F' value is 1.237 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on personal life expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.1 (d) that there is no significant influence of
women employees age on personal life expectations is accepted.

Personal life satisfaction


The obtained 'F' value is 0.791 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on personal life satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.1 (e) that there is no significant influence of
women employees age on personal life satisfaction is accepted.

88
4.7.2 Testing for significant influence of women employees designation on Life-work
balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees designation on Life-work balance


in the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self management,
Personal life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in urban area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees designation on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in
urban area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 5.2: There is no significant influence of women employees designation on (a) Family


support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life expectations
and (e) Personal life satisfaction.

Table 4.26 shows the analysis of variance for influence of women employees
designation on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

89
Table 4.26
ANOVA for influence of women employees designation on Life-work balance in
urban area

Designation N Mean SD F-value


Officer 66 89.22 5.314
Family Deputy/Assistant 115 88.46 5.282 3.774*
Manager
support (p=.011)
Manager 83 86.77 4.475
Chief Manager 36 87.05 4.458
Officer 66 34.83 1.926
Child care/ Deputy/Assistant 115 35.13 2.723 2.145
Manager
Dependent care (p=.095)
Manager 83 35.67 2.723
Chief Manager 36 35.88 2.458
Officer 66 27.60 2.339
Self Deputy/Assistant 115 27.76 2.245 1.202
Manager
management (p=.309)
Manager 83 27.92 2.278
Chief Manager 36 28.47 2.489
Officer 66 78.33 2.609
Personal life Deputy/Assistant 115 78.98 2.856 .794
Manager
expectations (p=.498)
Manager 83 78.92 3.067
Chief Manager 36 78.75 2.921
Officer 66 71.66 4.524
Personal life Deputy/Assistant 115 72.03 4.156 .156
Manager
satisfaction (p=.926)
Manager 83 72.02 3.738
Chief Manager 36 71.72 4.293
*significant at 5% level

Family support
The obtained 'F' value is 3.774 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees designation on family support.

90
Further, the mean table 4.26 indicates that women employees working as Officers have
scored higher mean value of 89.22 and the lowest mean was scored by the women employees
working as Manager (86.77). This shows that the Officers are having more family support and
Managers are having less family support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.2(a) that there is no significant influence of


women employees designation on family support is rejected.

Child care/Dependent care


The obtained 'F' value is 2.145 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees designation on child care/dependent
care.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.2 (b) that there is no significant influence of
women employees designation on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 'F' value is 1.202 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees designation on self management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.2 (c) that there is no significant influence of
women employees designation on self management is accepted.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 'F' value is 0.794 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees designation on personal life
expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.2 (d) that there is no significant influence of
women employees designation on personal life expectations is accepted.

91
Personal life satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 0.156 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees designation on personal life
satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.2 (e) that there is no significant influence of
women employees designation on personal life satisfaction is accepted.

4.7.3 Testing for significant influence of women employees service on Life-work balance
in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees service on Life-work balance in


the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self management,
Personal life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in urban area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees service on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in
urban area. The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 5.3: There is no significant influence of women employees service on (a) Family


support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life expectations
and (e) Personal life satisfaction.

Table 4.27 shows the analysis of variance for influence of women employees service
on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

92
Table 4.27
ANOVA for influence of women employees service on Life-work balance in urban area

Service N Mean SD F-value

Less than 1year 61 88.86 5.432


Family 1-10 years 110 88.29 5.290 1.554
Support 11-20 years 93 87.43 4.663 (p=.203)
Above 20 years 36 87.05 4.458
Less than 1year 61 34.85 1.981
Child care/ 1-10 years 110 35.16 2.777 1.698
Dependent care 11-20 years 93 35.55 2.610 (p=.167)
Above 20 years 36 35.88 2.458
Less than 1year 61 27.52 2.500
Self 1-10 years 110 27.96 2.286 1.469
Management 11-20 years 93 27.72 2.102 (p=.223)
Above 20 years 36 28.47 2.489
Less than 1year 61 78.21 2.582
Personal life 1-10 years 110 78.93 2.733 1.144
Expectations 11-20 years 93 79.03 3.163 (p=.333)
Above 20 years 36 78.75 2.921
Less than 1year 61 71.21 4.309
Personal life 1-10 years 110 71.82 4.061 1.364
Satisfaction 11-20 years 93 72.54 4.001 (p=.254)
Above 20 years 36 71.72 4.293

Family support
The obtained 'F' value is 1.554 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on family support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.3(a) that there is no significant influence of


women employees service on family support is accepted.

93
Child care/Dependent care
The obtained 'F' value is 1.698 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on child care/dependent care.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.3 (b) that there is no significant influence of
women employees service on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 'F' value is 1.469 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on self management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.3 (c) that there is no significant influence of
women employees service on self management is accepted.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 'F' value is 1.144 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on personal life expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.3 (d) that there is no significant influence of
women employees service on personal life expectations is accepted.

Personal life satisfaction


The obtained 'F' value is 1.364 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on personal life satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.3 (e) that there is no significant influence of
women employees service on personal life satisfaction is accepted.

94
4.7.4 Testing for significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Life-work
balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Life-work


balance in the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self
management, Personal life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in
urban area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees monthly salary on Life-work balance in the personal environment working in
banking sector in urban area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 5.4: There is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on (a)


Family support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life
expectations and (e) Personal life satisfaction.

Table 4.28 shows the analysis of variance for influence of women employees monthly
salary on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

95
Table 4.28
ANOVA for influence of women employees monthly salary on Life-work balance in
urban area

Monthly salary N Mean SD F-value

Less than Rs.20,000 64 89.17 5.388


Family 20,001-30,000 120 87.65 5.062 2.196
Support 30,001-40,000 82 88.13 4.965 (p=.089)
Above 40,000 34 86.64 4.241
Less than Rs.20,000 64 34.79 1.945
Child care/ 20,001-30,000 120 35.51 2.728 2.553
Dependent care 30,001-40,000 82 35.07 2.711 (p=.057)
Above 40,000 34 36.11 2.332
Less than Rs.20,000 64 27.62 2.373
Self 20,001-30,000 120 27.99 2.031 1.196
Management 30,001-40,000 82 27.63 2.521 (p=.311)
Above 40,000 34 28.38 2.534
Less than Rs.20,000 64 78.40 2.616
Personal life 20,001-30,000 120 78.70 3.027 1.232
expectations 30,001-40,000 82 79.28 2.754 (p=.298)
Above 40,000 34 78.67 2.992
Less than Rs.20,000 64 71.56 4.556
Personal life 20,001-30,000 120 72.06 3.847 .222
satisfaction 30,001-40,000 82 71.90 4.221 (p=.881)
Above 40,000 34 72.05 4.177

Family support
The obtained 'F' value is 2.196 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on family support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.4(a) that there is no significant influence of


women employees monthly salary on family support is accepted.

96
Child care/Dependent care
The obtained 'F' value is 2.553 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on child
care/dependent care.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.4 (b) that there is no significant influence of
women employees monthly salary on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 'F' value is 1.196 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on self management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.4 (c) that there is no significant influence of
women employees monthly salary on self management is accepted.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 'F' value is 1.232 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on personal life
expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.4 (d) that there is no significant influence of
women employees monthly salary on personal life expectations is accepted.

Personal life satisfaction


The obtained 'F' value is 0.222 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on personal life
satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.4 (e) that there is no significant influence of
women employees monthly salary on personal life satisfaction is accepted.

97
4.7.5 Testing for significant influence of women employees marital status on Life-work
balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees marital status on Life-work


balance in the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self
management, Personal life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in
urban area.

Independent samples t-test was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of
women employees marital status on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking
sector in urban area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 5.5: There is no significant influence of women employees marital status on (a) Family
support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life expectations
and (e) Personal life satisfaction.

Table 4.29 shows the t-test for influence of women employees marital status on Life-
work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

98
Table 4.29
t-test for influence of women employees marital status on Life-work balance in urban
area

Marital status N Mean SD t-value


Family Single 69 89.15 4.720 2.198*
Support Married 231 87.64 5.107 (p=.029)
Child care/ Single 69 35.04 2.277 .988
Dependent care Married 231 35.38 2.628 (p=.324)
Self Single 69 27.39 2.184 2.000*
Management Married 231 28.00 2.329 (p=.048)
Personal life Single 69 77.97 2.485 2.753**
expectations Married 231 79.04 2.935 (p=.006)
Personal life Single 69 72.69 3.703 1.800
satisfaction Married 231 71.67 4.228 (p=.073)
* Significant at 5% level

Family support
The obtained 't' value is 2.198 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees marital status on family support.

Further, the mean table 4.29 indicates that the women employees living as single have
scored higher mean value of 89.15 than the married women employees (87.64). This shows that
the women employees living as single are getting good family support than the married women
employees.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.5(a) that there is no significant influence of


women employees marital status on family support is rejected.

Child care/Dependent care


The obtained 't' value is 0.988 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees marital status on child
care/dependent care.

99
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.5 (b) that there is no significant influence of
women employees marital status on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 't' value is 2.000 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees marital status on self management.

Further, the mean table 4.29 indicates that the married women employees have scored
higher mean value of 28.00 than the women employees living as single (27.39). This shows that
the married women employees are good in self management than the women employees living as
single.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.5 (c) that there is no significant influence of
women employees marital status on self management is rejected.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 't' value is 2.753 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees marital status on personal life expectations.

Further, the mean table 4.29 indicates that married women employees have scored higher
mean value of 79.04 than the women employees living as single (77.97). This shows that the
married women employees Personal life expectations are more as compared with women
employees living as single.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.5 (d) that there is no significant influence of
women employees marital status on personal life expectations is rejected.

Personal life satisfaction


The obtained 't' value is 1.800 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees marital status on personal life

100
satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.5 (e) that there is no significant influence of
women employees marital status on personal life satisfaction is accepted.

4.7.6 Testing for significant influence of women employees family size on Life-work
balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees family size on Life-work balance
in the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self management,
Personal life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in urban area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees family size on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in
urban area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 5.6: There is no significant influence of women employees family size on (a) Family
support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life expectations
and (e) Personal life satisfaction.

Table 4.30 shows the analysis of variance for influence of women employees family
size on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

101
Table 4.30
ANOVA for influence of women employees family size on Life-work balance in
urban area

Family size N Mean SD F-value


Family Up to 3 119 88.67 5.124 2.107
3-5 127 87.74 5.513
Support (p=.123)
Above 5 54 87.09 3.366
Up to 3 119 34.98 2.580
Child care/ 3-5 127 35.55 2.674 1.646
Dependent care (p=.195)
Above 5 54 35.46 2.125
Up to 3 119 27.51 2.174
Self 3-5 127 27.96 2.428 2.925
Management (p=.055)
Above 5 54 28.38 2.218
Personal life Up to 3 119 79.15 3.082 1.578
3-5 127 78.61 2.757
Expectations (p=.208)
Above 5 54 78.44 2.596
Up to 3 119 71.89 4.311
Personal life 3-5 127 71.65 4.110 .944
Satisfaction (p=.390)
Above 5 54 72.57 3.749

Family support
The obtained 'F' value is 2.107 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on family support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.6(a) that there is no significant influence of


women employees family size on family support is accepted.

Child care/Dependent care


The obtained 'F' value is 1.646 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on child care/dependent
care.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.6 (b) that there is no significant influence of

102
women employees family size on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 'F' value is 2.925 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on self management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.6 (c) that there is no significant influence of
women employees family size on self management is accepted.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 'F' value is 1.578 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on personal life
expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.6 (d) that there is no significant influence of
women employees family size on personal life expectations is accepted.

Personal life satisfaction


The obtained 'F' value is 0.944 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on personal life
satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.6 (e) that there is no significant influence of
women employees family size on personal life satisfaction is accepted.

103
4.7.7 Testing for significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Life-
work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Life-


work balance in the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self
management, Personal life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in
urban area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees number of dependents on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking
sector in urban area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 5.7: There is no significant influence of women employees number of dependents on


(a) Family support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life
expectations and (e) Personal life satisfaction.

Table 4.31 shows the analysis of variance for influence of women employees number
of dependents on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban
area.

104
Table 4.31
ANOVA for influence of women employees number of dependents on Life-work
balance in urban area

Number of N Mean SD F-value


dependents
Family Up to 1 140 88.20 4.865 1.286
2 104 88.23 5.361
Support (p=.278)
More than 2 56 87.01 4.897
Up to 1 140 34.92 2.574
Child care/ 2 104 35.55 2.440 3.144*
Dependent care (p=.045)
More than 2 56 35.80 2.603
Up to 1 140 27.79 2.277
Self 2 104 27.86 2.369 .190
Management (p=.827)
More than 2 56 28.01 2.300
Personal life Up to 1 140 79.01 3.058 .958
2 104 78.50 2.658
Expectations (p=.385)
More than 2 56 78.80 2.759
Up to 1 140 72.41 4.408
Personal life 2 104 71.82 3.559 3.051*
Satisfaction (p=.049)
More than 2 56 70.82 4.243
*significant at 5% level

Family support
The obtained 'F' value is 1.286 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees number of dependents on family
support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.7(a) that there is no significant influence of


women employees number of dependents on family support is accepted.

Child care/Dependent care


The obtained 'F' value is 3.144 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees number of dependents on child
care/dependent care.

105
Further, the mean table 4.31 indicates that the women employees having more than 2
dependents have scored higher mean value of 35.80 and the women employees having only one
dependent (34.92). This shows that the women employees with more than 2 dependents are
concentrating more on child care/dependent care and the women employees with up to one
dependent are concentrating less on child care/dependent care.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.7(b) that there is no significant influence of


women employees number of dependents on child care/dependent care is rejected.

Self management
The obtained 'F' value is 0.190 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees number of dependents on self
management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.7(c) that there is no significant influence of


women employees number of dependents on self management is accepted.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 'F' value is 0.958 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees number of dependents on personal
life expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.7(d) that there is no significant influence of


women employees number of dependents on personal life expectations is accepted.

Personal life satisfaction


The obtained 'F' value is 3.051 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees number of dependents on personal life
satisfaction.

106
Further, the mean table 4.31 indicates that the women employees having up to one
dependent have scored higher mean value of 72.41 than the women employees having more than
2 dependents (70.82). This shows that the women employees having up to one dependent are
more satisfied in personal life and the women employees having more than 2 dependents are less
satisfied in personal life.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.7(e) that there is no significant influence of


women employees number of dependents on personal life satisfaction is rejected.

4.7.8 Testing for significant influence of women employees type of bank on Life-work
balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees type of bank on Life-work


balance in the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self
management, Personal life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in
urban area.

Independent samples t-test was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of
women employees type of bank on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking
sector in urban area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 5.8: There is no significant influence of women employees type of bank on (a) Family
support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life expectations
and (e) Personal life satisfaction.

Table 4.32 shows the t-test for influence of women employees type of bank on Life-
work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in urban area.

107
Table 4.32
t-test for influence of women employees type of bank on Life-work balance in urban
area

Type of bank N Mean SD t-value

Family Nationalised 204 88.52 5.128 2.707**


Support Private 96 86.85 4.717 (p=.007)
Child care/ Nationalised 204 35.15 2.738 1.567
Dependent care Private 96 35.64 2.077 (p=.118)
Self Nationalised 204 27.67 2.296 2.018*
Management Private 96 28.25 2.294 (p=.044)
Personal life Nationalised 204 79.07 2.977 2.456*
expectations Private 96 78.20 2.541 (p=.011)
Personal life Nationalised 204 72.14 4.404 1.431
satisfaction Private 96 71.41 3.444 (p=.153)
* significant at 5% level ** significant at 1% level

Family support
The obtained 't' value is 2.707 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on family support.

Further, the mean table 4.32 indicates that women employees working in Nationalised
banks have scored higher mean value of 88.52 than the women employees working in Private
banks (86.85). This shows that the women employees working in Nationalised Banks are getting
good support from their families than the women employees working in Private Banks.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.8(a) that there is no significant influence of


women employees type of bank on family support is rejected.

Child care/Dependent care


The obtained 't' value is 1.567 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees type of bank on child care/dependent
care.

108
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.8(b) that there is no significant influence of
women employees type of bank on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 't' value is 2.018 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on self management.

Further, the mean table 4.32 indicates that the women employees working in Private
Banks have scored higher mean value of 28.25 than the women employees working in
Nationalised Banks (27.67). This shows that the women employees working in Private Bank are
good in self management as compared with the women employees working in Nationalised
Banks.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.8(c) that there is no significant influence of


women employees type of bank on self management is rejected.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 't' value is 2.456 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on personal life expectations.

Further, the mean table 4.32 indicates that the women employees working in Nationalised
Banks have scored higher mean value of 79.07 than the women employees working in Private
Banks ( 78.20 ). This shows that the women employees working in Nationalised Banks are
having more expectations in their personal life as compared with the women employees working
in Private Banks.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.8(d) that there is no significant influence of


women employees type of bank on personal life expectations is rejected.

109
Personal life satisfaction
The obtainedt value is 1.431 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees type of bank on personal life
satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 5.8(e) that there is no significant influence of


women employees type of bank on personal life satisfaction is accepted.

4.8 INFLUENCE OF DEMOGRAPHICS ON FACTORS OF LIFE WORK BALANCE


OF WOMEN EMPLOYEES WORKING IN BANKS IN RURAL AREAS

4.8.1 Testing for significant influence of women employees age on Life-work balance in
the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees age on Life-work balance in the
personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self management, Personal
life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in rural area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees age on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural
area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 6.1: There is no significant influence of women employees age on (a) Family support
(b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life expectations and (e)
Personal life satisfaction.

110
Table 4.33 shows the analysis of variance for influence of women employees age on
Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

Table 4.33
ANOVA for influence of women employees age on Life-work balance in rural area

Age N Mean SD F-value


Below 30 years 66 86.90 2.912
Family 30-40 years 98 87.76 5.192 1.203
support 41-50 years 93 87.32 4.787 (p=.309)
Above 50 years 43 88.51 4.822
Below 30 years 66 35.18 2.245
Child care/ 30-40 years 98 35.27 2.794 .353
Dependent care 41-50 years 93 35.00 2.368 (p=.787)
Above 50 years 43 34.86 2.695
Below 30 years 66 28.13 2.067
Self 30-40 years 98 28.73 2.199 2.421
management 41-50 years 93 28.74 2.475 (p=.086)
Above 50 years 43 29.30 2.121
Below 30 years 66 78.50 3.513
Personal life 30-40 years 98 78.17 3.641 6.256**
expectations 41-50 years 93 80.03 2.559 (p<.001)
Above 50 years 43 78.34 2.942
Below 30 years 66 69.54 4.420
Personal life 30-40 years 98 69.62 3.832 4.588**
satisfaction 41-50 years 93 69.61 3.423 (p=.004)
Above 50 years 43 72.00 4.358
** Significant at 1% level

Family support
The obtained 'F' value is 1.203 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on family support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.1(a) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees age on family support is accepted.

111
Child care/Dependent care
The obtained 'F' value is 0.353 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on child care/dependent care.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.1(b) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees age on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 'F' value is 2.421 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on self management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.1 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on self management is accepted.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 'F' value is 6.256 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees age on personal life expectations.

Further, the mean table 4.33 indicates that the women employees with age 41-50 years
have scored higher mean value of 80.03 and the lowest mean was scored by the women
employees with age 30-40 years (78.17). This shows that the women employees with age of 41-
50 years are having more expectations in personal life and the women employees with age of 30-
40 years are having fewer expectations in personal life.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.1 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on personal life expectations is rejected.

Personal life satisfaction


The obtained 'F' value is 4.588 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees age on personal life satisfaction.

112
Further, the mean table 4.33 indicates that the women employees with age above 50 years
have scored higher mean value of 72.00 and the lowest mean was scored by the women
employees with age below 30 years (69.54). This shows that the women employees with age
above 50 years are having more satisfaction in personal life and the women employees with age
below 30 years are having less satisfaction in personal life.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.1 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on personal life satisfaction is rejected.

4.8.2 Testing for significant influence of women employees designation on Life-work


balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees designation on Life-work balance


in the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self management,
Personal life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in rural area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees designation on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in
rural area. The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 6.2: There is no significant influence of women employees designation on (a) Family


support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life satisfaction
and (e) Personal life expectations.

Table 4.34 shows the analysis of variance for influence of women employees
designation on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

113
Table 4.34
ANOVA for influence of women employees designation on Life-work balance in
rural area

Designation N Mean SD F-value


Officer 66 86.90 2.912
Family Deputy/Assistant 107 88.12 5.177 2.285
Manager
support (p=.079)
Manager 87 86.86 4.595
Chief Manager 40 88.55 5.002
Officer 66 35.18 2.245
Child care/ Deputy/Assistant 107 35.05 2.854 .076
Manager
Dependent care (p=.973)
Manager 87 35.17 2.226
Chief Manager 40 35.00 2.745
Officer 66 28.13 2.067
Self Deputy/Assistant 107 28.64 2.245 3.046*
Manager
management (p=.029)
Manager 87 28.79 2.426
Chief Manager 40 29.47 2.099
Officer 66 78.50 3.513
Personal life Deputy/Assistant 107 78.43 3.603 3.204*
Manager
expectations (p=.024)
Manager 87 79.75 2.689
Chief Manager 40 78.52 2.978
Officer 66 69.54 4.420
Personal life Deputy/Assistant 107 69.93 3.841 3.019*
Manager
satisfaction (p=.030)
Manager 87 69.48 3.559
Chief Manager 40 71.62 4.288
* Significant at 5% level

Family support
The obtained 'F' value is 2.285 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees designation on family support.

114
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.2(a) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on family support is accepted.

Child care/Dependent care


The obtained 'F' value is 0.076 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant mean influence of women employees designation on child
care/dependent care.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.2(b) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees designation on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 'F' value is 3.046 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees designation on self management.

Further, the mean table 4.34 indicates that the Chief Managers have scored higher mean
value of 29.47 and the lowest mean was scored by Officers (28.13). This shows that the Chief
Managers are more comfortable in self management and the Officers are less comfortable in self
management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.2 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on self management is rejected.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 'F' value is 3.204 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees designation on personal life expectations.

Further, the mean table 4.34 indicates that the Managers have scored higher mean value
of 79.75 and the lowest mean was scored by Deputy/Assistant Managers (78.43). This shows that
the Managers are having more expectations in personal life and the Deputy/Assistant Managers
are having fewer expectations in personal life.

115
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.2 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on personal life expectations is rejected.

Personal life satisfaction


The obtained 'F' value is 3.019 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees designation on personal life satisfaction.

Further, the mean table 4.34 indicates that the Chief Managers have scored higher mean
value of 71.62 and the lowest mean was scored by the Managers (69.48). This shows that the
Chief Managers are having more satisfaction in personal life and the Managers are having less
satisfaction in personal life.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.2 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on personal life satisfaction is rejected.

4.8.3 Testing for significant influence of women employees service on Life-work balance
in the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees service on Life-work balance in


the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self management,
Personal life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) of the women employees working in
banking sector in rural area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees service on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural
area. The following null hypotheses were framed:

116
H0 6.3: There is no significant influence of women employees service on (a) Family
support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life expectations
and (e) Personal life satisfaction.

Table 4.35 shows the analysis of variance for influence of women employees service
on Life-work balance in personal environment in rural area banks.

Table 4.35
ANOVA for influence of women employees service on Life-work balance in rural area

Service N Mean SD F-value


Less than 1year 66 86.90 2.912
Family support 1-10 years 104 87.20 5.264 1.643
11-20 years 99 87.93 4.528 (p=.180)
Above 20 years 31 88.80 5.192
Less than 1year 66 35.18 2.245
Child care/ 1-10 years 104 35.17 2.703 0.151
Dependent care 11-20 years 99 34.96 2.430 (p=.929)
Above 20 years 31 35.19 2.891
Less than 1year 66 28.13 2.067
Self 1-10 years 104 28.51 2.306 4.338**
Management 11-20 years 99 28.87 2.291 (p=.005)
Above 20 years 31 29.80 2.088
Less than 1year 66 78.50 3.513
Personal life 1-10 years 104 78.10 3.519 4.667**
expectations 11-20 years 99 79.72 3.053 (p=.003)
Above 20 years 31 79.25 1.914
Less than 1year 66 69.54 4.420
Personal life 1-10 years 104 69.70 3.997 1.771
satisfaction 11-20 years 99 70.00 3.319 (p=.153)
Above 20 years 31 71.41 4.842
** Significant at 1% level

117
Family support
The obtained 'F' value is 1.643 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on family support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.3 (a) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on family support is accepted.

Child care/Dependent care


The obtained 'F' value is 0.151 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on child care/dependent care.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.3 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 'F' value is 4.338 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees service on self management.

Further, the mean table 4.35 indicates that the women employees with above 20 years of
service have scored higher mean value of 29.80 and the lowest mean was scored by women
employees with less than one year service ( 28.13 ). This shows that the women employees with
above 20 years of service are more comfortable with self management and the women employees
with less than one year service are less comfortable with self management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.3 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on self management is rejected.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 'F' value is 4.667 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees service on personal life expectations.

118
Further, the mean table 4.35 indicates that the women employees with 11-20 years of
service have scored higher mean value of 79.72 and the lowest mean was scored by the women
employees having 1-10 years of service ( 78.10 ). This shows that the women employees with
11-20 years of service are having more expectations in personal life and the women employees
with 1-10 years of service are having fewer expectations in personal life.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.3 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on personal life expectations is rejected.

Personal life satisfaction


The obtained 'F' value is 1.771 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on personal life satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.3 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on personal life satisfaction is accepted.

4.8.4 Testing for significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Life-work
balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Life-work


balance in the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self
management, Personal life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in rural
area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees monthly salary on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector
in rural area. The following null hypotheses were framed:

119
H0 6.4: There is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on (a)
Family support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life
expectations and (e) Personal life satisfaction.

Table 4.36 shows the analysis of variance for influence of women employees monthly
salary on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

Table 4.36
ANOVA for influence of women employees monthly salary on Life-work balance in rural
area

Monthly salary N Mean SD F-value


Less than Rs.20,000 66 86.90 2.912
Family 20,001-30,000 116 87.75 5.286 1.221
support 30,001-40,000 81 87.29 4.354 (p=.302)
Above 40,000 37 88.59 5.187
Less than Rs.20,000 66 35.18 2.245
Child care/ 20,001-30,000 116 35.07 2.810 .356
Dependent care 30,001-40,000 81 35.25 2.183 (p=.785)
Above 40,000 37 34.75 2.832
Less than Rs.20,000 66 28.13 2.067
Self 20,001-30,000 116 28.77 2.242 2.453
management 30,001-40,000 81 28.70 2.522 (p=.063)
Above 40,000 37 29.35 1.932
Less than Rs.20,000 66 78.50 3.513
Personal life 20,001-30,000 116 79.28 3.348 1.757
expectations 30,001-40,000 81 78.88 3.126 (p=.156)
Above 40,000 37 78.00 2.972
Less than Rs.20,000 66 69.54 4.420
Personal life 20,001-30,000 116 69.44 3.906 5.088**
satisfaction 30,001-40,000 81 69.92 3.121 (p=.002)
Above 40,000 37 72.24 4.548
** Significant at 1% level

120
Family support
The obtained 'F' value is 1.221 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on family support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.4(a) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees monthly salary on family support is accepted.

Child care/Dependent care


The obtained 'F' value is 0.356 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on child
care/dependent care.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.4 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 'F' value is 2.453 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on self management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.4 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on self management is accepted.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 'F' value is 1.757 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on personal life
expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.4 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on personal life expectations is accepted.

121
Personal life satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 5.088 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees monthly salary on personal life satisfaction.

Further, the mean table 4.36 indicates that the women employees with monthly salary of
above Rs. 40,000 have scored higher mean value of 72.24 and the lowest mean was scored by the
women employees earning Rs.20,001-30,000 as monthly salary ( 69.44 ). This shows that the
women employees with monthly salary of above Rs.40, 000 are having more satisfaction in
personal life and the women employees earning monthly salary Rs.20,001-30,000 are having less
satisfaction in personal life.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.4 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on personal life satisfaction is rejected.

4.8.5 Testing for significant influence of women employees marital status on Life-work
balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees marital status on Life-work


balance in the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self
management, Personal life satisfaction and Personal life expectations) in banking sector in rural
area.

Independent samples t-test was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of
women employees marital status on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking
sector in rural area. The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 6.5: There is no significant influence of women employees marital status on (a) Family
support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life satisfaction
and (e) Personal life expectations.

122
Table 4.37 shows the t-test for influence of women employees marital status on Life-
work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

Table 4.37
t-test for influence of women employees marital status on Life-work balance in rural area

Marital status N Mean SD t-value


Family Single 73 86.49 4.406 2.265*
Support Married 227 87.88 4.619 (p=.024)
Child care/ Single 73 34.91 2.431 .746
Dependent care Married 227 35.17 2.562 (p=.456)
Self Single 73 28.76 2.031 .348
Management Married 227 28.66 2.341 (p=.728)
Personal life Single 73 77.63 2.997 3.701**
expectations Married 227 79.23 3.298 (p<.001)
Personal life Single 73 69.20 3.774 1.819
satisfaction Married 227 70.18 4.049 (p=.070)
*significant at 5% level ** significant at 1% level

Family support
The obtained t value is 2.265 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees marital status on family support.

Further, the mean table 4.37 indicates that the married women employees have scored
higher mean value of 87.88 than the women employees living as single ( 86.49 ). This shows that
the married women employees are getting more support from their families than the women
employees living as single in rural area.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.5(a) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees marital status on family support is rejected.

123
Child care/Dependent care
The obtainedt value is 0.746 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees marital status on child
care/dependent care.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.5 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtainedt value is 0.348 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees marital status on self management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.5 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on self management is accepted.

Personal life expectations


The obtained t value is 3.701 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees marital status on personal life expectations.

Further, the mean table 4.37 indicates that the married women employees have scored
higher mean value of 79.23 than the women employees living as single (77.63). This shows that
the married women employees are having more expectations in personal life than the women
employees living as single.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.5 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on personal life expectations is rejected.

Personal life satisfaction


The obtained t value is 1.819 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees marital status on personal life
satisfaction.

124
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.5 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on personal life satisfaction is accepted.

4.8.6 Testing for significant influence of women employees family size on Life-work
balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees family size on Life-work balance
in the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self management,
Personal life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in rural area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees family size on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in
rural area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 6.6: There is no significant influence of women employees family size on (a) Family
support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life expectations
and (e) Personal life satisfaction.

Table 4.38 shows the analysis of variance for influence of women employees family
size on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

125
Table 4.38
ANOVA for influence of women employees family size on Life-work balance in rural area

Family size N Mean SD F-value


Family Up to 3 96 86.93 4.474 1.904
3-5 120 87.52 4.596
Support (p=.151)
Above 5 84 88.27 4.699
Up to 3 96 34.96 2.593
Child care/ 3-5 120 35.10 2.447 .352
Dependent care (p=.704)
Above 5 84 35.28 2.590
Up to 3 96 28.34 2.256
Self 3-5 120 28.92 2.359 1.793
Management (p=.168)
Above 5 84 28.73 2.117
Personal life Up to 3 96 79.00 3.371 8.637**
3-5 120 79.55 3.070
expectations (p<.001)
Above 5 84 77.66 3.235
Up to 3 96 70.28 4.642
Personal life 3-5 120 69.40 3.640 1.859
satisfaction (p=.158)
Above 5 84 70.33 3.641
** significant at 1% level

Family support
The obtained 'F' value is 1.904 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on family support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.6(a) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees family size on family support is accepted.

Child care/Dependent care


The obtained 'F' value is 0.352 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on child care/dependent
care.

126
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.6 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees family size on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 'F' value is 1.793 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on self management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.6 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees family size on self management is accepted.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 'F' value is 8.637 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees family size on personal life expectations.

Further, the mean table 4.38 indicates that the women employees with family size of 3 -5
members have scored higher mean value of 79.55 and the lowest mean was scored by the women
employees with family size of above 5 members ( 77.66 ). This shows that the women employees
with family size of 3 - 5 are having more expectations in personal life and the women employees
with family size of above 5 members are having fewer expectations in personal life.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.6 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees family size on personal life expectations is rejected.

Personal life satisfaction


The obtained 'F' value is 1.859 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on personal life
satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.6 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees family size on personal life satisfaction is accepted.

127
4.8.7 Testing for significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Life-
work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Life-


work balance in the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self
management, Personal life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in rural
area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees number of dependents on Life-work balance in the personal environment of the
women employees working in banking sector in rural area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 6.7: There is no significant influence of women employees number of dependents on


(a) Family support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life
expectations and (e) Personal life satisfaction.

Table 4.39 shows the analysis of variance for influence of women employees number
of dependents on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

128
Table 4.39
ANOVA for influence of women employees number of dependents on Life-work balance
in rural area

Number of dependents N Mean SD F-value


Family Up to 1 96 86.96 4.283 1.161
2 111 87.72 4.721
support (p=.315)
More than 2 93 87.92 4.759
Up to 1 96 35.00 2.538
Child care/ 2 111 35.45 2.617 1.830
Dependent care (p=.162)
More than 2 93 34.80 2.387
Up to 1 96 28.18 2.295
Self 2 111 28.72 2.343 4.392*
management (p=.013)
More than 2 93 29.15 2.053
Personal life Up to 1 96 78.93 3.148 12.273**
2 111 79.81 2.849
expectations (p<.001)
More than 2 93 77.60 3.560
Up to 1 96 70.25 4.257
Personal life 2 111 69.51 3.974 1.035
satisfaction (p=.356)
More than 2 93 70.13 3.746
* significant at 5% level ** significant at 1% level

Family support
The obtained 'F' value is 1.161 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees number of dependents on family
support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.7(a) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on family support is accepted.

Child care/Dependent care


The obtained 'F' value is 1.83 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is no significant influence of women employees Number of dependents on child

129
care/dependent care.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.7(b) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees Number of dependents on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 'F' value is 4.392 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees number of dependents on self management.

Further, the mean table 4.39 indicates that the women employees having more than two
dependents have scored higher mean value of 29.15 and the lowest mean was scored by the
women employees with up to one dependent (28.18). This shows that the women employees with
more than two dependents are more comfortable in self management and the women employees
with up to one dependent are less comfortable in self management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.7(c) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on self management is rejected.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 'F' value is 12.273 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees number of dependents on personal life
expectations.

Further, the mean table 4.39 indicates that the women employees with exactly two
dependents have scored higher mean value of 79.81 and the lowest mean was scored by the
women employees with more than two dependents (77.60). This shows that the women
employees with exactly two dependents are having more expectations in personal life and the
women employees with more than two dependents are having fewer expectations in personal life.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.7(d) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on personal life expectations is rejected.

130
Personal life satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 1.035 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees number of dependents on personal
life satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.7(e) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on personal life satisfaction is accepted.

4.8.8 Testing for significant influence of women employees type of bank on Life-work
balance in the personal environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees type of bank on Life-work


balance in the personal environment (Family support, Child care/Dependent care, Self
management, Personal life expectations and Personal life satisfaction) in banking sector in rural
area.

Independent samples t-test was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of
women employees type of bank on Life-work balance in the personal environment in banking
sector in rural area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 6.8: There is no significant influence of women employees type of bank on (a) Family
support (b) Child care/Dependent care (c) Self management (d) Personal life expectations
and (e) Personal life satisfaction.

Table 4.40 shows the t-test for influence of women employees type of bank on Life-
work balance in the personal environment in rural area.

131
Table 4.40
t-test for influence of women employees type of bank on Life-work balance in rural area

Banking sector N Mean SD t-value


Family Nationalized 135 88.53 4.334 3.420**
Support Private 165 86.73 4.666 (p=.001)
Child care/ Nationalised 135 35.17 2.801 .419
Dependent care Private 165 35.05 2.290 (p=.675)
Self Nationalised 135 28.00 2.168 4.927**
Management Private 165 29.24 2.195 (p<.000)
Personal life Nationalised 135 80.80 2.294 10.986**
expectations Private 165 77.24 3.130 (p<.001)
Personal life Nationalised 135 70.37 4.891 1.707
satisfaction Private 165 69.58 3.05 (p=.089)
** significant at 1% level

Family support
The obtained 't' value is 3.420 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on family support.

Further, the mean table 4.40 indicates that the women employees working in Nationalised
Banks have scored higher mean value of 88.53 than the women employees working in Private
Banks ( 86.73 ). This shows that the women employees working in Nationalised banks are
getting more support from their families than the women employees working in Private Banks.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.8(a) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees type of bank on family support is rejected.

Child care/Dependent care


The obtained 't' value is 0.419 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees type of bank on child care/dependent
care.

132
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.8(b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees type of bank on child care/dependent care is accepted.

Self management
The obtained 't' value is 4.927 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on self management.

Further, the mean table 4.40 indicates that the women employees working in Private
Banks have scored higher mean value of 29.24 than the women employees working in
Nationalised Banks ( 28.00 ). This shows that the women employees working in Private Banks
are more comfortable than the women employees working in Nationalised Banks towards self-
management.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.8(c) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees type of bank on self management is rejected.

Personal life expectations


The obtained 't' value is 10.986 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant mean influence of women employees type of bank on personal life
expectations.

Further, the mean table 4.40 indicates that the women employees working in Nationalised
Banks have scored higher mean value of 80.80 than the women employees working in Private
Banks (77.24). This shows that the women employees working in Nationalised Banks are having
more expectations in personal life than the women employees working in Private Banks.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.8(d) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees type of bank on personal life expectations is rejected.

133
Personal life satisfaction
The obtained 't' value is 1.707 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant mean influence of women employees type of bank on personal life
satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 6.8(e) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees type of bank on personal life satisfaction is accepted.

4.9 INFLUENCE OF DEMOGRAPHICS ON FACTORS OF WORK - LIFE BALANCE


OF WOMEN EMPLOYEES WORKING IN BANKS IN URBAN AREA

4.9.1 Testing for significant influence of women employees age on Work-life balance in
the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees age on Work-life balance in the
work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load, Financial
assistance, Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in urban area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees age on Work-life balance in the work environment of the women employees in
banking sector in urban area. The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 7.1: There is no significant influence of women employees age on (a) Work life balance
policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e) Work
expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.41shows the analysis of variance of influence of women employees age on


Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

134
Table 4.41
ANOVA for influence of women employees age on Work-life balance in urban area

Age N Mean SD F-value


Work life Below 30 years 58 36.00 4.104
30-40 years 102 37.02 3.895 1.470
balance policies
41-50 years 102 36.65 4.438 (p=.223)
Above 50 years 38 35.55 4.584
Below 30 years 58 54.81 8.554
Work place 30-40 years 102 56.70 7.483 2.639
support
41-50 years 102 55.74 8.068 (p=.051)
Above 50 years 38 52.50 9.114
Below 30 years 58 38.97 6.399
Work load 30-40 years 102 36.59 6.330 3.607*
41-50 years 102 36.58 6.590 (p=.014)
Above 50 years 38 39.53 6.455
Below 30 years 58 31.29 5.328
Financial 30-40 years 102 32.70 4.635 2.040
assistance
41-50 years 102 32.46 4.759 (p=.108)
Above 50 years 38 30.79 5.933
Below 30 years 58 61.17 1.948
Work 30-40 years 102 60.87 1.663 1.734
expectations
41-50 years 102 61.41 1.505 (P=.160)
Above 50 years 38 61.13 1.818
Work Below 30 years 58 53.48 9.557
30-40 years 102 56.42 8.601 2.200
satisfaction
41-50 years 102 55.77 9.021 (p=.088)
Above 50 years 38 52.92 10.339
* Significant at 5% level

Work life balance policies


The obtained 'F' value is 1.470 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on Work life balance policies.

135
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.1 (a) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on Work life balance policies is accepted.

Work place support


The obtained 'F' value is 2.639 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on Work place support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.1 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on Work place support is accepted.

Work load
The obtained 'F' value is 3.607 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees age on Work load.

Further, the mean table 4.41 indicates that women employees with age above 50 years
have scored higher mean value of 39.53 and the lowest mean was scored by the women
employees with age 41 50 years (36.58). This shows that the women employees with age above
50 years are having more work load and the women employees with age 41-50 years are feeling
that their work load is less.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.1 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on Work load is accepted.

Financial assistance
The obtained 'F' value is 2.040 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on financial assistance.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.1 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on Financial assistance is rejected.

136
Work expectations
The obtained 'F' value is 1.734 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on Work expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.1 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on Work expectations is accepted.

Work satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 2.200 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on Work satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.1 (f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on Work satisfaction is accepted.

4.9.2 Testing for significant influence of women employees designation on Work-life


balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees designation on Work-life balance


in the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load, Financial
assistance , Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in urban area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees designation on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in
urban area. The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 7.2: There is no significant influence of women employees designation on (a) Work life
balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e) Work
expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

137
Table 4.42 shows the analysis of variance of influence of women employees
designation on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

Table 4.42
ANOVA for influence of women employees designation on Work-life balance in urban
area

Designation N Mean SD F-value


Officer 66 36.33 3.967
Work life Deputy/Assistant 115 37.10 3.999 1.750
balance policies Manager
(p=.157)
Manager 83 36.33 4.481
Chief Manager 36 35.36 4.636
Officer 66 55.35 8.148
Work place Deputy/Assistant 115 56.81 7.516 3.257*
support Manager
(p=.022)
Manager 83 55.22 8.323
Chief Manager 36 52.03 9.135
Officer 66 38.12 6.439
Work load Deputy/Assistant 115 36.47 6.315 2.994*
Manager
(p=.031)
Manager 83 37.07 6.735
Chief Manager 36 39.94 6.374
Officer 66 31.71 5.131
Financial Deputy/Assistant 115 32.84 4.601 2.135
assistance Manager
(p=.096)
Manager 83 32.06 4.915
Chief Manager 36 30.56 6.012
Officer 66 61.18 1.897
Work Deputy/Assistant 115 60.85 1.607 3.362*
expectations Manager
(p=.019)
Manager 83 61.60 1.561
Chief Manager 36 60.97 1.732
Officer 66 54.39 9.308
Work Deputy/Assistant 115 56.57 8.653 2.141
satisfaction Manager
(p=.095)
Manager 83 55.11 9.185
Chief Manager 36 52.42 10.393
* Significant at 5% level

138
Work life balance policies
The obtained 'F' value is 1.750 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees designation on Work life balance
policies.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.2 (a) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on Work life balance policies is accepted.

Work place support


The obtained 'F' value is 3.257 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees designation on Work place support.

Further, the mean table 4.42 indicates that women employees working as
Deputy/Assistant Managers have scored higher mean value of 56.81 and the lowest mean was
scored by women employees working as Chief managers ( 52.03 ). This shows that the women
employees working as Deputy/Assistant Managers are getting more support from the work place
and the Chief Managers are getting less support in their work places.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.2 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on Work place support is rejected.

Work load
The obtained 'F' value is 2.994 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees designation on Work load.

Further, the mean table 4.42 indicates that the Chief Managers have scored higher mean
value of 39.94 and the lowest mean was scored by the Deputy/Assistant Managers ( 36.47 ). This
shows that the Chief Managers are having more work load and the Deputy/Assistant Managers
are having less Work load.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.2 (c) that there is no significant influence of

139
the women employees designation on Work load is rejected.

Financial assistance
The obtained 'F' value is 2.135 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees designation on financial assistance.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.2 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on Financial assistance is accepted.

Work expectations
The obtained 'F' value is 3.362 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees designation on Work expectations.

Further, the mean table 4.42 indicates that the Managers have scored higher mean value
of 61.60 and the lowest mean was scored by the Deputy/Assistant Managers (60.85). This shows
that the Managers are having more expectations in work and the Deputy/Assistant Managers are
having less Work expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.2 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on Work expectations is rejected.

Work satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 2.141 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees designation on Work satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.2 (f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on Work satisfaction is accepted.

140
4.9.3 Testing for significant influence of women employees service on Work-life balance
in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees service on Work-life balance in


the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load, Financial
assistance , Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in urban area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees service on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban
area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 7.3: There is no significant influence of women employees service on (a) Work life
balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e) Work
expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.43 shows the analysis of variance of influence of women employees service
on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

141
Table 4.43
ANOVA for influence of women employees service on Work-life balance in the urban
area

Service N Mean SD F-value


Work life Less than 1year 61 36.02 4.089
1-10 years 110 36.85 4.125 1.647
balance policies
11-20 years 93 36.88 4.222 (p=.179)
Above 20 years 36 35.36 4.636
Less than 1year 61 54.79 8.418
Work place 1-10 years 110 56.50 7.536 3.064*
support
11-20 years 93 56.04 8.096 (p=.028)
Above 20 years 36 52.03 9.135
Less than 1year 61 38.93 6.387
Work load 1-10 years 110 36.54 6.656 4.333**
11-20 years 93 36.48 6.188 (p=.005)
Above 20 years 36 39.94 6.374
Less than 1year 61 31.30 5.321
Financial 1-10 years 110 32.68 4.747 2.435
assistance
11-20 years 93 32.55 4.579 (p=.065)
Above 20 years 36 30.56 6.012
Less than 1year 61 61.23 1.927
Work 1-10 years 110 61.05 1.689 .493
expectations
11-20 years 93 61.28 1.542 (p=.687)
Above 20 years 36 60.97 1.732
Work Less than 1year 61 53.56 9.512
1-10 years 110 55.96 8.704 2.574
satisfaction
11-20 years 93 56.42 8.903 (p=.054)
Above 20 years 36 52.42 10.393
* significant at 5% level ** significant at 1% level

Work life balance policies


The obtained 'F' value is 1.647 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on Work life balance policies.

142
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.3 (a) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on Work life balance policies is accepted.

Work place support


The obtained 'F' value is 3.064 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees service on Work place support.

Further, the mean table 4.43 indicates that the women employees with service 1 10
years have scored higher mean value of 56.50 and the lowest mean was scored by women
employees having above 20 years of service ( 52.03 ). This shows that the women employees
having service less than 10 years are getting more support from the work place and the women
employees having more than 20 years are getting less support from the work place.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.3 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on Work place support is rejected.

Work load
The obtained 'F' value is 4.333 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees service on Work load.

Further, the mean table 4.43 indicates that women employees having more than 20 years
of services have scored higher mean value of 39.94 and the lowest mean was scored by women
employees having 11-20 years of services ( 36.48 ). This shows that the women employees with
more than 20 years of services are feeling that they are having more work load and the women
employees having 11-20 years of experience are feeling that they are having less work load.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.3 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on Work load is rejected.

143
Financial assistance
The obtained 'F' value is 2.435 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on financial assistance.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.3 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on Financial assistance is accepted.

Work expectations
The obtained 'F' value is .493 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is no significant influence of women employees service on Work expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.3 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on Work expectations is accepted.

Work satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 2.574 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on Work satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.3 (f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on Work satisfaction is accepted.

144
4.9.4 Testing for significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work-life
balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work-life


balance in the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load,
Financial assistance , Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in urban area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees monthly salary on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in
urban area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 7.4: There is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on (a) Work
life balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e)
Work expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.44 shows the analysis of variance of influence of women employees monthly
salary on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

145
Table 4.44
ANOVA for influence of women employees monthly salary on Work-life balance in urban
area

Monthly salary N Mean SD F-value


Work life Less than Rs.20,000 64 36.22 3.974
20,001-30,000 120 36.59 4.200 2.170
balance policies
30,001-40,000 82 37.21 4.189 (p=.092)
Above 40,000 34 35.09 4.628
Less than Rs.20,000 64 55.20 8.233
Work place 20,001-30,000 120 55.55 7.827 4.194**
support
30,001-40,000 82 57.24 7.785 (p=.006)
Above 40,000 34 51.44 9.063
Less than Rs.20,000 64 38.34 6.412
Work load 20,001-30,000 120 37.45 6.717 5.494**
30,001-40,000 82 35.43 5.886 (p=.001)
Above 40,000 34 40.35 6.324
Less than Rs.20,000 64 31.58 5.154
Financial 20,001-30,000 120 32.10 4.946 2.929*
assistance
30,001-40,000 82 33.22 4.269 (p=.034)
Above 40,000 34 30.41 6.160
Less than Rs.20,000 64 61.16 1.921
Work 20,001-30,000 120 61.08 1.708 0.587
expectations
30,001-40,000 82 61.33 1.466 (p=.624)
Above 40,000 34 60.91 1.764
Work Less than Rs.20,000 64 54.09 9.294
20,001-30,000 120 55.22 8.902 3.519*
satisfaction
30,001-40,000 82 57.41 8.689 (p=.016)
Above 40,000 34 51.79 10.362
* significant at 5% level **significant at 1% level

Work life balance policies


The obtained 'F' value is 2.170 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work life balance

146
policies.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.4 (a) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on Work life balance policies is accepted.

Work place support


The obtained 'F' value is 4.194 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work place support.

Further, the mean table 4.44 indicates that women employees with monthly salary of Rs.
30,001 40,000 have scored higher mean value of 57.24 and the lowest mean was scored by
women employees earning above Rs. 40,000 as monthly salary ( 51.44 ). This shows that the
women employees with monthly salary of Rs. 30,001 40,000 are getting more support from
work place and the women employees with monthly salary above Rs. 40,000 are getting less
support from work place.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.4 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on Work place support is rejected.

Work load
The obtained 'F' value is 5.494 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work load.

Further, the mean table 4.44 indicates that the women employees with monthly salary of
above Rs. 40,000 have scored higher mean value of 40.35 and the lowest mean was scored by
women employees earning Rs. 30,001 - 40,000 as monthly salary ( 35.43 ). This shows that the
women employees with monthly salary of above Rs. 40,000 are having more work load and the
women employees with monthly salary of Rs.30, 001- 40,000 are having less work load.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.4 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on Work load is rejected.

147
Financial assistance
The obtained 'F' value is 2.929 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees monthly salary on financial assistance.

Further, the mean table 4.44 indicates that the women employees with monthly salary of
Rs. 30,001 40,000 have scored higher mean value of 33.22 and the lowest mean was scored by
women employees earning above Rs. 40,000 as monthly salary ( 30.41 ). This shows that the
women employees with monthly salary of Rs. 30,001 40,000 are getting more financial
assistance and the women employees with monthly salary above Rs. 40,000 are getting less
financial assistance.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.4 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on Financial assistance is rejected.

Work expectations
The obtained 'F' value is 0.587 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.4 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on Work expectations is accepted.

Work satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 3.519 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work satisfaction.

Further, the mean table 4.44 indicates that the women employees with monthly salary of
Rs. 30,001 40,000 have scored higher mean value of 57.41 and the lowest mean was scored by
women employees earning above Rs. 40,000 as monthly salary ( 51.79 ). This shows that the
women employees with monthly salary of Rs. 30,001 40,000 are having more satisfaction
towards their work and the women employees with monthly salary above Rs. 40,000 are having
less satisfaction towards their work.

148
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.4 (f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on Work satisfaction is accepted.

4.9.5 Testing for significant influence of women employees marital status on Work-life
balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees marital status on Work-life


balance in the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load,
Financial assistance, Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in urban area.

Independent samples t-test was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of
women employees marital status on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking
sector in urban area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 7.5: There is no significant influence of women employees marital status on (a) Work
life balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e)
Work expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.45 shows the t-test for influence of women employees marital status on Work-
life balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

149
Table 4.45
t-test for influence of women employees marital status on Work-life balance in urban
area

Marital N Mean SD t-value


status
Work life balance Single 69 36.65 3.842 .318
policies Married 231 36.47 4.340 (p=.751)
Work place Single 69 56.00 7.891 .609
support Married 231 55.32 8.271 (p=.543)
Work load Single 69 36.65 6.259 1.108
Married 231 37.65 6.608 (p=.269)
Financial Single 69 32.61 4.936 .953
assistance Married 231 31.95 5.044 (p=.341)
Work Single 69 61.09 2.085 332
expectations Married 231 61.16 1.568 (p=.740)
Work Single 69 55.86 9.015 .682
satisfaction Married 231 54.99 9.288 (p=.496)

Work life balance policies


The obtainedt value is .318 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is no significant influence of women employees marital status on Work life balance
policies.
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.5 (a) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on Work life balance policies is accepted.

Work place support


The obtainedt value is .609 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is no significant influence of women employees marital status on Work place support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.5 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on Work place support is accepted.

150
Work load
The obtainedt value is 1.108 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees marital status on Work load.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.5 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on Work load is accepted.

Financial assistance
The obtainedt value is .953 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is no significant influence of women employees marital status on financial assistance.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.5 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on Financial assistance is accepted.

Work expectations
The obtainedt value is .332 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is no significant influence of women employees marital status on Work expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.5 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on Work expectations is accepted.

Work satisfaction
The obtainedt value is .682 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is no significant influence of women employees marital status on Work satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.5 (f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on Work satisfaction is accepted.

151
4.9.6 Testing for significant influence of women employees family size on Work-life
balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees family size on Work-life balance
in the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load, Financial
assistance, Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in urban area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees family size on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in
urban area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 7.6: There is no significant influence of women employees family size on (a) Work life
balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e) Work
expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.46 shows the analysis of variance of influence of women employees family size
on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

152
Table 4.46
ANOVA for influence of women employees family size on Work-life balance in the urban
area

Family size N Mean SD F-value


Work life balance Up to 3 119 37.18 3.732 3.114*
policies 3-5 127 36.30 4.437
(p=.046)
Above 5 54 35.54 4.563
Work place Up to 3 119 57.12 7.596 5.312**
support 3-5 127 55.00 8.165
(p=.005)
Above 5 54 52.96 8.791
Work load Up to 3 119 36.33 6.369 4.993**
3-5 127 37.48 6.506
(p=.007)
Above 5 54 39.67 6.478
Financial Up to 3 119 32.71 4.375 2.544
assistance 3-5 127 32.06 5.235
(p=.080)
Above 5 54 30.87 5.650
Work Up to 3 119 61.20 1.735 2.767
expectations 3-5 127 61.30 1.678
(p=.064)
Above 5 54 60.67 1.602
Work Up to 3 119 56.44 8.511 2.782
satisfaction 3-5 127 54.98 9.483
(p=.065)
Above 5 54 52.93 9.773
* significant at 5% level ** significant at 1% level

Work life balance policies


The obtained 'F' value is 3.114 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees family size on Work life balance policies.

Further, the mean table 4.46 indicates that the women employees with family size up to 3
members have scored higher mean value of 37.18 and the lowest mean was scored by the women
employees with family size of above 5 members ( 35.54 ). This shows that the women employees
with family size of up to 3 members are more comfortable with the work life balance policies
and the women employees with family size above 5 members are less comfortable with the work
life balance policies.

153
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.6(a) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees family size on Work life balance policies is rejected.

Work place support


The obtained 'F' value is 5.312 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees family size on Work place support.

Further, the mean table 4.46 indicates that the women employees with family size up to 3
members have scored higher mean value of 57.12 and the lowest mean was scored by the women
employees with family size of above 5 members ( 52.96 ). This shows that the women employees
with family size up to 3 members are getting more support from the work place and the women
employees with family size above 5 members are getting less support from the work place in
banks in urban area.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.6 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees family size on Work place support is rejected.

Work load
The obtained 'F' value is 4.993 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees family size on Work load.

Further, the mean table 4.46 indicates that the women employees with family size of
above 5 members have scored higher mean value of 39.67 and the lowest mean was scored by
the women employees with family size of up to 3 members ( 36.33 ). This shows that the women
employees who have family size of above 5 members are feeling that they are having more work
load and the women employees with family size of above 5 members are feeling that they are
having less work load.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.6 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees family size on Work load is rejected.

154
Financial assistance
The obtained 'F' value is 2.544 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on Financial assistance.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.6 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees family size on Financial assistance is accepted.

Work expectations
The obtained 'F' value is 2.767 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on Work expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.6 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees family size on Work expectations is accepted.

Work satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 2.782 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on Work satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.6 (f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees family size on Work satisfaction is accepted.

155
4.9.7 Testing for significant influence of women employees number of dependents on
Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Work-


life balance in the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work
load, Financial assistance, Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in urban
area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees number of dependents on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking
sector in urban area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 7.7: There is no significant influence of women employees number of dependents on


(a) Work life balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial
assistance (e) Work expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.47 shows the analysis of variance of influence of women employees number of
dependents on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

156
Table 4.47
ANOVA for influence of women employees number of dependents on Work-life balance
in urban area

Number of N Mean SD F-value


dependents
Work life Up to 1 140 37.79 3.422 12.922**
balance policies 2 104 35.40 4.542
(p< .001)
More than 2 56 35.38 4.587
Work place Up to 1 140 58.07 6.522
2 104 53.32 8.559 14.476**
support
(p< .001)
More than 2 56 52.98 9.304
Up to 1 140 35.63 5.584
Work load 2 104 38.51 7.002 11.343**
(p< .001)
More than 2 56 39.86 6.700
Financial Up to 1 140 33.49 3.956
2 104 30.96 5.470 10.754**
assistance
(p< .001)
More than 2 56 30.75 5.664
Work Up to 1 140 61.14 1.847
2 104 61.25 1.550 0.457
expectations
(p=.634)
More than 2 56 60.98 1.578
Work Up to 1 140 57.79 7.580 11.112**
satisfaction 2 104 52.93 9.848
(p< .001)
More than 2 56 52.89 10.147
** Significant at 1% level

Work life balance policies


The obtained 'F' value is 12.922 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Work life balance
policies.

Further, the mean table 4.47 indicates that the women employees having dependents up to
one members have scored higher mean value of 37.79 and the lowest mean was scored by the
women employees having dependents more than two members (35.38). This shows that the

157
women employees having up to one dependent are more satisfied towards the work life balance
policies and the women employees having more than two dependents are less satisfied towards
the work life balance policies.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.7(a) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on Work life balance policies is rejected.

Work place support


The obtained 'F' value is 14.476 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Work place
support.

Further, the mean table 4.47 indicates that the women employees having dependents up to
one members have scored higher mean value of 58.07 and the lowest mean was scored the
women employees having more than two dependents (52.98). This shows that the women
employees having up to 1 dependent are getting more support in work place and the women
employees having more than two dependents are getting less support in work place.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.7(b) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on Work place support is rejected.

Work load
The obtained 'F' value is 11.343 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Work load.

Further, the mean table 4.47 indicates that the women employees having more than two
dependents have scored higher mean value of 39.86 and the lowest mean was scored by the
women employees having up to one dependent (35.63). This shows that the women employees
having more than two dependents are feeling that their work load is more and the women
employees having up to one dependent are accepted that their work load is less.

158
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.7(c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees number of dependents on Work load is rejected.

Financial assistance
The obtained 'F' value is 10.754 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Financial
assistance.

Further, the mean table 4.47 indicates that the women employees having up to one
dependent have scored higher mean value of 33.49 and the lowest mean was scored by the
women employees having more than two dependents (30.75). This shows that the women
employees with up to one dependent are more comfortable with the financial assistance and the
women employees with more than two dependents are less comfortable with the financial
assistance offered by the banks in urban area.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.7(d) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on Financial assistance is rejected.

Work expectations
The obtained 'F' value is 0.457 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Work
expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.7(e) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on Work expectations is accepted.

Work satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 11.112 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Work satisfaction.

Further, the mean table 4.47 indicates that the women employees having upto one

159
dependent have scored higher mean value of 57.79 and the lowest mean was scored by the
women employees having more than two dependents ( 52.89 ). This shows that the women
employees having up to one dependent are more satisfied towards their work and the women
employees having more than two dependents are less satisfied towards their work in banks in
urban area.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.7(f) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on Work satisfaction is rejected.

4.9.8 Testing for significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work-life
balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

To test the significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work-life


balance in the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load,
Financial assistance, Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in urban area.

Independent samples t-test was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of
women employees age on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in
urban area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 7.8: There is no significant influence of women employees type of bank on (a) Work
life balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e)
Work expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.48 shows the t-test for influence of women employees type of bank on Work-
life balance in the work environment in banking sector in urban area.

160
Table 4.48
t-test for influence of women employees type of bank on Work-life balance in the urban
area

Type of bank N Mean SD t-value


Work life Nationalised 204 39.25 1.197 5.786**
balance policies Private 96 36.68 1.599 (p<.001)
Work place Nationalised 204 50.81 1.901 5.115**
support Private 96 45.14 3.423 (p<.001)
Work load Nationalised 204 39.18 2.263 4.315**
Private 96 43.43 1.646 (p<.001)
Financial Nationalised 204 33.39 1.404 7.931**
assistance Private 96 29.13 1.637 (p<.001)
Work Nationalised 204 61.21 1.792 0.954
expectations Private 96 61.01 1.476 (p=.341)
Work Nationalised 204 54.34 1.891 4.091**
satisfaction Private 96 49.13 2.476 (p<.001)
**significant at 1% level

Work life balance policies


The obtained t value is 5.786 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work life balance policies.

Further, the mean table 4.48 indicates that the women employees working in Nationalised
Bank have scored higher mean value of 39.25 than the women employees working in Private
Banks ( 36.68 ). This shows that the women employees working in Nationalised Banks are more
satisfied with the work life balance policies and the women employees working in Nationalised
Banks are less satisfied with the work life balance policies.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.8 (a) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees type of bank on Work life balance policies is rejected.

Work place support


The obtained t value is 5.115 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that

161
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work place support.

Further, the mean table 4.48 indicates that the women employees working in Nationalised
Banks have scored higher mean value of 50.81 than the women employees working in Private
Banks ( 45.14 ). This shows that the women employees working in Nationalised Banks are
getting good support in their work place and the women employees working in Private Banks are
getting less support in the work place.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.8 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees type of bank on Work place support is rejected.

Work load
The obtainedt value is 4.315 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work load.

Further, the mean table 4.48 indicates that the women employees working in Private
banks have scored higher mean value of 43.43 than the women employees working in
Nationalised Banks ( 39.18 ). This shows that the women employees working in Private Banks
are facing more work load than the women employees working in Nationalised banks.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.8 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees type of bank on Work load is rejected.

Financial assistance
The obtainedt value is 7.931 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on Financial assistance.

Further, the mean table 4.48 indicates that the women employees working in Nationalised
banks have scored higher mean value of 33.39 than the women employees working in Private
Banks (29.13). This shows that the women employees working in Nationalised banks are more
satisfied with the finance assistance offered by their banks than the women employees working

162
in Private Banks in urban area.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.8 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees type of bank on Financial assistance is rejected.

Work expectations
The obtainedt value is 0.954 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.8 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees type of bank on Work expectations is accepted.

Work satisfaction
The obtainedt value is 4.091 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work satisfaction.

Further, the mean table 4.48 indicates that the women employees working in Nationalised
Banks have scored higher mean value of 54.34 than the women employees working in Private
Banks ( 49.13 ). This shows that the women employees working in Nationalised Bank are having
good satisfaction towards their work than the women employees working in Private Banks in
urban area.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 7.8 (f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees type of bank on Work satisfaction is rejected.

163
4.10 INFLUENCE OF DEMOGRAPHICS ON FACTORS OF WORK - LIFE BALANCE
OF WOMEN EMPLOYEES WORKING IN BANKS IN RURAL AREAS

4.10.1 Testing for significant influence of women employees age on Work-life balance in
the work environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees age on Work-life balance in the
work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load, Financial
assistance, Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in rural area, one way
ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women employees age
on Work-life balance in the work environment of the women employees in banking sector in
rural area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 8.1: There is no significant influence of women employees age on (a) Work life balance
policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e) Work
expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.49 shows the analysis of variance of influence of women employees age on
Work-life balance in the work environment by the women employees in banking sector in rural
area.

164
Table 4.49
ANOVA for influence of women employees age on Work-life balance in rural area

Age N Mean SD F-value


Work life balance Below 30 years 66 27.00 2.700
30-40 years 98 26.42 2.512 2.437
policies
41-50 years 93 27.42 2.379 (p=.065)
Above 50 years 43 28.05 7.247
Work place Below 30 years 66 43.09 6.314
30-40 years 98 42.91 6.890 2.808*
support
41-50 years 93 44.84 7.073 (p=.040)
Above 50 years 43 41.42 6.737
Below 30 years 66 40.73 7.268
Work load 30-40 years 98 40.97 7.338 2.939*
41-50 years 93 38.52 7.223 (p=.034)
Above 50 years 43 41.91 7.047
Financial Below 30 years 66 30.05 5.205
30-40 years 98 29.71 5.655 3.447*
assistance
41-50 years 93 31.26 5.082 (p=.017)
Above 50 years 43 28.19 5.430
Work Below 30 years 66 61.50 2.099
30-40 years 98 61.23 1.686 1.149
expectations
41-50 years 93 61.68 1.431 (p=.329)
Above 50 years 43 61.60 1.734
Work Below 30 years 66 42.45 8.473
30-40 years 98 42.31 7.819 4.417**
satisfaction
41-50 years 93 45.29 8.217 (p=.005)
Above 50 years 43 40.33 7.634
* significant at 5% level ** significant at 1% level

Work life balance policies


The obtained 'F' value is 2.437 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on Work life balance policies.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.1 (a) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on Work life balance policies is accepted.

165
Work place support
The obtained 'F' value is 2.808 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees age on Work place support.

Further, the mean table 4.49 indicates that the women employees with age of 41-50 years
have scored higher mean value of 44.84 and the lowest mean was scored by the women
employees with above 50 years of age ( 41.42 ). This shows that the women employees with age
of 41-50 years are getting more support in work place and the women employees with age above
50 years are getting less support in work place.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.1 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on Work place support is rejected.

Work load
The obtained 'F' value is 2.939 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees age on Work load.

Further, the mean table 4.49 indicates that the women employees with age above 50 years
have scored higher mean value of 41.91 and the lowest mean was scored by the women
employees with 41 50 years of age ( 38.52 ). This shows that the women employees with age
above 50 years are having more work load and the women employees with age 41-50 years are
having less work load.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.1 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on Work load is rejected.

Financial assistance
The obtained 'F' value is 3.447 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees age on financial assistance.

Further, the mean table 4.49 indicates that the women employees with age 41-50 years

166
have scored higher mean value of 31.26 and the lowest mean was scored by the women
employees with above 50 years of age ( 28.19 ). This shows that the women employees with age
41-50 years are more satisfied with the financial assistance offered by the banks and the women
employees with age above 50 years are less satisfied with the financial assistance offered by the
banks.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.1 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on Financial assistance is rejected.

Work expectations
The obtained 'F' value is 1.149 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees age on Work expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.1 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on Work expectations is accepted.

Work satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 4.417 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees age on Work satisfaction.

Further, the mean table 4.49 indicates that the women employees with age of 41-50 years
have scored higher mean value of 45.29 and the lowest mean was scored by the women
employees with above 50 years of age ( 40.33 ). This shows that the women employees with age
of 41-50 years are having more satisfaction towards the work and the women employees with
age above 50 years are having less satisfaction towards the work.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.1 (f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees age on Work satisfaction is rejected.

167
4.10.2 Testing for significant influence of women employees designation on Work-life
balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural area

To test the significant influence of women employees designation on Work-life balance


in the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load, Financial
assistance , Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in rural area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees designation on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in
rural area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 8.2: There is no significant influence of women employees designation on (a) Work life
balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e) Work
expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.50 shows the analysis of variance of influence of women employees


designation on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural area.

168
Table 4.50
ANOVA for influence of women employees designation on Work-life balance in rural
area

Designation N Mean SD F-value


Officer 66 27.00 2.700
Work life balance Deputy/Assistant 107 26.69 2.626 1.301
policies Manager
(p=.274)
Manager 87 27.24 2.282
Chief Manager 40 27.98 7.516
Officer 66 43.09 6.314
Work place Deputy/Assistant 107 43.64 7.030 2.580
support Manager
(p=.054)
Manager 87 44.31 7.019
Chief Manager 40 40.78 6.542
Officer 66 40.73 7.268
Work load Deputy/Assistant 107 40.33 7.383 3.139*
Manager
(p=.026)
Manager 87 38.72 7.433
Chief Manager 40 42.88 6.301
Officer 66 30.05 5.205
Financial Deputy/Assistant 107 30.16 5.612 4.322**
assistance Manager
(p=.005)
Manager 87 31.10 5.259
Chief Manager 40 27.45 4.878
Officer 66 61.50 2.099
Work Deputy/Assistant 107 61.33 1.647 0.601
expectations Manager
(p=.615)
Manager 87 61.55 1.484
Chief Manager 40 61.73 1.739
Officer 66 42.45 8.473
Work Deputy/Assistant 107 43.07 7.929 5.208**
satisfaction Manager
(p=.002)
Manager 87 45.07 8.510
Chief Manager 40 39.08 6.306
* significant at 5% level ** significant at 1% level

169
Work life balance policies
The obtained 'F' value is 1.301 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees designation on Work life balance
policies.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.2(a) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees designation on Work life balance policies is accepted.

Work place support


The obtained 'F' value is 2.580 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees designation on Work place support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.2 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on Work place support is accepted.

Work load
The obtained 'F' value is 3.139 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees designation on Work load.

Further, the mean table 4.50 indicates that the Chief Managers have scored higher mean
value of 42.88 and the lowest mean was scored by the Managers (38.72). This shows that the
Chief Managers are having more work load and the Managers are having less work load.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.2 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on Work load is rejected.

Financial assistance
The obtained 'F' value is 4.322 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees designation on financial assistance.

170
Further, the mean table 4.50 indicates that the Managers have scored higher mean value
of 31.10 and the lowest mean was scored by the Chief Managers (27.45). This shows that the
Managers are more satisfied with the financial assistance offered by the banks and the Chief
Managers are less satisfied with the financial assistance offered by the banks.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.2 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on Financial assistance is rejected.

Work expectations
The obtained 'F' value is 0.601 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees designation on Work expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.2 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on Work expectations is accepted.

Work satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 5.208 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees designation on Work satisfaction.

Further, the mean table 4.50 indicates that the Managers have scored higher mean value
of 45.07 and the lowest mean was scored by the Chief managers (39.08). This shows that the
Managers are more satisfied with their work and the Chief Managers are less satisfied with their
work.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.2 (f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees designation on Work satisfaction is rejected.

171
4.10.3 Testing for significant influence of women employees service on Work-life balance
in the work environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees service on Work-life balance in


the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load, Financial
assistance, Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in rural area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees service on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural
area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 8.3: There is no significant influence of women employees service on (a) Work life
balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e) Work
expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.51 shows the analysis of variance of influence of women employees service
on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural area.

172
Table 4.51
ANOVA for influence of women employees service on Work-life balance in rural area

Service N Mean SD F-value


Work life Less than 1year 66 27.00 2.700
1-10 years 104 26.65 2.621 2.238
balance policies
11-20 years 99 27.15 2.256 (p=.084)
Above 20 years 31 28.55 8.445
Less than 1year 66 43.09 6.314
Work place 1-10 years 104 43.63 6.949 0.970
support
11-20 years 99 43.76 7.068 (p=.407)
Above 20 years 31 41.48 7.061
Less than 1year 66 40.73 7.268
Work load 1-10 years 104 40.48 7.358 1.392
11-20 years 99 39.24 7.386 (p=.245)
Above 20 years 31 42.06 6.894
Less than 1year 66 30.05 5.205
Financial 1-10 years 104 29.88 5.653 2.368
assistance
11-20 years 99 30.88 5.177 (p=.071)
Above 20 years 31 27.97 5.444
Less than 1year 66 61.50 2.099
Work 1-10 years 104 61.37 1.690 0.602
expectations
11-20 years 99 61.48 1.402 (p=.614)
Above 20 years 31 61.84 1.899
Work Less than 1year 66 42.45 8.473
1-10 years 104 42.84 8.082 1.920
satisfaction
11-20 years 99 44.27 8.483 (p=.126)
Above 20 years 31 40.45 6.552

Work life balance policies


The obtained 'F' value is 2.238 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on Work life balance policies.

173
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.3(a) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on Work life balance policies is accepted.

Work place support


The obtained 'F' value is 0.970 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on Work place support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.3 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on Work place support is accepted.

Work load
The obtained 'F' value is 1.392 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on Work load.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.3 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on Work load is accepted.

Financial assistance
The obtained 'F' value is 2.368 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on financial assistance.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.3 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on Financial assistance is accepted.

Work expectations
The obtained 'F' value is 0.602 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on Work expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.3 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on Work expectations is accepted.

174
Work satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 1.920 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees service on Work satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.3 (f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees service on Work satisfaction is accepted.

4.10.4 Testing for significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work-life
balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work-life


balance in the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load,
Financial assistance, Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in rural area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees monthly salary on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in
rural area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 8.4: There is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on (a) Work
life balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e)
Work expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.52 shows the analysis of variance of influence of women employees monthly
salary on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural area.

175
Table 4.52
ANOVA for influence of women employees monthly salary on Work-life balance in rural
area

Monthly salary N Mean SD F-value


Work life balance Less than Rs.20,000 66 27.00 2.700
20,001-30,000 116 26.84 2.423 1.924
policies
30,001-40,000 81 27.85 5.590 (p=.126)
Above 40,000 37 26.35 2.251
Less than Rs.20,000 66 43.09 6.314
Work place 20,001-30,000 116 44.19 7.065 1.111
support
30,001-40,000 81 42.81 6.955 (p=.345)
Above 40,000 37 42.22 6.945
Less than Rs.20,000 66 40.73 7.268
Work load 20,001-30,000 116 39.78 7.205 0.355
30,001-40,000 81 40.37 7.684 (p=.785)
Above 40,000 37 40.92 7.112
Less than Rs.20,000 66 30.05 5.205
Financial 20,001-30,000 116 30.46 5.566 1.080
assistance
30,001-40,000 81 30.11 5.206 (p=.358)
Above 40,000 37 28.62 5.741
Less than Rs.20,000 66 61.50 2.099
Work 20,001-30,000 116 61.35 1.488 0.467
expectations
30,001-40,000 81 61.56 1.673 (p=.706)
Above 40,000 37 61.70 1.808
Work Less than Rs.20,000 66 42.45 8.473
20,001-30,000 116 43.97 8.214 1.203
satisfaction
30,001-40,000 81 42.78 8.093 (p=.309)
Above 40,000 37 41.27 7.834

Work life balance policies


The obtained 'F' value is 1.924 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work life balance
policies.

176
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.4(a) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on Work life balance policies is accepted.

Work place support


The obtained 'F' value is 1.111 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work place
support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.4 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on Work place support is accepted.

Work load
The obtained 'F' value is 0.355 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work load.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.4 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on Work load is accepted.

Financial assistance
The obtained 'F' value is 1.080 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on financial
assistance.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.4 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on Financial assistance is accepted.

Work expectations
The obtained 'F' value is 0.467 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work expectations.

177
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.4 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on Work expectations is accepted.

Work satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 1.203 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees monthly salary on Work satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.4 (f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees monthly salary on Work satisfaction is accepted.

4.10.5 Testing for significant influence of women employees marital status on Work-life
balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees marital status on Work-life


balance in the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load,
Financial assistance, Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in rural area.

Independent samples t-test was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of
women employees marital status on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking
sector in rural area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 8.5: There is no significant influence of women employees marital status on (a) Work
life balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e)
Work expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.53shows the t-test for influence of women employees marital status on Work-
life balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural area.

178
Table 4.53
t-test for influence of women employees marital status on Work-life balance in rural area

Marital status N Mean SD t-value


Work life Single 73 26.47 2.739 1.702
balance policies Married 227 27.29 3.838 (p=.090)
Work place Single 73 41.58 5.873 2.538*
support Married 227 43.90 7.075 (p=.012)
Work Single 73 41.95 6.440 2.237*
load Married 227 39.76 7.512 (p=.026)
Financial Single 73 28.77 4.477 2.337*
assistance Married 227 30.46 5.633 (p=.020)
Work Single 73 61.07 2.084 2.384*
expectations Married 227 61.62 1.571 (p=.018)
Work Single 73 40.56 8.023 2.932**
satisfaction Married 227 43.76 8.125 (p=.004)
* significant at 5% level ** significant at 1% level

Work life balance policies


The obtainedt value is 1.702 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees marital status on Work life balance
policies.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.5(a) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees marital status on Work life balance policies is accepted.

Work place support


The obtainedt value is 2.538 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees marital status on Work place support.

Further, the mean table 4.53 indicates that the married women employees have scored
higher mean value of 43.90 than the women employees living as single (41.58). This shows that
the married women employees are getting good support from work place than the women

179
employees living as single.
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.5 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on Work place support is rejected.

Work load
The obtainedt value is 2.237 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees marital status on Work load.

Further, the mean table 4.53 indicates that the women employees living as single have
scored higher mean value of 41.95 than the married women employees (39.76). This shows that
the women employees living as single are feeling more work load than the married women
employees.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.5 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on Work load is rejected.

Financial assistance
The obtainedt value is 2.337 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees marital status on Financial assistance.

Further, the mean table 4.53 indicates that the married women employees have scored
higher mean value of 30.46 than the women employees living as single (28.77). This shows that
the married women employees are getting good financial assistance than the women employees
living as single.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.5 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on Financial assistance is rejected.

Work expectations
The obtainedt value is 2.384 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees marital status on Work expectations.

180
Further, the mean table 4.53 indicates that the married women employees have scored
higher mean value of 61.62 than the women employees living as single (61.07). This shows that
the married women employees are having more expectations in work than the women employees
living as single.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.5 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on Work expectations is rejected.

Work satisfaction
The obtainedt value is 2.932 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees marital status on Work satisfaction.

Further, the mean table 4.53 indicates that the married women employees have scored
higher mean value of 43.76 than the women employees living as single (40.56). This shows that
the married women employees are having more satisfaction towards their work than the women
employees living as single.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.5 (f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees marital status on Work satisfaction is rejected.

4.10.6 Testing for significant influence of women employees family size on Work-life
balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees family size on Work-life balance
in the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load, Financial
assistance, Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in rural area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women

181
employees family size on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural
area. The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 8.6: There is no significant influence of women employees family size on (a) Work life
balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e) Work
expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.54 shows the analysis of variance of influence of women employees family size
on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural area.

Table 4.54
ANOVA for influence of women employees family size on Work-life balance in rural area

Family size N Mean SD F-value


Work life Up to 3 96 26.88 2.472 2.704
balance policies 3-5 120 26.73 2.589
(p=.069)
Above 5 84 27.86 5.442
Work place Up to 3 96 44.25 7.391 1.587
support 3-5 120 43.23 6.708
(p=.206)
Above 5 84 42.44 6.401
Work load Up to 3 96 38.72 7.426 4.434*
3-5 120 40.40 7.185
(p=.013)
Above 5 84 41.93 7.078
Financial Up to 3 96 30.53 5.686 0.727
assistance 3-5 120 30.00 5.500
(p=.484)
Above 5 84 29.56 4.980
Work Up to 3 96 61.31 1.656 1.061
expectations 3-5 120 61.65 1.790
(p=.348)
Above 5 84 61.44 1.696
Work Up to 3 96 44.28 8.340 2.030
satisfaction 3-5 120 42.70 7.901
(p=.133)
Above 5 84 41.89 8.367
* significant at 5% level

182
Work life balance policies
The obtained 'F' value is 2.704 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on Work life balance
policies.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.6(a) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees family size on Work life balance policies is accepted.

Work place support


The obtained 'F' value is 1.587 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on Work place support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.6(b) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees family size on Work place support is accepted.

Work load
The obtained 'F' value is 4.434 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees family size on Work load.

Further, the mean table 4.54 indicates that the women employees with family size of
above 5 members have scored higher mean value of 41.93 and the lowest mean was scored by
the women employees with family size of up to 3 members ( 38.72 ). This shows that the women
employees with family size of above 5 members are getting more work load and the women
employees with family size of up to 3 members are getting less work load.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.6(c) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees family size on Work load is rejected.

Financial assistance
The obtained 'F' value is 0.727 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates

183
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on Financial assistance.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.6(d) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees family size on Financial assistance is accepted.

Work expectations
The obtained 'F' value is 1.061 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on Work expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.6(e) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees family size on Work expectations is accepted.

Work satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 2.030 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees family size on Work satisfaction.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.6(f) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees family size on Work satisfaction is accepted.

4.10.7 Testing for significant influence of women employees number of dependents on


Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Work-


life balance in the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work
load, Financial assistance, Work expectations and Work satisfaction) by the women employees
in banking sector in rural area.

One way ANOVA was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of women
employees number of dependents on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking

184
sector in rural area. The following null hypotheses were framed:
H0 8.7: There is no significant influence of women employees number of dependents on
(a) Work life balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial
assistance (e) Work expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.55 shows the analysis of variance of influence of women employees number of
dependents on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural area.

Table 4.55
ANOVA for influence of women employees number of dependents on Work-life balance
in rural area

Number of dependents N Mean SD F-value

Work life balance Up to 1 96 27.00 2.526 0.146


policies 2 111 27.03 2.455 (p=.864)
More than 2 93 27.26 5.351
Work place Up to 1 96 44.56 7.059 2.847
support 2 111 43.22 6.778 (p=.060)
More than 2 93 42.20 6.629
Up to 1 96 38.56 7.335 9.228**
Work load 2 111 39.65 7.572
(p< .001)
More than 2 93 42.84 6.298
Financial Up to 1 96 30.81 5.826 3.790*
assistance 2 111 30.43 5.410 (p=.024)
More than 2 93 28.80 4.790
Work Up to 1 96 61.31 1.713 0.939
expectations 2 111 61.49 1.788 (p=.392)
More than 2 93 61.66 1.652
Work Up to 1 96 44.53 8.174 9.883**
satisfaction 2 111 44.19 8.710 (p< .001)
More than 2 93 39.94 6.732
* significant at 5% level ** significant at 1% level

185
Work life balance policies
The obtained 'F' value is 0.146 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Work life
balance policies.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.7(a) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on Work life balance policies is accepted.

Work place support


The obtained 'F' value is 2.847 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Work place
support.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.7(b) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on Work place support is accepted.

Work load
The obtained 'F' value is 9.228 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Work load.

Further, the mean table 4.55 indicates that the women employees having more than two
dependents have scored higher mean value of 42.84 and the lowest mean was scored by the
women employees having up to one dependent (38.56). This shows that the women employees
with more than two dependents are getting more work load and the women employees with up to
one dependent are getting less work load.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.7(c) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on Work load is rejected.

Financial assistance

186
The obtained 'F' value is 3.790 and it is significant at 5% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Financial
assistance.

Further, the mean table 4.55 indicates that the women employees with up to one
dependent have scored higher mean value of 30.81 and the lowest mean was scored by the
women employees with more than two dependents (28.80). This shows that the women
employees having up to one dependent are more pleased with the financial assistance offered by
the banks and the women employees having more than two dependents are less pleased with the
financial assistance offered by the banks.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.7(d) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on Financial assistance is rejected.

Work expectations
The obtained 'F' value is 0.939 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Work
expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.7(e) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees number of dependents on Work expectations is accepted.

Work satisfaction
The obtained 'F' value is 9.883 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees number of dependents on Work satisfaction.

Further, the mean table 4.55 indicates that the women employees with up to one
dependent have scored higher mean value of 44.53 and the lowest mean was scored by the
women employees with more than two dependents ( 39.94 ). This shows that the women
employees with up to one dependent are having more satisfaction towards their work and the
women employees with more than two dependents are having less satisfaction towards their

187
work.
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.7(f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees number of dependents on Work satisfaction is rejected.

4.10.8 Testing for significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work-life
balance in the work environment in banking sector in rural area.

To test the significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work-life


balance in the work environment (Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load,
Financial assistance, Work expectations and Work satisfaction) in banking sector in rural area.

Independent samples t-test was applied to ascertain if there is any significant influence of
women employees age on Work-life balance in the work environment in banking sector in
rural area.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 8.8: There is no significant influence of women employees type of bank on (a) Work
life balance policies (b) Work place support (c) Work load (d) Financial assistance (e)
Work expectations and (f) Work satisfaction.

Table 4.56 shows the t-test for influence of women employees type of bank on Work-
life balance in the work environment by the women employees in banking sector in rural area.

188
Table 4.56
t-test for influence of women employees type of bank on Work-life balance in rural area

Type of bank N Mean SD t-value


Work life balance Nationalized 135 28.82 1.736 8.321**
policies Private 165 25.67 4.107 (p<.001)
Work place Nationalised 135 45.28 1.815 5.604**
support Private 165 41.25 2.380 (p<.001)
Work Load Nationalised 135 40.25 2.205 6.619**
Private 165 44.67 1.589 (p<.001)
Financial Nationalised 135 33.76 1.061 5.511**
assistance Private 165 29.28 1.949 (p<.001)
Work Nationalised 135 61.33 1.435 1.366
expectations Private 165 61.61 1.921 (p<.001)
Work Nationalised 135 47.76 2.584 6.080**
satisfaction Private 165 41.80 1.398 (p<.001)
** significant at 1% level

Work life balance policies


The obtainedt value is 8.321 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work life balance policies.

Further, the mean table 4.56 indicates that the women employees working in Nationalised
Banks have scored higher mean value of 28.82 than the women employees working in Private
Banks ( 25.67 ). This shows that the women employees working in Nationalised Banks are
comfortable with work life balance policies than the women employees working in Private
Banks.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.8(a) that there is no significant influence of


the women employees type of bank on Work life balance policies is rejected.

Work place support


The obtainedt value is 5.604 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that

189
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work place support.

Further, the mean table 4.56 indicates that women employees working in Nationalised
banks have scored higher mean value of 45.28 than the women employees working in Private
Banks (41.25). This shows that the women employees working in Nationalised Banks are getting
good support from work place than the women employees working in Private Banks.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.8 (b) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees type of bank on Work place support is rejected.

Work load
The obtainedt value is 6.619 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work load.

Further, the mean table 4.56 indicates that the women employees working in Private
Banks have scored higher mean value of 44.67 than the women employees working in
Nationalised Banks ( 40.25). This shows that the women employees working in Private Banks
are getting more work load than the women employees working in Nationalised Banks.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.8 (c) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees type of bank on Work load is rejected.

Financial assistance
The obtainedt value is 5.511 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on Financial assistance.

Further, the mean table 4.56 indicates that the women employees working in Nationalised
Banks have scored higher mean value of 33.76 than the women employees working in Private
Banks ( 29.28 ). This shows that the women employees working in Nationalised Banks are more
pleased with the financial assistance offered by the Banks than the women employees working in
Private Banks.

190
Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.8 (d) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees type of bank on Financial assistance is rejected.

Work expectations
The obtainedt value is 1.366 and it is not significant at 5% level. The value indicates
that there is no significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work expectations.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.8 (e) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees type of bank on Work expectations is accepted.

Work satisfaction
The obtainedt value is 6.080 and it is significant at 1% level. The value indicates that
there is significant influence of women employees type of bank on Work satisfaction.

Further, the mean table 4.56 indicates that the women employees working in Nationalised
Banks have scored higher mean value of 47.76 than the women employees working in Private
Banks ( 41.80 ). This shows that the women employees working in Nationalised banks are more
satisfied with their work than the women employees working in Private Banks.

Therefore, the formulated hypothesis H0 8.8 (f) that there is no significant influence of
the women employees type of bank on Work satisfaction is rejected.

191
4.11 ASSESSING THE SATISFACTORY LEVEL WITH THE EXPECTATIONS OF
WOMEN EMPLOYEES WORKING IN URBAN AREA BANKS

Paired samples t-test was applied to ascertain if there was any significant fulfillment of
satisfaction from the expectations level in personal life and work life of women employees
working in urban area banks. The following null hypotheses were framed:

Null hypothesis H09 (a): There is no significant difference between satisfaction and
expectations in personal life of women employees working in urban area banks.

Null hypothesis H09 (b): There is no significant difference between satisfaction and
expectations in work life of women employees working in urban area banks.

Table 4.57 shows the paired samples t-test for fulfillment of satisfactory level with
expectations in personal life and work life of women employees working in urban area banks.

Table 4.57

t-test for satisfaction with expectations of women employees working in urban area banks

N Mean SD t-value
Personal life Expectations 300 78.79 2.869 22.649**
Satisfaction 300 71.91 4.129 (p<.001)
Work life Expectations 300 61.14 1.697 11.054**
Satisfaction 300 55.19 9.217 (p<.001)
** significant at 1% level

The obtained t-value of 22.649 is significant at 1% level. It indicates that there is


significant difference between satisfaction level and the expectations level in personal life of
women employees working in urban area banks. Hence, the formulated hypothesis There is no
significant difference between satisfaction and expectations in personal life of women employees
working in urban area banks is rejected. Further the table 4.57shows that mean of satisfaction in
personal life is 71.91 which are relatively lesser than the mean of expectations in personal life

192
(78.79). This shows that the satisfaction levels in personal life of women employees are not
fulfilled up to their expectations level in the urban area banks.

The obtained t-value of 11.054 is significant at 1% level. It indicates that there is


significant difference between satisfaction level and the expectations level in work life of women
employees working in urban area banks. Hence, the formulated hypothesis There is no
significant difference between satisfaction and expectations in work life of women employees
working in urban area banks is rejected. Further the table 4.57 shows that mean of satisfaction
in work life is 55.19 which is relatively lesser than the mean of expectations in work life (61.14).
This shows that the satisfaction levels in work life of women employees are not fulfilled up to
their expectations level in the urban area banks.

4.12 ASSESSING THE SATISFACTORY LEVEL WITH THE EXPECTATIONS OF


WOMEN EMPLOYEES WORKING IN RURAL AREA BANKS

Paired samples t-test was applied to ascertain if there was any significant fulfillment of
satisfaction from the expectations level in personal life and work life of women employees
working in rural area banks. The following null hypotheses were framed:

Null hypothesis H010(a): There is no significant difference between satisfaction and


expectations in personal life of women employees working in rural area banks.

Null hypothesis H010(b): There is no significant difference between satisfaction and


expectations in work life of women employees working in rural area banks.

Table 4.58 shows the paired samples t-test for fulfillment of satisfaction level with
expectations in personal life and work life of women employees working in rural area banks.

193
Table 4.58
t-test for satisfaction with expectations of women employees working in rural area banks

N Mean SD t-value
Personal life Expectations 300 78.84 3.296 29.668**
Satisfaction 300 69.94 4.001 (p<.001)
Work life Expectations 300 61.48 1.722 37.690**
Satisfaction 300 42.98 8.202 (p<.001)
** significant at 1% level

The obtained t-value of 29.668 is significant at 1% level. It indicates that there is


significant difference between satisfaction level and the expectations level in personal life of
women employees working in rural area banks. Hence, the formulated hypothesis There is no
significant difference between satisfaction and expectations in personal life of women employees
working in rural area banks is rejected. Further the table 4.58 shows that mean of satisfaction in
personal life is 69.94 which is relatively lesser than the mean of expectations in personal life
(78.84). This shows that the satisfaction levels in personal life of women employees are not
fulfilled up to their expectations level in the rural area banks.

The obtained t-value of 37.690 is significant at 1% level. It indicates that there is


significant difference between satisfaction level and the expectations level in work life of women
employees working in rural area banks. Hence, the formulated hypothesis There is no
significant difference between satisfaction and expectations in work life of women employees
working in rural area banks is rejected. Further the table 4.58 shows that mean of satisfaction in
work life is 42.98 which is relatively lesser than the mean of expectations in work life (61.48).
This shows that the satisfaction levels in work life of women employees are not fulfilled up to
their expectations level in the rural area banks.

194
4.13 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONAL LIFE SATISFACTION AND FACTORS
OF LIFE WORK BALANCE

4.13.1 Relationships between personal life satisfaction and factors of life-work balance of
women employees working in urban area banks

To test the significant relationship between personal life satisfaction and factors of life
work balance of women employees working in urban area banks, Bi-variate correlation was
applied to ascertain if there were any significant relationship between personal life satisfaction
and factors of life work balance. The following null hypotheses were framed:

H011(a): There is no significant relationship between personal life satisfaction and family
support.
H011(b): There is no significant relationship between personal life satisfaction and child
care/dependent care.
H011(c): There is no significant relationship between personal life satisfaction and self
management.
H011(d): There is no significant relationship between family support and child care/dependent
care.
H011(e): There is no significant relationship between family support and self management.
H011(f): There is no significant relationship between self management and child care/dependent
care. Table 4.59
Correlation analysis for personal life satisfaction in urban area banks

Personal life Family Child care/ Self


satisfaction support Dependent care management
Personal life 1 ** ** **
r= .561 r=.513 r=.443
satisfaction p = .005 p = .001 p =.009
Family 1 r=.415** **
r=.264
support p =.002 p =.001
Child care/ 1 r=.051
Dependent care p =.383
Self 1
management
** significant at 1% level
195
Positive significant correlation is observed between personal life satisfaction and family
support (r =.561). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between
personal life satisfaction and family support is rejected at 1% level. This shows that good family
support will result in good personal life satisfaction.

There is positive significant correlation is observed between personal life satisfaction and
child care/dependent care (r =.513). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant
relationship between personal life satisfaction and child care/dependent care is rejected at 1%
level. This shows that child care/dependent care enriches personal life satisfaction.

Significant Positive correlation is observed between personal life satisfaction and self
management (r =.443). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between
personal life satisfaction and self management is rejected at 1% level. This shows that self
management increases satisfactory level in personal life

There is positive significant correlation observed between family support and child
care/dependent care (r =.415). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship
between family support and child care/dependent care is rejected at 1% level. This shows that
chide care/dependent care is done by good family support.

Significant positive correlation is observed between family support and self management (r
=.264). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between family support
and self management is rejected at 1% level. This shows that family support helps to maintain
self management.

Significant correlation is not observed between self management and child care/dependent
care (r =.051). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between self
management and child care/dependent care is accepted at 5% level.

196
4.13.2 Relationships between personal life satisfaction and factors of life-work balance of
women employees working in rural area banks

To test the significant relationship between personal life satisfaction and factors of life -
work balance of women employees working in rural area banks, Bi-variate correlation was
applied to ascertain if there were any significant relationship between personal life satisfaction
and factors of life-work balance. The following null hypotheses were framed:

H012(a): There is no significant relationship between personal life satisfaction and family
support.
H012(b): There is no significant relationship between personal life satisfaction and child
care/dependent care.
H012(c): There is no significant relationship between personal life satisfaction and self
management.
H012(d): There is no significant relationship between family support and child care/dependent
care.
H012(e): There is no significant relationship between family support and self management.
H012(f): There is no significant relationship between self management and child care/dependent
care.

Table 4.60
Correlation analysis for personal life satisfaction in rural area banks

Personal life Family Child care/ Self


satisfaction support Dependent care management
Personal life 1 ** ** **
r = .587 r = .613 r = .458
satisfaction p<.001 p<.001 p<.001
Family 1 ** r = .122
r = .571
support p<.001 p = .083
Child care/ 1 r = .095
Dependent care .099
Self 1
management
** significant at 1% level

197
Positive significant correlation is observed between personal life satisfaction and family
support (r =.587). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between
personal life satisfaction and family support is rejected at 1% level. This shows that good family
support will result in good personal life satisfaction.

There is positive significant correlation is observed between personal life satisfaction and
child care/dependent care (r =.613). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant
relationship between personal life satisfaction and child care/dependent care is rejected at 1%
level. This shows that child care/dependent care enriches personal life satisfaction.

Significant Positive correlation is observed between personal life satisfaction and self
management (r =.458). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between
personal life satisfaction and self management is rejected at 1% level. This shows that self
management increases satisfaction level in personal life

There is positive significant correlation observed between family support and child
care/dependent care (r =.571). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship
between family support and child care/dependent care is rejected at 1% level. This shows that
chide care/dependent care is done by good family support.

Significant correlation is not observed between family support and self management (r
=.122). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between family support
and self management is accepted at 5% level.

Significant correlation is not observed between self management and child care/dependent
care (r =.095). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between self
management and child care/dependent care is accepted at 5% level.

198
4.14 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WORK LIFE SATISFACTION AND FACTORS OF
WORK-LIFE BALANCE

4.14.1 Relationships between work life satisfaction and factors of work-life balance of
women employees working in urban area banks

To test the significant relationship between work-life satisfaction and factors of work-life
balance of women employees working in urban area banks, Bi-variate correlation was applied to
ascertain if there were any significant relationship between work-life satisfaction and factors of
work-life balance.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 13(a): There is no significant relationship between work life satisfaction and work life
balance policies.
H013(b): There is no significant relationship between work life satisfaction and work place
support.
H0 13(c): There is no significant relationship between work life satisfaction and work load.
H013(d): There is no significant relationship between work life satisfaction and financial
assistance.
H013(e): There is no significant relationship between work life balance policies and work place
support.
H013(f): There is no significant relationship between work life balance policies and work load.
H013(g): There is no significant relationship between work life balance policies and financial
assistance.
H0 13(h): There is no significant relationship between work place support and work load. H 013(i):

There is no significant relationship between work place support and financial assistance. H 0 13(j):
There is no significant relationship between work load and financial assistance.

199
Table 4.61
Correlation analysis for work-life satisfaction in urban area banks

Work Work life Work place Work Financial


satisfaction balance policies support load assistance
Work 1 ** ** ** **
.731 .729 -.721 .621
satisfaction p < .001 p < .001 p < .001 p < .001
Work life 1 ** ** **
.712 -.601 .612
balance policies p < .001 p < .001 p < .001
Work place 1 ** **
-.709 .707
support p < .001 p < .001
Work 1 .127
load p = .097
Financial 1
assistance
** significant at 1% level

Positive significant correlation is observed between work life satisfaction and work life
balance policies (r =.731). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship
between work life satisfaction and work life balance policies is rejected at 1% level. This shows
that good work life balance policies improve work life satisfaction.

There is positive significant correlation is observed between work life satisfaction and work
place support (r =.729). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between
work life satisfaction and work place support is rejected at 1% level. This shows that good
support from work place bring good level of work life satisfaction.

Significant negative correlation is observed between work life satisfaction and work load (r
= -.721). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between work life
satisfaction and work load is rejected at 1% level. This shows that lesser work load will improve
the work life satisfaction.

Significant Positive correlation is observed between work life satisfaction and financial
assistance (r =.621). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between
work life satisfaction and financial assistance is rejected at 1% level. This shows that financial

200
assistance offered by the banks improves the level of work satisfaction.

There is positive significant correlation between work life balance policies and work place
support (r =.712). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between work
life balance policies and work place support is rejected at 1% level. This shows that work life
balance policies provides the way for good support from the work place.

Significant negative correlation is observed between work life balance policies and work
load (r = -.601). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between work
life balance policies and work load is rejected at 1% level. This shows that good and improved
work life balance policies will decrease the work load.

Significant positive correlation is observed between work life balance policies and financial
assistance (r =.612). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between
work life balance policies and financial assistance is rejected at 1% level. This shows that good
work life balance policies helps to get financial assistance from their banks.

Significant negative correlation is observed between work place support and work load (r =
-.709). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between work place
support and work load is rejected at 1% level. This shows that work place support will reduce
the work load considerably.

Significant positive correlation is observed between work place support and financial
assistance (r =.707). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between
work place support and financial assistance is rejected at 1% level. This shows that support
from work place helps to get financial assistance from their banks.

Significant correlation is not observed between work load and financial assistance (r
=.127). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between work load and
financial assistance is accepted at 5% level.

201
4.14.2 Relationships between work-life satisfaction and factors of work - life balance of
women employees working in rural area banks

To test the significant relationship between work life satisfaction and factors of work-life
balance of women employees working in rural area banks, Bi-variate correlation was applied to
ascertain if there were any significant relationship between work life satisfaction and factors of
work-life balance.

The following null hypotheses were framed:

H0 14(a): There is no significant relationship between work life satisfaction and work life
balance policies.
H014(b): There is no significant relationship between work life satisfaction and work place
support.
H0 14(c): There is no significant relationship between work life satisfaction and work load.
H014(d): There is no significant relationship between work life satisfaction and financial
assistance.
H0 14(e): There is no significant relationship between work life balance policies and work place
support.
H0 14(f): There is no significant relationship between work life balance policies and work load.
H0 14(g): There is no significant relationship between work life balance policies and financial
assistance.
H0 14(h): There is no significant relationship between work place support and work load. H 014(i):

There is no significant relationship between work place support and financial assistance. H 0 14(j):
There is no significant relationship between work load and financial assistance.

202
Table 4.62
Correlation analysis for work-life satisfaction in rural area banks

Work Work life Work place Work Financial


satisfaction balance policies support load assistance
Work 1 ** ** ** **
r = .415 r =.718 r = -.744 r =.725
satisfaction p < .001 p < .001 p < .001 p < .001
Work life 1 ** ** **
r =.420 r = -.391 r =.412
balance policies p < .001 p < .001 p < .001
Work place 1 ** **
r = -.716 r =.720
support p < .001 p < .001
Work 1 r = .089
load p =.103
Financial 1
assistance
** significant at 1% level

Positive significant correlation is observed between work life satisfaction and work life
balance policies (r =.415). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship
between work life satisfaction and work life balance policies is rejected at 1% level. This
shows that good work life balance policies improve work life satisfaction.

There is positive significant correlation is observed between work life satisfaction and work
place support (r =.718). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between
work life satisfaction and work place support is rejected at 1% level. This shows that good
support from work place bring good level of work life satisfaction.

Significant negative correlation is observed between work life satisfaction and work load (r
= -.744). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between work life
satisfaction and work load is rejected at 1% level. This shows that lesser work load will
improve the work life satisfaction.

Significant Positive correlation is observed between work life satisfaction and financial
assistance (r =.725). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between
work life satisfaction and financial assistance is rejected at 1% level. This shows that financial

203
assistance offered by the banks improves the level of work satisfaction.

There is positive significant correlation between work life balance policies and work place
support (r = .420). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between work
life balance policies and work place support is rejected at 1% level. This shows that work life
balance policies provides the way for good support from the work place.

Significant negative correlation is observed between work life balance policies and work
load (r = -.391). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between work
life balance policies and work load is rejected at 1% level. This shows that good and improved
work life balance policies will decrease the work load.

Significant positive correlation is observed between work life balance policies and financial
assistance (r =.412). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between
work life balance policies and financial assistance is rejected at 1% level. This shows that good
work life balance policies helps to get financial assistance from their banks.

Significant negative correlation is observed between work place support and work load (r =
-.716). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between work place
support and work load is rejected at 1% level. This shows that work place support will reduce
the work load considerably.

Significant positive correlation is observed between work place support and financial
assistance (r =.720). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between
work place support and financial assistance is rejected at 1% level. This shows that support
from work place helps to get financial assistance from their banks.

Significant correlation is not observed between work load and financial assistance (r
=.089). Hence the null hypothesis There is no significant relationship between work load and
financial assistance is accepted at 5% level.

204
4.15 ASSESSING THE PREDICTOR VARIABLES FOR PERSONAL LIFE AND WORK
LIFE SATISFACTION OF WOMEN EMPLOYEES WORKING IN BANKING SECTOR

4.15.1 Assessing the predictor variables for personal life satisfaction of women employees
working in urban area banks (taking factors of life work balance as independent variables)

Multiple regression analysis was conducted by taking Personal life satisfaction as


dependent variable and Family support, Child care/ Dependent care and Self management are
taken as independent variables (shown in the table 4.63)

Table 4.63
Regression analysis for personal life satisfaction of women employees working in urban
area banks (taking factors of life work balance as independent variables)

2 Standard
R
Predictor Variables Beta F t- value
Family support 0.714 3.166**
0.313
Child care/ Dependent care Adjusted 0.041 8.324** .725
Self management R2 0.102 1.527
0.291
** significant at 1% level

It is observed from the table 4.63, the regression models F value is 8.324 and it is
2
significant at 1% level. The regression models coefficient of determination (R ) is 0.313 and the
2
adjusted R is 0.291, which is a healthy coefficient. Family support serves as a significant
predictor for personal life satisfaction of women employees working in urban area banks, its
standard beta value 0.714 shows that personal life satisfaction is positive with reference to family
support. This shows that one unit increase in family support improves 0.714 units in personal life
satisfaction of women employees. Child care/ Dependent care and Self management are not
serving as significant predictors for personal life satisfaction. Hence Family support serves as
predictor variable for personal life satisfaction of women employees working in urban area
banks.

205
4.15.2 Assessing the predictor variables for personal life satisfaction of women employees
working in rural area banks (taking factors of life work balance as independent variables)

Multiple regression analysis was conducted by taking Personal life satisfaction as


dependent variable and Family support, Child care/ Dependent care and Self management are
taken as independent variables (shown in the table 4.64)

Table 4.64
Regression analysis for personal life satisfaction of women employees working in rural area
banks (taking factors of life work balance as independent variables)

2 Standard
R
Predictor Variables Beta F t- value
Family support 0.531 4.992**
0.263
Child care/ Dependent care Adjusted 0.723 7.234** 2.128*
Self management 2 0.051 1.361
R
0.241
*significant at 5% level ** significant at 1% level

It is observed from the table 4.64, the regression models F value is 7.234 and it is
2
significant at 1% level. The regression models coefficient of determination (R ) is 0.263 and the
2
adjusted R is 0.241, which is a healthy coefficient. Family support serves as a significant
predictor for personal life satisfaction of women employees working in rural area banks, its
standard beta value 0.531 shows that personal life satisfaction is positive with reference to family
support. This shows that one unit increase in family support improves 0.531 units in personal life
satisfaction of women employees. Child care/ Dependent care serves as a significant predictor
for personal life satisfaction of women employees working in rural area banks, its standard beta
value 0.723 shows that personal life satisfaction is positive with reference to Child care/
Dependent care. This shows that one unit increase in Child care/ Dependent care increases 0.723
units increase in personal life satisfaction of women employees working in rural area banks. Self
management is not serving as significant predictor for personal life satisfaction. Hence Family
support and Child care/ Dependent care serves as predictor variables of personal life satisfaction
of women employees working in rural area banks.

206
4.15.3 Assessing the predictor variables for personal life satisfaction of women employees
working in urban area banks (taking factors of work life balance as independent variables)

Multiple regression analysis was conducted by taking Personal life satisfaction as


dependent variable and Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load and Financial
assistance are taken as independent variables (shown in the table 4.65)

Table 4.65
Regression analysis for Personal life satisfaction of women employees working in
urban area banks (taking factors of work life balance as independent variables)
2 Standard
R
Predictor Variables Beta F t- value
Work life balance policies 0.120 .771
0.287
Work place support Adjusted 0.502 4.325** 2.440*
Work load 2 -0.165 1.613
R
Financial assistance 0.261 0.533 2.114*

* significant at 5% level ** significant at 1% level

It is observed from the table 4.65, the regression models F value is 4.325 and it is
2
significant at 1% level. The regression models coefficient of determination (R ) is 0.287 and the
2
adjusted R is 0.261, which is a healthy coefficient. Work place support serves as a significant
predictor for personal life satisfaction, its standard beta value 0.502 shows that personal life
satisfaction is positive with reference to work place support. This shows that one unit increase in
work place support increases 0.502 units of personal life satisfaction. Financial assistance serves
as a significant predictor for personal life satisfaction, its standard beta value 0.533 shows that
personal life satisfaction is positive with reference to financial assistance. This shows that one
unit increase in financial assistance increases personal life satisfaction by 0.533 times. Work life
balance policies and work load are not serving as predictor variables for personal life
satisfaction. Hence work place support and financial assistance serves as a significant predictor
for personal life satisfaction of women employees working in banks in urban area.

207
4.15.4 Assessing the predictor variables for personal life satisfaction of women employees
working in rural area banks (taking factors of work life balance as independent variables)

Multiple regression analysis was conducted by taking Personal life satisfaction as


dependent variable and Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load and Financial
assistance are taken as independent variables (shown in the table 4.66)

Table 4.66
Regression analysis for Personal life satisfaction of women employees working in rural area
banks (taking factors of work life balance as independent variables)
2 Standard
R
Predictor Variables Beta F t- value
Work life balance policies -0.120 1.725
0.320
Work place support Adjusted 0.059 3.742** .616
Work load 2 -0.743 2.426*
R
0.301
Financial assistance -0.233 1.893
* significant at 5% level ** significant at 1% level

It is observed from the table 4.66, the regression models F value is 3.742 and it is
2
significant at 1% level. The regression models coefficient of determination (R ) is 0.320 and the
2
adjusted R is 0.301, which is a healthy coefficient. Work load serves as a significant predictor
for personal life satisfaction, its standard beta value -0.743 shows that personal life satisfaction is
negative with reference to work load. This shows that one unit increase in work load decreases
0.743 units of personal life satisfaction. Work life balance policies, work place support and
financial assistance are not serving as significant predictors for personal life satisfaction. Hence
work load serves as a significant predictor for personal life satisfaction of women employees
working in banks in rural area.

208
4.15.5 Assessing the predictor variables for work-life satisfaction of women employees
working in urban area banks (taking factors of work life balance as independent variables)

Multiple regression analysis was conducted by taking Work satisfaction as dependent


variable and Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load and Financial assistance
are taken as independent variables (shown in the table 4.67)

Table 4.67
Regression analysis for Work satisfaction of women employees working in urban
area banks (taking factors of work life balance as independent variables)
2 Standard
R
Predictor Variables Beta F t- value
Work life balance policies 0.645 6.212**
0.420
Work place support Adjusted 0.587 13.241** 5.475**
Work load 2 -0.678 5.269**
R
0.397
Financial assistance 0.570 4.370**
** significant at 1% level

It is observed from the table 4.67, the regression models F value is 13.241 and it is
2
significant at 1% level. The regression models coefficient of determination (R ) is 0.420 and the
2
adjusted R is 0.397, which is a healthy coefficient. Work life balance policies serves as a
predictor variable for work satisfaction, its standard beta value of 0.645 shows that work
satisfaction is positive with reference to work life balance policies. One unit increase in work life
balance policies will improve 0.645 units in work satisfaction. Work place support serves as a
significant predictor for work satisfaction of women employees working in urban area banks, its
standard beta value 0.587 shows that work satisfaction is positive with reference to work place
support. This shows that one unit increase in work place support improves 0.587 units of work
satisfaction of women employees. Work load serves as a significant predictor for work
satisfaction of women employees, its standard beta value -0.687 shows that work satisfaction is
negative with reference to work load. This shows that one unit increase in work load decreases
0.687 units of satisfaction towards work. Financial assistance serves as significant predictor of
work satisfaction and increases work satisfaction by 0.570 units. Hence work life balance
policies, work place support, work load and financial assistance are the predictor variables of

209
work satisfaction of women employees working in urban area banks.

4.15.6 Assessing the predictor variables for work-life satisfaction of women employees
working in rural area banks (taking factors of work life balance as independent variables)

Multiple regression analysis was conducted by taking Work satisfaction as dependent


variable and Work life balance policies, Work place support, Work load and Financial assistance
are taken as independent variables (shown in the table 4.68)

Table 4.68
Regression analysis for Work satisfaction of women employees working in rural area
banks (taking factors of work life balance as independent variables)
2 Standard
R
Predictor Variables Beta F t- value
Work life balance policies 0.053 1.266
0.418
Work place support Adjusted 0.740 14.032** 4.185**
Work load R2 -0.849 4.421**
0.387
Financial assistance 0.564 5.209**
** significant at 1% level

It is observed from the table 4.68, the regression models F value is 14.032 and it is
2
significant at 1% level. The regression models coefficient of determination (R ) is 0.418 and the
2
adjusted R is 0.387, which is a healthy coefficient. Work place support serves as a significant
predictor for work satisfaction of women employees working in rural area banks, its standard
beta value 0.740 shows that work satisfaction is positive with reference to work place support.
This shows that one unit increase in work place support improves .740 units of work satisfaction
of women employees. Work load serves as a significant predictor for work satisfaction of women
employees, its standard beta value -0.849 shows that work satisfaction is negative with reference
to work load. This shows that one unit increase in work load decreases 0.849 units of satisfaction
towards work. Financial assistance serves as significant predictor of work satisfaction and
increases work satisfaction by 0.564 units. Work life balance policies are not serving as
significant predictors for work satisfaction. Hence work place support, work load and

210
financial assistance are the predictor variables of work satisfaction of women employees working
in rural area banks.

4.15.7 Assessing the predictor variables for work-life satisfaction of women employees
working in urban area banks (taking factors of life work balance as independent variables)

Multiple regression analysis was conducted by taking Work satisfaction as dependent


variable and Family support, Child care/ Dependent care and Self management are taken as
independent variables (shown in the table 4.69)

Table 4.69
Regression analysis for Work satisfaction of women employees working in urban
area banks (taking factors of life work balance as independent variables)
Standard
Predictor Variables R
2
Beta F t- value
Family support 0.624 2.477*
0.304
Child care/ Dependent care Adjusted 0.065 7.385** 1.146
Self management 2 0.087 1.479
R
0.281
* significant at 5% level ** significant at 1% level

It is observed from the table 4.69, the regression models F value is 7.385 and it is
2
significant at 1% level. The regression models coefficient of determination (R ) is 0.304 and the
2
adjusted R is 0.281, which is a healthy coefficient. Family support serves as significant
predictor for work satisfaction, its standard beta value 0.624 shows that work satisfaction is
positive with reference to family support. This shows that one unit increase in family support
improves 0.624 units increase in work satisfaction of women employees working in urban area
banks. Child care/ Dependent care and self management are not serving as significant predictors
for work satisfaction. Hence family support serves as the predictor variables of work satisfaction
of women employees working in urban area banks.

211
4.15.8 Assessing the predictor variables for work-life satisfaction of women employees
working in rural area banks (taking factors of life work balance as independent variables)

Multiple regression analysis was conducted by taking Work satisfaction as dependent


variable and Family support, Child care/ Dependent care and Self management are taken as
independent variables (shown in the table 4.70)

Table 4.70
Regression analysis for Work satisfaction of women employees working in rural area
banks (taking factors of life work balance as independent variables)
Standard
Predictor Variables R2 Beta F t- value
Family support 0.724 2.755**
0.293
Child care/ Dependent care Adjusted 0.114 9.286** .780
Self management 2 0.547 4.177**
R
0.273
** significant at 1% level

It is observed from the table 4.70, the regression models F value is 9.286 and it is
2
significant at 1% level. The regression models coefficient of determination (R ) is 0.293 and the
2
adjusted R is 0.273, which is a healthy coefficient. Family support serves as significant
predictor for work satisfaction, its standard beta value 0.724 shows that work satisfaction is
positive with reference to family support. This shows that one unit increase in family support
improves 0.724 units increase in work satisfaction of women employees working in rural area
banks. Self management serves as a significant predictor for work satisfaction, its standard beta
value 0.547 shows that work satisfaction is positive with reference to self management. This
shows that one unit increase in self management increases 0.547 units in work satisfaction of
women employees. Child care/ Dependent care is not serving as significant predictor for work
satisfaction. Hence family support and self management serves as the predictor variables of work
satisfaction of women employees working in rural area banks.

212
4.16 MODEL FOR WORK - LIFE SATISFACTION OF WOMEN EMPLOYEES
WORKING IN BANKING SECTOR

Structural equation modeling (SEM) is a statistical technique for testing and estimating
causal relations using a combination of statistical data and qualitative causal assumptions. This
definition of SEM was articulated by the geneticist Sewall Wright (1921), the economist Trygve
Haavelmo (1943).

SEM allow both confirmatory and exploratory modeling, meaning they are suited to both
theory testing and theory development. Confirmatory modeling usually starts out with a
hypothesis that gets represented in a causal model. The concepts used in the model must then be
operationalized to allow testing of the relationships between the concepts in the model. The
model is tested against the obtained measurement data to determine how well the model fits the
data. The causal assumptions embedded in the model often have falsifiable implications which
can be tested against the data.

With an initial theory SEM can be used inductively by specifying a corresponding model
and using data to estimate the values of free parameters. Often the initial hypothesis requires
adjustment in light of model evidence. When SEM is used purely for exploration, this is usually
in the context of exploratory factor analysis as in psychometric design.

A model was developed by using analysis of moment structure (AMOS 16.1). A model is
fit to ensure the Work-life satisfaction of women employees working in banking sector. In the
model factors such as Family support, Work place support, Work load, Financial assistance,
Personal life satisfaction and Work life satisfaction are taken as observed variables. e1 and e2 are
error terms (residuals) for observed variables Personal life satisfaction and Work life satisfaction.

213
Null Hypothesis H015: The model fitted for work life satisfaction of women employees
working in banking sector is good.

Figure 4.16.1: Work - Life satisfaction of women employees working in banking sector

Model fit Summary


2
The model fit Chi-square = 3.212 and the models p-value is 0.105 which is
insignificant at 5% level. This shows that the null hypothesis The model fitted for work life
satisfaction of women employees working in banking sector is good is accepted. The goodness
of fit index (GFI) is 0.918 of the model, shows reasonably good fit, and its adjusted goodness of
fit (AGFI) is 0.901. The Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) is 0.094, a
smaller value indicates better model, and Expected Cross Validation Index (ECVI) is 0.721,
which are within the acceptable range indicating a better model fit.

Model for Work - Life satisfaction of women employees working in banking sector
A model is fit to ensure the Work-life satisfaction of women employees working in

214
banking sector. In the model, factors such as Family support, Work place support, Work load,
financial assistance, Personal life satisfaction and Work life satisfaction are taken as observed
2
variables. The model fit Chi-square = 3.212 and the models p-value is 0.105 which is
insignificant shows that model fitted for work life satisfaction of women employees working in
banking sector is good. The goodness of fit index (GFI) is 0.918 and adjusted goodness of fit
(AGFI) is 0.901 which indicates a better model.

215
Figure 4.16.2: Family support

216
Figure 4.16.3: Child care/Dependent care

217
Figure 4.16.4: Self-management

218
Figure 4.16.5: Work life balance policies

219
Figure 4.16.6: Work place support

220
Figure 4.16.7: Work load

221
Figure 4.16.8: Financial assistance

222

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi