Organization Citizenship Behaviour and Work-Life Interface Practices: Exploring Entrepreneurial and Intrapreneurial Mindset

Abstract

This research was conducted on women working professionals (such as entrepreneurs and managers/intrapreneurs), to understand the effects of organizational citizenship behaviour on the quality of their work life. A representative sample of 480 women working professionals was selected using a quasi-experimental sampling technique. The data were collected using the Organization Citizenship Behaviour-Checklist and Quality of Worklife Scale (QoWL) and was analyzed using ‘t’, UNIANOVA, two-way ANOVA with post-hoc analysis. Findings indicated that the respondents’ attitude towards work was favourably affected by their involvement, satisfaction and commitment towards their work-roles, organizational size and tenure of work. The analysis of interviews with respondents revealed that there is a negative impact of their professional lives on their psychological and physical self and many of them complained of experiencing insomnia, lack of consideration for own health, juggling between personal-professional life, dissatisfying work-life balance, negative displacement of anger among family members and children and so on. Striking similarities were also observed on the scores, high scorers were also observed to be high on achievement motive, have tolerance towards risk, were driven by ‘internal locus of control’, and were cautious and vigilant, having high intention towards entrepreneurial pursuits. Here ‘selection of the career’ has become their ‘lifestyle-by-product’ differentiating their work and life phenomena.

Keywords

Entrepreneurship Intrapreneurship Organization Citizenship Behaviour Work–Life Interface

Executive Summary

Entrepreneurship gives a sense of differentiation to an individual that they expect out of their professional life. Entrepreneurial nuances emerge from an individual’s creativity, unique thinking process and mindset. Entrepreneurs vary from others in their performance referring to their ability to manage multiple challenges. The world economies have recognized and acknowledged the enterprise spirit of people which has helped the transformation of small units into industrial giants, making their contribution to compete with international markets. It has also been a topic of interest to understand how entrepreneurship under the giant corporate houses can lead to new ideas flowing from cubicles to board rooms. The entrepreneurial transformation of an organization is about adapting innovative and better ways to cope with the new age of uncertainty and competition. The twenty-first-century world of work is filled with tremendous work pressure, a chase for competitions to upgrade self and master new skills, cut-throat rivalry for patronage, high aspiration of professional achievement and survival of the fittest. Today, there is no discrimination between work and life. Work has become a crucial part of our lives. All this places undue pressure on women professionals, as managing work and family life has become increasingly important and challenging at the same time for them.

This research was conducted to examine the effect of organizational citizenship behaviour and work-life balance using a quasi-experimental sampling technique on a representative sample of 480 women (entrepreneurs and managers/intrapreneurs). The primary data were collected using Organization Citizenship Behaviour-Checklist (Paul & Suzy, 2009) and Quality of Worklife Scale (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 2002) and analyzed using ‘t’, UNIANOVA, two-way ANOVA with post-hoc analysis. Findings indicated that the respondents’ attitude towards work was favourably affected by their involvement, satisfaction and commitment towards their work-roles, organizational size and tenure of work. The analysis of interviews with respondents revealed that there is a negative impact of their professional lives on their psychological and physical self and many of them complained of experiencing insomnia, lack of consideration for own health, juggling between personal-professional life, dissatisfying work-life balance, negative displacement of anger among family members and children and so on. Striking similarities were also observed on the scores, high scorers were also observed to be high on achievement motive, have tolerance towards risk, were driven by ‘internal locus of control’, and were cautious and vigilant, having high intention towards entrepreneurial pursuits. Here ‘selection of the career’ has become their ‘lifestyle-by-product’ differentiating their work and life phenomena.

Introduction

Entrepreneurial nuances emerge from an individual’s creativity, unique thinking process and mindset. Entrepreneurship gives a sense of differentiation to an individual that they expect out of their professional life. It has been noted that ‘entrepreneurship emerges from an individual’s creative spirit’ (Prasanna & Venkatraman, 2018, p. 222). It is closely linked to employment creation, optimum allocation of resources and formation of capital, long-term business ownership and economic security. Entrepreneurs vary from others in their performance referring to their ability to manage multiple challenges. They have to deal with failures, emotional and motivational upsets arising out of negative feedback (Badovick et al., 1992). The world economies have recognized and acknowledged the enterprise spirit of people and their strive for innovation and creativity. This growing realization of their potential has helped the transformation of small units into industrial giants competing with international markets. This enterprise spirit of people is also observed under giant corporate houses. For researchers, it has always been a topic of interest to appraise how this spirit of entrepreneurship can lead to new ideas flowing from cubicles to board rooms. An idea with modernization and innovation in product development can lead to greater wealth creation and economic development. The entrepreneurial transformation of an organization is about adapting innovative and better ways to cope with the new age of uncertainty and competition. Technically this is termed as ‘corporate entrepreneurship’ or ‘intrapreneurship’; ‘a process that can facilitate firms’ efforts to innovate constantly and cope effectively with the competitive environments’ (Bruce & Bluedorn, 1999). These firms support their employees to take risks without fear of their outcome, personal loss, failures and further reward employees by letting them strive from their creations. The mere goal is to amalgamate innovative behaviour and entrepreneurial commitment of the person, aligning it with the availability of advanced technology, capital availability, leveraging the market strengths and reach.

Managers often like to see their subordinates engaging in voluntary activities at work. Here managers’ role is more crucial in helping their subordinates to ‘execute voluntary behavior without any reward while developing a sense of belongingness’ (Gupta et al., 2017, p. 981). Researchers and practitioners have further observed the importance of extra-role behaviour on healthy work-life and explain the impact of the workplace setting, its intervening policy which in turn helps to create a positive attitude, commitment and satisfaction on the employees (Gayathiri & Ramakrishnan, 2013, p. 6). Markos and Sridevi (2010, p. 89) have examined that the exceedingly engaged employees who score high in aspects such as organizational citizenship behaviour, employee commitment and job satisfaction were also observed to enjoy a stronger predictor for positive organizational performance. They observed that exceedingly engaged employees are emotionally attached to their organization and highly involved in their job with great enthusiasm for the success of their employer and going the extra mile beyond the employment contractual agreement, thereby showing a two-way conducive relationship between employer and employee (Markos & Sridevi, 2010, p. 94).

Managing work and family life has become increasingly important and challenging at the same time for women at all professional levels. They have to equally share and care for family responsibilities while managing their professional pursuits. Researchers have observed that women who earn while bearing family responsibilities are now turning towards becoming entrepreneurs, as they observe it be a viable option that gives them the flexibility to manage home and business (Rehman & Azam Roomi, p. 212). But these pursuits come with extra challenges, such as putting on extra time and efforts to manage these overloaded responsibilities while parallelly spending extra hours on self-learning and development. A qualitative study on 26 women entrepreneurs from a region in South India observed that they struggle and juggle between highly demanding familial, personal, professional and societal needs; facing health problems, poor time management, dependent care issues and lack of sufficient support networks (Mathew & Panchanatham, 2011, p. 98). The ‘work and life’ aspects have often been observed to have a negative impact on the life of any employee with corresponding consequences on the employees’ job satisfaction and commitment towards work (Nwagbara & Akanji, 2012). With changing and advancing socio-cultural environment and increasing the acceptance for higher education, women have started becoming aware of their entrepreneurial skills (Rehman & Azam-Roomi, p. 222). With the support system, growing numbers of women workforce have increased substantially, but the existing familial and societal setup overburdens ‘women to balance their work and personal roles’ (Rajendhiran & Silambarasan, 2015). These changes have led to the wider acceptance of women not only as homemakers but also as nation builders. Various support systems starting from home to government and ecosystem enablers have paved the way for them to become aware and develop their skills, choose a career of their own choice, promoting this knowledge and skills to perform better.

The Emergence of Women Leaders

Nowadays women entrepreneurs are a growing trend in today’s competitive edge economy and ‘own more than 25% of all business enterprises’ (Punithavathy & Eswaran, 2002). Scholars, researchers, corporate/industry experts and governments have appreciated the significant contribution of women into different sectors. Studies and reports across globe (conducted by academicians to industry experts) have focused on career profiles of women entrepreneurs and corporate executives and have observed that some of them have identified common features such as ‘commitment, intuition, adaptability, discipline, tendency to cooperate, ability to delegate authority, tolerance to frustration, finding efficiency and effectiveness’ as some of the skills that have helped them to become better in handling challenging roles (Romo et al., 2007). The report by Grant Thornton International Ltd (2019) chalked out the contribution of women in leadership role globally and highlighted that 87% of businesses have at least one women in a senior management role which has risen from 20% (in the year 2012) to 29% (in the year 2019), and 29% proportion of these senior roles held by women have risen from 65% (in the year 2012) to 87% (in the year 2019) (as observed in the report by Grant Thornton International Ltd., 2019, p. 5). These women into leadership roles are designated and working as human resource directors (43%), chief finance officers (34%), chief marketing officers (20%), chief operating officers (18%), sales directors (17%), chief information officers (16%), chief executive officers/ managing directors (15%), the corporate controllers (14%), partners (7%) and others into different administrative roles (3%). Similarly, the Deloitte Global Report (2017) has also observed the contribution of women in higher leadership roles across the globe as board members and board chairs. The report summarizes that women leaders in North America have occupied 14.5% and 3.8% as board members and chairs. In Canada, it was observed to be 17.7% and 5.0%, while the United States observed 14.2% and 3.7% of women leaders, whereas in Latin and South America women leaders have occupied 7.2% and 2.1%, respectively. Similarly, women into leadership positions occupied in other nations such as Brazil (7.7% and 1.5%); Chile (6.5% and %); Columbia (14.5%); Mexico (6.0% and 2.2%); Asia (2.6% and 7.8%) and the Middle East (5.4% and be 11.3%) were also observed as thriving exceptionally (Deloitte, 2017).

Organization Citizenship Behaviour

Technology advancement and globalization have affected organizational productivity, functioning and overall work culture. Timely delivery of good quality products has always been a priority of the firms, and to achieve this, many times organizations impose numerous pressure on the employees. Employees are always expected to perform better and go beyond their assigned tasks. Some employees have also been observed to execute helping hands to their peers even at the time of extreme conditions. Some indulge in such selfless acts as a voluntary behaviour while for others it is a way to impress their boss. Zheng-long and Hong-dom (2010) have observed that compulsory citizenship behaviour has a negative impact on contextual performance and organizational commitment. In today’s time, altruistic behaviour has gained greater importance. Going beyond one’s assigned tasks and exhibiting compassion and concern for colleagues is referred to as extra-role behaviour or organization citizenship behaviour (OCB). Scholars have also observed that people who engage themselves in OCB exhibit characteristics such as ‘positive and negative affectivity, conscientiousness and agreeableness’ (Organ & Ryan, 1995). Further, occupational psychologists believe that this type of behaviour is exhibited more by highly engaged employees because these people believe in investing and channelizing their ‘cognitive, physical and emotional energies’ into their work (Gupta et al., 2017, p. 973). A review of the literature explains that ‘female oil worker significantly practices OCB more than male oil workers’ (Francis, 2014). Cemal et al. (2012) observed that a ‘positive relationship of entrepreneurship with OCB is mediated by affective and continuance commitment’. Many studies have also focused on the positive impact of entrepreneurial leadership on OCB and observe that it enhances innovative activities, innovative and proactive behaviour among organizations. Entrepreneurial leaders’ commitment, work satisfaction, positivity towards work and colleagues, helping subordinates and so on have positively contributed towards small enterprises’ performance beyond estimation and welcome the future by generating confidence in the organization’s vision (Podsakoff et al. 2000; Robbins, 2006; Rutherford & Holt, 2007; Supriyanto et al., 2018, p. 9; Zehir et al., 2012). A study by Chandra and Mathur (2018a, p. 114) observes that women entrepreneurs exhibit a high level of achievement and power affiliation motive, which helped them in achieving various challenging areas, such as process breakthroughs, line extensions, developing new organizational patterns, designing new products and services, developing new models of alliances and so on.

From the last quarter of the twentieth century onwards OCB and employee commitment have started to appear on the ground that ‘efficiency and productivity lie within the employees’ ability and commitment’ (Markos & Sridevi, 2010, p. 89). Though people voluntarily indulge in these behaviours but knowingly (or unknowingly) they expect their organization to recognize and reward them. If due to any reason, the organization fails to recognize or do not reward its employees who exhibit extra-role behaviour, then chances are that employees may take a step back, stop supporting colleagues leading to negatively affecting the efficiency and productivity of the organization. Psychogios et al. (2019) examined the relationship between adverse working conditions in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) during the time of severe economic crisis and the cost-cutting practices adopted by SMEs such as downsizing, salary cuts, freezing of wages and so on hinder the performance of employees in mid/long run. Employees who practice OCB were able to cope with helping themselves and their colleagues to sail through these adverse conditions at work (Psychogios et al., 2019, p. 521). Some employees even perceive job losses as their employers’ instability to retain and nurture the best talent (Wynen & Op de Beeck, 2014).

Quality of Work Life

Today there is no discrimination between work and life. Work has become a crucial part of our lives. An individual spends almost one-third of his/her life at the workplace, sharing their emotions and feelings with colleagues, building sweet and sour relationships. Creating, enhancing or promoting positive wellbeing is something that everyone looks upon. Providing healthy workplaces to its employees has become a challenging task for any organization. Studies have suggested three indicators that objectively contribute towards work-life balance these are, ‘organizational commitment, productivity, and development’. A healthy workplace gives a ‘feeling of satisfaction and commitment towards work-life’ (Rice et al., 1985). Studies have further observed a significant correlation between teamwork benefitting positive affectivity in the organizations and helping employees to experience work-life balance (Guest 2002; Organ, et al. 2005). Women have been observed to always report experiencing an imbalance and juggle between personal, professional, social and emotional life. But their relentless zeal, incessant quench for success, willingness to walk an extra mile to accelerate the career ladder has led on one hand to demand a work profile that matches their advanced knowledge, varied skills and competencies. On the other hand, this has also led them to face an imbalance in their existing domestic and societal setup because the expectations from family and society are, that they should have family care and relationships as their first priority (Sumitha & Dsouza, 2015). A study by Indumathi and Selvan (2015) which was focused on analyzing the quality of work-life among male and female employees from technology companies, highlights various factors which contribute to the experience of the quality of work-life balance such as job security, organization’s management, policies, open communication between team members and reporting heads and a culture where social integration is emphasized. They have observed that ‘work has become an indispensable part of everyday’, and work-life balance is affected by job stress, insecurity, social integration and lack of open exchange of thoughts (Indumathi & Selvan, 2015). Delina and Prabhakar (2013) in a study on the work-life balance among working women and entrepreneurs concluded that the role changes of working women across the world due to economic conditions and social demands leading to a tremendous pressure to develop a career as a robust against their male counterparts’. The excessive pressure to excel in their career and at the same time sustaining personal and family life is leaving them with less time for themselves affecting their physical and psychological lives. All these factors are interfering in balancing their work and personal life (Delina & Prabhakar, 2013).

Everyone demands a healthy work-life balance. A healthy employee (at his/her physical and psychological level) engages in best practices to deliver the best possible results (Chandra, 2020). An employee feels a high level of job satisfaction and commitment towards work when he/she is given a conducive work environment. A supportive work environment is what every employee looks forward to, which in turn encourages them to successfully implement enough creative ideas to make a surplus of fruitful opportunities for them. An employee who is dedicated towards his/her work will not only find it motivating but will also take ‘onus’ of it (Sweetman & Luthans, 2010). Organizations can reap the fruits of the commitment of their employees only by improving the quality of their work lives. A stressful working environment negatively influences the mental health of its employees. Improved wellbeing can increase employee’s involvement at work, and can help to ‘reduce absenteeism and attrition’ (Hannif et al., 2008, p. 272). This in turn helps to develop a positive relationship among its members and supports for building the organizations’ environment, culture and outcome.

A working woman has a perception of her potential capabilities and limitations. She understands and recognizes the importance of developing interpersonal skills and competencies, applying entrepreneurial and leadership acumen to her day-to-day tasks, and developing a social perception to not belittle themselves if she is not able to contribute equally to family and work. But she still faces enormous hurdles during this journey, she still faces a gap between creating a healthy well-balanced work-life for herself and creating a conducive and supporting environment for others. The twenty-first-century world of work is filled with tremendous work pressure, a chase for competitions to upgrade self and master new skills, cut-throat rivalry for patronage, high aspiration of professional achievement and survival of the fittest. All this builds undue pressure on women professionals, as managing work and family life has become increasingly important and challenging at the same time for them. Their current hectic work-lifestyle, getting less sleep, added responsibilities of home and work, juggling between personal/professional roles leads to a feeling of burnout, exhaustion and guilt of not being able to fulfil all the demands of home and children and not able to spend quality time with them. Though both these groups vary by the nature of their work, the very notion that women at any age, profession or career status will have to take care of a family along with managing professional life. The objectives and hypotheses we derived for this study were based on the theoretical foundations, where we assumed that the nature of work (such as entrepreneurs and managers/intrapreneurs) will have a differing effect on the organizational citizenship behaviour and quality of work-life practices. Women entrepreneurs by the very nature of their work environment vary from others in their professional pursuits referring to their ability to manage multiple challenges. Whereas women intrapreneurs (or corporate managers) are trained to manage multiple and cross-functional team assignments, bearing challenging responsibilities for various projects and working in collaboration with diverse groups.

This study was conducted on assumption that citizenship behaviour has its positive or negative impact, whether these behaviours are executed voluntarily or involuntarily transmitting on the wellbeing of employees. We here emphasize that for any individual or organization to meet its objectives, a twin-goal approach needs to be adopted aiming towards organizational effectiveness and improved well-being of employees. This study was conducted with an objective to understand the framework of organizational citizenship behaviour and quality of work-life practices among women working professionals who have chosen a career as entrepreneurs or are working as corporate employees and deploying dual profiles (as managers/ intrapreneurs). The study also intends to understand the relationship between strategies and intrapreneurial orientations indicating the importance given by the organization in providing overall support in the form of activities related to innovation in the organizations.

Objectives

Objectives of the study were as follows:

To study and analye the impact of the nature of work on women entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs on their measure of organizational citizenship behaviour and work-life interface practices.

To study and analyze the impact of the type of enterprises on women entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs on their measure of organizational citizenship behaviour and work-life interface practices.

Hypotheses

The hypotheses for this study were as follows:

H₁: The nature of work significantly influences women entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs on their measure of organizational citizenship behaviour and work-life interface practices.

H₂: The type of enterprises significantly influences women entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs on their measure of organizational citizenship behaviour and work-life interface practices.

Methodology

Selection of Sample and Collection of Primary Data

The total sample size comprised 480 women professionals. Using a quasi-experimental sampling technique (Kothari, 2009), the data were equally distributed and segregated into two groups. The first group is categorized as ‘nature of work’, (entrepreneurs [N = 120] and intrapreneurs [N = 120]); and the second group as ‘enterprises’, (medium [N = 120] and large [N = 120]). The sample included in the study was gathered from family owned-enterprises, business houses, educational/training institutions and industry associations across urban and suburb regions of Gujarat a state in India. The age of the respondents ranged from 23 to 52 years. At the initial stage, the prospective respondents were explained about the objective of the study, and all the respondents who gave their consent to participate were further given detailed instructions. The researcher ensured that the first step started with establishing rapport and making sure about the confidentiality of their information. The researcher then provided the questionnaires along with response sheets. To avoid intervening effects, one questionnaire was given on a single day. After several follow-ups, 480 filled responses were received and they was considered as the final sample to be investigated. The demographic data were measured separately.

To analyze the primary data, the researcher adopted descriptive and inferential statistical techniques (using Ms-Excel-2013; SPSS-2.0). The independent group of samples (nature of work and enterprises) had two levels and so were measured using the ‘t’ test and UNIANOVA. For the next step, a two-way analysis of variance was used to analyze the mediating effects of psychological variables to assess the proposed relationships. For the third step, post-hoc analysis (Bonferroni) was used to compare the means of variables to understand the between and within effect between each level.

Measuring Instruments

OCB Checklist (OCB-C; Paul & Suzy, 2009) is a 42 item 5-point scale, developed to measure how frequently employee exhibits citizenship behaviour in their organizations. This scale is focused to assess the acts of altruistic behaviour, reducing counterproductive work-behaviour, indicating the degree to which a person helps his/her co-worker on their personal and professional issues. It does not include any sub-scale. The sum of all items is the obtained total score. A high score indicates a person executes altruistic behaviour and inspires others also.

Quality of Worklife Scale (QoWL) developed by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (2002) is a scale to measure work-organization issues. This scale has 76 items with a focus to assess the employee on various areas of professional life such as; job, work culture, family and health concerns, working hours, union and supervision, other support systems and benefits and so on. This scale was developed based on the responses of 1,796 workers indicating their work experiences over 25 years. The KMO values (<0.6); factor analysis (was observed between 0.520 and 0.880 which is <0.5). The Cronbach’s coefficient alpha (was observed as 0.88). The 0.5 or higher factor loadings (for 100 of the sample) indicate that a person who scores high has better wellbeing and work-life balance. The next section of the article discusses the results of statistical analysis.

Results and Discussions

The tabulated results of the analyzed data are as follows:

The statistical analysis on the scale of the OCB-C (refer to Table 1) shows the difference between considering variables (nature of work vs. large enterprises). The mean differences observed that women intrapreneurs (217.41 and 218.18) are scoring higher than the other group (194.55 and 190.46). Whereas a reverse pattern has been observed (in the respondents from medium enterprises). Here entrepreneurs have reported high score (223.95) than intrapreneurs (191.44). Further, the analysis of UNIANOVA (using ‘t’ test) differed statistically, here high score has been reported by the subjects from enterprises group (small, medium and large) (44.16) and comparatively, the low score has been observed in the subjects from nature of workgroup (32.37) (refer to Table 2). The two-way analysis of variance observed that entrepreneurs have reported high scores (896.94) than intrapreneurs (medium vs. large enterprises) (14.66) (refer to Table 3). Further, the post-hoc (Bonferroni) analysis observed a significant difference (44.16), between medium and large enterprises (13.61 and 1.47) and between large and medium (13.61 and 1.51) (refer to Table 4). Taking reflection from the above analysis, the H1 stands accepted.

Table 1.

Showing the Summary of Descriptive Analysis on OCB-C

Criterion Groups		Mean	Median	SD
Nature of Work	Entrepreneurs	194.55	195	8.21
	Intrapreneurs	217.41	216	7.23
Medium Enterprise	Entrepreneurs	223.95	220	3.85
	Intrapreneurs	191.44	190.5	7.96
Large Enterprise	Entrepreneurs	190.46	188.5	9.33
	Intrapreneurs	218.18	217	6.91

Source: The authors.

Table 2.

Showing the Summary of Analysis Using ‘t’ Test

Criterion Groups		df	Mean	Median	SD	SE	t-Value
Nature of Work	Entrepreneurs	478	184.35	185	8.21	0.53	32.37^*
	Intrapreneurs		271.14	216	7.23	0.47
Enterprises	Medium Enterprise	2,478	198.35	197	12.46	1.16	44.16^*
	Large Enterprise		211.96	215	13.81	0.96

Source: The authors.

Note: NS, not significant; ^*Significant at 0.05 level; ^**Significant at 0.01 levels.

Table 3.

Showing the Summary of Calculated Factorial ANOVA

Criterion Groups	Sum-Squares	df	Mean-Squares	F-Value
Nature of Work	32,179.54	1	32,179.45	698.23^*
Enterprises	1,213.28	1	606.64	14.66^*

Source: The authors.

Note: ^*Significant at 0.05 level; ^**Significant at 0.01 levels.

Table 4.

Showing the Summary of Calculated Post-hoc Analysis (Bonferroni)

Criterion Groups	Sum-Squares	df	Mean-Squares	F-Value
Groups (Between)	14,810.89	2	7,405.44	44.16^*
Groups (Within)	76,519.94	477	160.42
Total	91,330.83	479

Enterprises	Mean Difference	Std. Error
Medium^*Large	13.61^*	1.47
Large^*Medium	13.61^*	1.51

Source: The authors.

Note: ^*Significant at 0.05 level; ^**Significant at 0.01 levels.

H₁: The nature of work significantly influences women entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs on their measure of organizational citizenship behaviour and work-life interface practices.

The analysis of the quality of work-life scale (refer to Table 5) observed the differences between all the groups. The mean differences between the nature of work and enterprises observed that women intrapreneurs have scored high (196.37 and 196.89) (195.31 and 143.08) than the entrepreneurs (155.65 and 134.8). The analysis of UNIANOVA observed that respondents from the enterprises’ group have scored comparatively low (21.27) than the other group (16.75) (refer to Table 6). However, a reverse pattern has been observed, the multi-stage analysis of ANOVA observed that entrepreneurs have reported high scores (421.09) than the other group (13.58) (refer to Table 7). Whereas the post-hoc (Bonferroni) analysis observed a significant difference in the mean values (21.27), (23.67 and 3.74), whereas a no-significant difference has been observed in the group ‘enterprises’. Lastly, the factorial ANOVA and a post-hoc analysis for all the dimensions have been separately discussed in Table 8 and further Table 9 explains the summary of the calculation of unianova, ANOVA and post-hoc analysis of all nine dimensions and the total scores of QoWL Scale. Taking reflection from the above analysis, the H2 stands accepted.

Table 5.

Showing the Summary of Descriptive Analysis on QoWL Scale

Criterion Groups		Mean	Median	SD
Nature of Work	Entrepreneurs	155.65	185.5	37.36
	Intrapreneurs	196.37	197	4.66
Medium Enterprise	Entrepreneurs	143.08	110	37.93
	Intrapreneurs	195.31	197	3.87
Large Enterprise	Entrepreneurs	134.8	110	36.25
	Intrapreneurs	196.89	199	4.4

Source: The authors.

Table 6.

Showing the Summary of the Calculated ‘t’ Value

Criterion Groups		df	Mean	Median	SD	SE	t-Value
Nature of Work	Entrepreneurs	478	135.77	154.5	37.36	2.41	16.75^*
	Intrapreneurs		156.23	157	4.66	0.3
Enterprises	Medium Enterprise	2,478	159.28	186	39.77	3.69	21.27^*
	Large Enterprise		182.96	197	31.29	2.19

Source: The authors.

Note: ^*Significant at 0.05 level; ^**Significant at 0.01 levels.

Table 7.

Showing the Summary of Calculated Factorial ANOVA

Criterion Groups	Sum-Squares	df	Mean-Squares	F-Value
Nature of Work	153,757.32	1	153,757.32	441.05^*
Enterprises	11,717.85	1	5,858.92	13.58^*

Source: The authors.

Note: ^*Significant at 0.05 level; ^**Significant at 0.01 levels.

Table 8.

Showing the Summary of Calculated Post-hoc Analysis (Bonferroni)

Criterion Groups	Sum-Squares	df	Mean-Squares	F-Value
Groups (Between)	44,018.3	2	22,009.15	21.27^*
Groups (Within)	493,592.64	477	1,034.79
Total	537,610.95	479

Enterprises	Mean Differences	Std. Error
Medium^*Large	23.67^*	3.74
Large^*Medium	3.70^NS	3.04

Source: The authors.

Note: ^*Significant at 0.05 level; ^**Significant at 0.01 levels.

Table 9.

Showing the Summary of UNIANOVA, ANOVA and Post-hoc Analysis for All the Dimensions of QoWL

Dimensions of QoWL Scale	UNIANOVA		ANOVA		Post-hoc (Bonferroni)
	Nature of Work	Enterprises	Nature of Work	Enterprises	Enterprises
	‘t’ Value	F Value	F Value	F Value	F Value
Job Level	0.00^NS	0.61^NS	667.42^*	16.54^*	0.61^NS
Culture/Climate	18.29^*	26.19^*	446.47^*	16.43^*	26.19^*
Health Outcomes	23.85^*	36.02^*	577.03^*	12.04^*	36.02^*
Hours of Work	36.68^*	60.63^*	902.93^*	4.25^*	60.63^*
Work Family	36.54^*	66.11^*	778.93^*	0.60^NS	66.11^*
Supervision	19.06^*	24.32^*	479.44^*	12.40^*	24.32^*
Benefit	23.98^*	29.30^*	667.42^*	10.45^*	29.30^*
Union	23.95^*	42.87^*	439.55^*	8.06^*	42.87^*
Other Outcomes	6.97^*	24.55^*	51.46^*	13.26^*	24.55^*
Total Scores QoWL	16.75^*	21.27^*	421.09^*	13.58^*	21.27^*

Source: The authors.

Note: ^*Significant at 0.05 level; ^**Significant at 0.01 levels.

H₂: The type of enterprises significantly influences women entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs on their measure of organizational citizenship behaviour and work-life interface practices.

The twenty-first-century world of work is observing tremendous work pressure, a chase for competitions to upgrade self, and to survive in the market. Organizations on the other side have joined hands with their employees, are helping them to enhance their effectiveness and efficiency. This is also one of the ways to retain and nurture good talent which organizations can reap their benefits at a later stage. In today’s scenario even though we have seen women growing professionally, they still own the responsibility of domestic chores. They are engaging in the work profession many a time due to push-pull factors. The bright side of this is that all these encourage them to have an independent occupation. A new era has been observed where more and more women entrepreneurs are engaging themselves in various businesses ranging from self-help groups to micro and small enterprises to service-based businesses. The opportunities and challenges with this new (digital) world have converted job seekers to job creators. Some are here due to a traumatic event in the family, for example, the death of the bread earner (father/spouses), stagnant corporate jobs with no possible further scope of growth, layoffs, socio-economic reasons and so on.

While having one-to-one interaction during interviews with the respondents, they shared that even though with their current hectic work-lifestyle, getting less sleep, added responsibilities of home and work, juggling between personal/professional roles; still they are enjoying this as part of their lifestyle. Some of the respondents have even revealed that they have reduced their sleep from 2 hours daily to 14 hours a week. On the other hand, even though trying at their extreme level to manage things, still exhaustion and guilt have been observed leading to a feeling of not being able to fulfil all the demands of home and children and not able to spend quality time with them. Some have even said that they need to skip the time they used to spend shopping and now buying things (from grocery to luxury items) online. Some respondents revealed that they have quit their corporate jobs to dedicate full time to launching new ventures (which is another way to satisfy their expectations). Many of them have even referred that the choice of ‘entrepreneurial career has become their lifestyle-by-products’ (Chandra & Mathur, 2018a). All these sum up leading to the problems affecting their work-life balance. The discussion further brought about a striking similarity of psychological constructs, namely, ‘internal locus of control’, ‘need for achievement’, ‘risk tolerance’ and ‘entrepreneurial alertness’ (Chandra & Mathur, 2018b) which is observed high among both women into managerial and entrepreneurial roles.

Twenty-first-century organizations get new skilled human resources who are not only looking for professional advancements and work which suits their temperament, such as rewarding, competitive assignments and highly collaborative and cross-functional self-managed teams where members do not compete for supervisory positions but on the other hand, themselves decide their teams’ work timeline, select, appraise and evaluate each other’s performance (Robbins & Judge, 2013, p. 310). The authors have also observed a kind of changed mindset in the respondents. Their families have started supporting them giving them the independence to choose a career of their choice and are also helping them to achieve their ambitions. This has brought about a sense of enjoying their abilities to develop relationships, aspire to high perseverance, cultivating an optimistic attitude, developing vision; sharing this motivation with others, and encouraging others to start believing in (themselves) along with driving their ‘entrepreneurial pursuits’ (as seen in Chandra & Mathur, 2017). Despite having differences concerning the innovation and risk-taking appetite, organizations have started giving them freedom and the chance to participate equally in planning and organizing their work, leading to increased ‘organizational commitment’ (as seen in Chandra & Mathur, 2017). This came as a response to closer ‘psychological attachment’ for fulfilling organizational goals. Organizations are also helping their employees to manage ‘work-life conflicts’ subsequently increasing their ‘psychological availability for work’ (May et al., 2004).

Conclusion

To summarize, the increasing number of double-income households, the need for a better standard of living, and increased women’s participation in the workplace have made both males and females independently take charge of work and home. Despite this, women still have major responsibilities of household chores (with a notion of more accountability), making them affected by increased burnout (as seen in Patel et al., 2017) from their routine tasks. Therefore, quality of experiences at work, rather than work itself has become the focus of attention, and ‘workplace wellness has become crucial in promoting healthier working environments’ (Dhar et al., 2009). In the end, employees strive towards task-oriented goals, more likely creating a healthy teamwork experience that is effective for organizations to strive better. It is further concluded that a place where an employee feels safe for themselves (physical and psychological) are observed to display altruistic behaviour leading to a healthier work-life practice. We suggest that organizations should initiate a better support system for their employees giving them flexibility in choosing assignments, work timeline and team members, more training programmes should be initiated to develop employee’s varied skills which can further be utilized for their professional and personal advancements.

Limitations, Significance, Implication and Future Research Prospects

Our study has observed some limitations. The study was conducted only on the identified professional groups of women analyzing a few psychological factors. These factors were OCB and quality of work-life which can be affected by numerous variables, however, for this study, only selective variables were considered. Further, the intra-inter comparison between the organizations considered in the study cannot be carried out due to time limitations as companies located at only a few urban and sub-urban areas were covered. Hence, the results derived from this study cannot be generalized to the wider strata. A more comprehensive study can be carried out on a larger sample constituting varied sectors across regions to analyze the effect of other socio-psychological and physical variables. Future studies can also be carried out to understand psycho-socio-emotional constructs among male and female populations comparing samples from different regions. A comparative study to examine various dynamic factors such as career progressions, growth and competition can also be conducted among various demographic generations. This study will be useful to understand the psychological factors, gain insights on socio-emotional, personal and professional aspects of women working professionals while analyzing the impact of these on their work-life. This study will have a significant impact in the area of organizational psychology to understand the complex nature of various organizations and the impact of their functioning on the life of employees and associated stakeholders. The authors would like to emphasize that academicians, researchers, policymakers, potential entrepreneurs organizational change managers, occupational therapists and research scholars will find this study useful. It would be helpful to examine personality traits and other factors that have effects on the entrepreneurial intention by conducting follow-up studies.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

References

Badovick

G. J.

, Hadaway

F. J.

, & Kaminski

P. F.

(1992). Attributions and emotions: The effects on salesperson motivation after successful vs. unsuccessful quota performance. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 12(3), 01–11. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08853134.1992.10753913

Bruce

R. B.

, & Bluedorn

A. C.

(1999). Corporate entrepreneurship and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 421–444.

Cemal

, Busra

, & Zehir

(2012). The impact of corporate entrepreneurship on organizational citizenship behavior and organizational commitment: Evidence from Turkey SMEs. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 924–933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1071

Chandra

(2020). A psychology of building healthy employee-employer relationships: Corporate social responsibility, a people-centric approach. Tathapi, 19(43), 185–195.

Chandra

, & Mathur

(2018a). Maturing intrapreneurial competencies among the employees of medium and large enterprises: Impact study of need for achievement and quality of worklife. Nirma University Journal of Business and Management Studies, 01(04), 29–46.

Chandra

, & Mathur

(2018b). Paradigm shift from managerial to intrapreneurial: A study of need for achievement and quality of worklife among corporate managers (pp. 98–119). Research Frontiers in Human Resource Management and Marketing Management, Institute of Management Nirma University, Excel Publishers.

Chandra

, & Mathur

(2017). Strategic entrepreneurship within family owned firms vs. corporate decision makers: Opportunity and challenges. Nirma University Journal of Business and Management Studies, 12(01–02), 85–102.

Delina

, & Prabhakar

R. R.

(2013). A study on work-life balance in working women. IRACST-International Journal of Commerce, Business and Management, 2(5), 274–282.

Deloitte (2017). Women in the boardroom: A global perspective (pp. 22–37). Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu P Ltd.

10.

Dhar

, Dhar

, & Jain

R. K.

(2009). Value based management for organizational excellence. Indian Society for Training and Development, Excel Books.

11.

Francis

(2014). Organizational citizenship behaviour and demographic factors among oil workers in Nigeria. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 19(08), 87–95. https://doi.org/10.9790/0837-19858795

12.

Gayathiri

, & Ramakrishnan

(2013). Quality of work life–linkage with job satisfaction and performance. International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 2(1), 1–8.

13.

Grant Thornton International Ltd (2019). Women in business: Turning promise into practice. International Business Report, 02–05. Grant Thornton International Ltd.

14.

Guest

D. E.

(2002). Perspectives on the study of work-life balance. Social Science Information, 41(2), 255–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018402041002005

15.

Gupta

, Shaheen

, & Reddy

P. K.

(2017). Impact of psychological capital on organizational citizenship behavior: Mediation by work engagement. Journal of Management Development, 36(7), 973–983. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-06-2016-0084

16.

Hannif

, Burgess

, & Connell

(2008). Call centres and the quality of work life: Towards a research agenda. Journal of Industrial Relations, 50(2), 271–284. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022185607087902

17.

Indumathi

G. S.

, & Selvan

R. T.

(2015). A perception on quality of work life among male and female employees in the information technology companies. IMPACT: International Journal of Research in Engineering & Technology, 01(07), 31–36.

18.

Kothari

C. R.

(2009). Research methodology: Methods & techniques (2nd ed., pp. 14–72). New Age International Publishers.

19.

Markos

, & Sridevi

M. S.

(2010). Employee engagement: The key to improving performance. International Journal of Business And Management, 5(12), 89. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v5n12p89

20.

Mathew

R. V.

, & Panchanatham

(2011). An exploratory study on the work-life balance of women entrepreneurs in South India. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 16(2), 105–129.

21.

May

D. R.

, Gilson

R. L.

, & Harter

L. M.

(2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77(1), 11–37. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317904322915892

22.

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (2002) Quality of worklife questionnaire. Retrieved September, 28, 2014, from http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/stress/qwlquest

23.

Nwagbara

, & Akanji

(2012). The impact of work-life balance on the commitment and motivation of Nigerian women employees. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 2(3), 38–47.

24.

Organ

D. W.

, & Ryan

(1995). A meta analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organization citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48, 775–802. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01781.x

25.

Organ

D. W.

, Podsakoff

P. M.

, & MacKenzie

S. B.

(2005). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Sage Publications.

26.

Patel

, Chandra

, & Mathur

(2017). Perception of work environment and its effect on job burnout. Research Trends in Marketing Management & Human Resource Management, Nirma University (pp. 215–223) [Paper presentation]. ANVESH-2017, Doctoral Conference in Management, Institute of Management, Nirma University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat April 07–08, 2017.

27.

Paul

E. S.

, & Suzy

(2009). Organizational citizenship behavior checklist (OCB-C). Test Manual. University of South Florida. Retrieved September 28, 2014, from http://shell.cas.usf.edu/~pspector/scales/ocbcpage.html

28.

Podsakoff

P. M.

, MacKenzie

S. B.

, Paine

J. B.

, & Bachrach

D. G.

(2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26(3), 513–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(00)00047-7

29.

Psychogios

, Nyfoudi

, Theodorakopoulos

, Szamosi

L. T.

, & Prouska

(2019). Many hands lighter work? Deciphering the relationship between adverse working conditions and organization citizenship behaviours in small and medium-sized enterprises during a severe economic crisis. British Journal of Management, 30(3), 519–537. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12245

30.

Prasanna

, & Venkatraman

(2018). A study of women entrepreneurs in small scale business. International Research Journal of Commerce, Arts and Science, 9(3), 222–230.

31.

Punithavathy

, & Eswaran

(2002). Empowerment of Women through Micro–Credit. Yojana, 46(11), 47.

32.

Rajendhiran

, & Silambarasan

(2015). A study on work life balance among women entrepreneurs with special reference to Salem City of Tamilnadu, India. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Science Index, Economics and Management, Engineering (Vol. 01, pp. 1063).

33.

Rehman

, & Azam Roomi

(2012). Gender and work-life balance: A phenomenological study of women entrepreneurs in Pakistan. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 19(2), 209–228. https://doi.org/10.1108/14626001211223865

34.

Rice

R. W.

, McFarlin

D. B.

, Hunt

R. G.

, & Near

J. P.

(1985). Organizational work and the perceived quality of life: Toward a conceptual model. Academy of Management Review, 10(02), 296–310. https://doi.org/10.2307/257971

35.

Robbins

S. P.

(2006). Organizational behavior: Concepts, controversies and applications (2nd ed.). Pudjaatmaka Translation. Prenhallindo.

36.

Robbins

S. P.

, & Judge

T. A.

(2013). Organizational behavior (p. 310). Pearson Education Inc.

37.

Romo

, Suárez

, & Llamas

(2007). Characteristics and skills of women entrepreneurs. Gaceta Ide @ s CONCYTEG, 2(23), 111–127.

38.

Rutherford

M. W.

, & Holt

D. T.

(2007). Corporate entrepreneurship: An empirical look at the innovativeness dimension and its antecedents. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 20(3), 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1108/09534810710740227

39.

Sumitha

P. V.

, & Dsouza

P. K.

(2015). Role of women entrepreneurs in inclusive growth - A study on work life balance. IOSR Journal of Business Management, 8th International Business Research Conference. (pp. 54–62). IES Management College and Research Centre, Mumbai.

40.

Supriyanto

A. S.

, Ekowati

V. M.

, Wekke

I. S.

, & Idris

(2018). Respective contribution of entrepreneurial leadership through organizational citizenship behaviour in creating employees performance. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 24(4), 1–11.

41.

Sweetman

, & Luthans

(2010). The power of positive psychology: Psychological capital and work engagement. In Akker

A. B.

, & Leiter

M. P.

(Eds.), Work Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research (pp. 54–68). Psychology Press.

42.

Wynen

, & Op de Beeck

(2014). The impact of the financial and economic crisis on turnover intention in the US federal government. Public Personnel Management, 43(4), 565–585.

43.

Zehir

, Busra

, & Songul

(2012). The impact of corporate entrepreneurship on organizational citizenship behavior and organizational commitment: Evidence from Turkey SMEs. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 924–933. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026014537043

44.

Zheng-long

, & Hong-dan

(2012). Does organization citizenship behavior really benefit the organization? Study on the compulsory citizenship behavior in China. Nankai Business Review International, 03(01), 75–92. https://doi.org/10.1108/20408741211201935