1. INTRODUCTION

Working from home was present as a strategy even before the Corona Virus outbreak. In recent years, there has been increasing focus on the question of how to balance work and life commitments.

Homeworking is one initiative that has been promoted as a way of improving the work-life balance. However, it is not a popular choice among corporate as the office-work setting is assumed to bring more productivity and output. Managing the effectiveness of remote working has always been challenging for organizations.

Since the outbreak of Coronavirus, there are lockdowns in many parts of the world. In India particularly, the Government announced a lockdown and restricted the people to stay in their homes, and suspended all transport facilities except for essential goods and services (Wankhede, 2020). The lockdown resulted in a total shutdown of work for most of the corporate. To minimize productivity losses, organizations started online work and remote working for their employees. ‘Work from home’ became significant in ensuring social distancing and ensuring safety (Sinha, 2020). However, the understanding regarding how well it is accepted by the employees is an area of study which needed attention. Michael (2021) highlighted the severe psychological impact of covid 19 on people with a significant association of occupation on the psychological impact. Hence understanding work-related perceptions and beliefs become an important area of study. Another study by Sethi and Saini (2020) highlights of opinions of school teachers on work from home and suggests that teachers had a positive opinion on work from home, although, they consider work from home a moderately challenging job. Thus, with the assistance of school authorities working from home can become a highly satisfying job for the teachers. Flexible work schedules and arrangements thus facilitate the need for employees to achieve balance in their home and work life (Saxena, 2018).

With the said background, this study is undertaken to explore the following research problems.

1. How well the employees of the corporate sector have accepted the work from home setting and how well they are satisfied by the same?

2. Do the benefits of working from home outweigh its challenges and whether employees want to continue with this work setting in the post-pandemic world?

3. How the organizations and the employees themselves can make work from home setting more effective and productive?

4. Whether working from home is a better working setting compared to offices? Which setting is preferred by employees?

This study is undertaken to understand the perceptions of corporate sector employees towards benefits and challenges of working from home and also to understand potential factors which will help increase the effectiveness of work from home settings. This study is needed to identify the motivations and drivers which will make work from home more effective and productive. Because of lockdown restrictions, organizations do not have an option but to practice this setting. Identifying and working on the challenges will help the organizations minimise their impact and boost the effectiveness of work from home. Hence, for the purpose of this research, following objectives are developed.

1. To understand the satisfaction among employees toward a complete work from home scenario

2. To understand the benefits and challenges of working from home

3. To understand the factors influencing the effectiveness of work from home

4. To compare office and home as work settings and understand the preferences of employees on appropriate work arrangement

The paper comprises of a literature review followed by gap analysis and identification of variables. Then hypotheses are developed and research methodology is defined. The result section comprises of descriptive and inferential analysis followed by discussion and conclusion. The last sections comprise of managerial implication, limitations of study and contribution of research.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW:

Various national and international papers examined the experience of homeworking drawing on studies on homeworkers, teleworkers and people working remotely. Some of these papers are studied and their findings are summarised below.

A paper investigated the relationships between theoretically grounded telework factors and various individual and organizational outcomes of telework (overall satisfaction with telework, perceived advantages of teleworking, career opportunities and self-reported productivity). Based on a literature review, ten telework factors that may affect individual and organizational telework outcomes were identified and empirically tested using the survey data of 128 teleworkers exercising different telework intensity and representing various sectors of the economy. The bundle of theoretically selected variables explained a significant part of the variance of telework outcomes. Reduced communication with co-workers, supervisor’s trust and support, suitability of the working place at home were found to be the most important telework factors impacting different telework outcomes. Higher self-reported productivity was related to reduced time in communicating with co-workers, a suitable working place at home and the possibility to take care of family members when teleworking. This study provides insights about the management of telework in organizations by highlighting the factors that promote the satisfaction, productivity and perceived career opportunities of teleworkers. (Nakrošiene et al, 2019).

Another paper aimed to identify strategies used by successful teleworkers to create and maintain boundaries between work and home, and to determine how these strategies relate to employee preferences for segmentation or integration of work and home. Forty in-depth, face-to-face interviews were conducted with employees working from home either occasionally (occasional teleworkers), between 20 and 50 per cent of the workweek (partial teleworkers), or most of the time (full teleworkers). Teleworkers use physical, temporal, behavioural and communicative strategies to recreate boundaries like those found in office environments. These findings can encourage organizations to proactively assess employee preferences for boundary permeability before entering a teleworking arrangement. (Basile and Beauregard, 2016)

An interesting paper attempted to show how the shift of paid work from traditional locations into the home environment raises serious questions of identity for managers who have started to work from home and who have to “cope with” the sometimes-conflicting demands imposed by different socio-cultural spheres. Based on an empirical study of working from home, three case studies are presented, which articulate and summarise different modes of engagement with both paid and domestic work and respective identity issues. Adding to the existing literature on working from home, the findings of this research indicate that the success or failure of ‘working from home’ is intrinsically tied into issues related to home worker’s identity. (Tietze and Musson, 2010).

In response to the rising number of individuals who must combine work and home responsibilities, organizations increasingly offer work-home practices. However, extant research on the relationship between work-home practice use and both work-to-home conflict (i.e., work interfering with private life) and home-to-work conflict (i.e., private life interfering with work) shows inconsistent results. In a study, researchers posit that employees’ work-home conflict does not so much depend on whether or not they use a specific work-home practice, but rather on (1) the degree to which their (non-)use of this practice is in line with their preference (i.e., volition) and (2) the pressure they experience from the work and/or the home environment to act in another way than they prefer (i.e., perceived work pressure and perceived home pressure). (Delanoeije and Verbruggen, 2019)

Telecommuting has become an increasingly popular work mode that has generated significant interest from scholars and practitioners alike. With recent advances in technology that enable mobile connections at ever-affordable rates, working away from the office as a telecommuter has become increasingly available to many workers around the world. Since the term telecommuting was first coined in the 1970s, scholars and practitioners have debated the merits of working away from the office, as it represents a fundamental shift in how organizations have historically done business. Complicating efforts to truly understand the implications of telecommuting have been the widely varying definitions and conceptualizations of telecommuting and the diverse fields in which research has taken place. (Tammy et al, 2015)

A research paper explores published articles and research papers that bring to light the impact of working remotely (Telecommuting and Telework) on the productivity of employees and the professionalism their work demands. Although the articles and papers present both positive and the negative impact of working remotely on employee performance and work specific professionalism, the negatives outweigh the positive ones. The paper discusses the difficulties and challenges that any company could face while adopting this mode of work besides the option being one of the most lucrative ways to keep the workforce motivated and satisfied. (Singh et al, 2017).

Amabile and Kramer (2013) discussed the positives of this work option and acknowledged that work from home has increased productivity and lead to more employee satisfaction. While Richardson and Writer, (2017) implied that although there are positives of this work option, the negatives of working remotely require attention as they directly impact productivity of the employees and makes supervision and communication difficult. Table-1 summarises the review of literature and identifies the gaps.

3.1. Hypotheses Development:

Following hypotheses are developed for this study. The first hypothesis H1 attempts to test the level of agreement on factors defining benefits of working from home.

H1₀: There is no significant difference in the level of agreement on factors defining benefits of working from home.

H1_A: There is significant difference in the level of agreement on factors defining benefits of working from home.

The second hypothesis H2 attempts to test the level of agreement on factors defining challenges of working from home.

H2₀: There is no significant difference in the level of agreement on factors defining challenges of working from home.

H2_A: There is a significant difference in the level of agreement on factors defining challenges of working from home.

The third hypothesis H3 attempts to test the level of agreement on factors improving the effectiveness of working from home.

H3₀: There is no significant difference in the level of agreement on factors improving the effectiveness of work from home.

H3_A: There is a significant difference in the level of agreement on factors improving the effectiveness of work from home.

The null hypothesis implies that there are no significant differences in ratings given to the factors and the alternative hypothesis implies that there is a significant difference in ratings and that some factors are rated higher compared to others.

4. METHODOLOGY:

4.1 Research design: The research design is descriptive and exploratory. Secondary research involved a review of literature from various national and international journals. The primary study included a survey among employees of the corporate Sector (mainly from Mumbai City) to understand their perceptions and attitudes towards working from home.

4.2 Sample design: A sample of 240 respondents is taken into consideration. The target population was corporate sector employees from various sectors and levels of organization. Snow-ball sampling is used where the respondents were asked to forward the online survey to their acquaintances thus making the sampling random in nature.

Table-3 summarizes profile of respondents. From the sample size of 240 respondets, 156 are Males and 84 are Females.The average age of respondent is 32 years with more than half of the respondents belonging to 20-30 years of age group. The target population of this research was mainly corporate sector employees. Majority of respondents are from Banking, Financial Services, and Insurance Sector (25%), IT and IT enabled services sector (18%), Manufacturing (11%) and FMCG, Consulting, E-commerce, among others. Respondents were from all domains of management including Human Resource Management (20%), Marketing and Sales (19%) and Finance (18%).

Table 3: Profile of Respondents

Gender		Age Groups
Male	65%	20-30 Years	54%
Female	35%	30-40 Years	25%
Sector		40-50 Years	13%
IT and ITES	18%	50-60 Years	8%
BFSI	25%	Work Profile
FMCG	9%	Finance	18%
Education	14%	Marketing and Sales	19%
Manufacturing	11%	Human Resource Management	20%
E-Commerce	7%	Information Technology	14%
Consulting	8%	Operations and Supply Chain Management	14%
Others	8%	General Management and Others	15%

4.3 Questionnaire design: The Survey questions consisted of a mix of open-ended and close-ended questions. Five-point or ten-point Likert scales are used to gauge the level of agreement on each variable listed. Open-ended questions explored their attitudes towards various other aspects of remote working.

4.4. Data Design: The data gathered is analysed using statistical techniques. Descriptive analysis is used to explore the data and inferential technique like ANOVA is used to draw meaningful inferences from data analysis.

5. RESULTS:

The results of the survey are summarized in this section. The primary data is analyzed using descriptive as well as inferential analysis.

It can be observed from Table - 4 that a vast majority of employees (95.5%) are working remotely during the lockdown. The participants were asked whether they have worked remotely earlier, 55% participants have worked remotely earlier within that 24% (of total participants) are comfortable with the idea of working from home however 31% (of total participants) have worked remotely earlier but the experience of working amid lockdown is quite different and challenging for them. Surprisingly 45% of the respondents were working from home for the first time. This reflects the changing paradigm in the time of a crisis. It also highlights the great scope of adopting remote working policies widely.

Table 4: Working remotely before and during lockdown

Worked remotely during lockdown		Working remotely before lockdown
Yes	95.5%	Yes	55%
No	4.5%	No	45%

Respondents were asked to what extent they can complete their work responsibilities online. The average extent of being able to complete the work responsibilities online is 77% for the given sample. 86% of the respondents were able to complete more than 50% of their work remotely and only 14% of the respondents were able to complete less than 50% of their work online. 20% of employees were able to complete their full workload while working from home. This reflects the fact that the majority of the corporate sector jobs can be redesigned and can be done remotely without the need of coming to an office. The average satisfaction of working from home is 67% for the given sample. 44% were highly satisfied with Working from Home. 26% gave an average rating while 28% of the respondents gave a below-average satisfaction rating to working from home. Table-5 shows the descriptive statistics of work completion online and satisfaction with work from home.

Table 5: Extent of work completion online and Satisfaction with work from home

The extent of completing Work Online		Satisfaction with Work from Home
Mean	7.714912	Mean	6.72807
Standard Error	0.123428	Standard Error	0.151323
Median	8	Median	7
Mode	8	Mode	8
Standard Deviation	1.863715	Standard Deviation	2.284925
Sample Variance	3.473433	Sample Variance	5.220883
Kurtosis	0.455749	Kurtosis	-0.36178
Skewness	-0.83851	Skewness	-0.56426
Range	9	Range	9
Minimum	1	Minimum	1
Maximum	10	Maximum	10
Sum	1759	Sum	1534
Count	228	Count	228

5.1 Benefits of Working from Home:

The respondents were asked to rate their level of agreement on a set of factors defining ‘the benefits of working from home on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is the lowest and 5 is the highest level of agreement. The following hypothesis was tested using the ANOVA technique.

H1₀: There is no significant difference in the level of agreement on factors defining the benefits of working from home.

H1_A: There is a significant difference in the level of agreement on factors defining the benefits of working from home.

Table 6: ANOVA (Benefits of working from home)

ANOVA: Single Factor
SUMMARY
Groups			Count	Sum	Average		Variance
Saves Travel Costs and Time			228	969	4.25		1.35
Convenient and Comfortable			228	854	3.74		1.45
No need for Formal Attire and a Presentable Appearance			228	865	3.79		1.47
Family Time			228	876	3.84		1.35
Flexible Lifestyle			228	874	3.83		1.41
Time for exploring other activities and interests			228	809	3.54		1.54
Possibility of Frequent Breaks			206	731	3.54		1.65
Psychologically Peaceful			206	685	3.32		1.70
ANOVA
Source of Variation	SS	Df	MS	F		P-value		F crit
Between Groups	115.68	7	16.52	11.08		8.78E-14		2.01
Within Groups	2641.98	1772	1.49
Total	2757.66	1779

From Table No. 6, it can be seen that there is agreement on all the listed variables as benefits of working from home (average>3). It can also be observed that the P-value is less than 0.05 hence null hypothesis H1₀ is rejected and alternate hypothesis H1_A is accepted at a 5% level of significance. Hence it is inferred that there is a significant difference between the levels of agreement on factors defining the benefits of working from home. The top three benefits of working from home are (1) It saves traveling time and cost (avg=4.25), (2) It allows Family Time (avg=3.84), and (3) It allows a Flexible Lifestyle (avg=3.83).

Apart from the highest-rated benefits, respondents also agreed on the benefit that there is (4) no need for formal attire and presentable appearance all the time, working from home is (5) convenient and comfortable, and there is (6) time for exploring other activities and interests and (7) possibility of frequent breaks. It is (8) psychologically peaceful and less stressful compared to the office. Respondents in the open-ended question answers also highlighted the unseen benefits of working from home. Employees highlighted that working from home (9) allows better focus and there is (10) autonomy to schedule their work.

5.2 Challenges of working from home:

The respondents were asked to rate their level of agreement on a set of factors defining ‘challenges of working from home on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is the lowest and 5 is the highest level of agreement. The following hypothesis was tested using the ANOVA technique.

H2₀: There is no significant difference in the level of agreement on factors defining challenges of working from home.

H2_A: There is significant difference in the level of agreement on factors defining challenges of working from home.

Table 7: ANOVA (Challenges of working from home)

ANOVA: Single Factor
SUMMARY
Groups			Count	Sum		Average		Variance
Communication Difficulties			226	774		3.42		1.32
No Face-to-Face Interaction			226	796		3.52		1.31
Distractions at Home			225	811		3.60		1.08
Internet Connectivity, Technical Errors			222	808		3.63		1.28
Loneliness, Social Disconnect			226	759		3.35		1.53
Longer Working Hours			226	858		3.79		1.22
Disturbed Work Schedule			204	762		3.74		1.22
Multi-tasking Family Responsibilities and Work			204	770		3.77		1.18
ANOVA
Source of Variation	SS	Df	MS		F		P-value		F crit
Between Groups	40.5053	7	5.78647		4.54249		4.91E-05		2.0148
Within Groups	2230.51	1751	1.27385
Total	2271.02	1758

From Table No. 7, it is noted that there is agreement on all the listed variables as challenges of working from home (average>3). It can also be observed that the P-value is less than 0.05 hence null hypothesis H2₀ is rejected and alternate hypothesis H2_A is accepted at a 5% level of significance. Hence it is inferred that there is a significant difference between the levels of agreement on factors defining challenges of working from home. The top three challenges of Working from Home are (1) Longer working hours (avg=3.79), (2) Multi-Tasking Family and Work Responsibilities (avg=3.77), and (3) Disturbed Work Schedule (avg=3.74).

Apart from the top three challenges, respondents also agreed on the fact that there are (4) distractions at home, the existence of (5) Internet connectivity issues and technical errors (6) No face to face interactions with the team, social disconnect, and communication difficulties make work from home challenge. In the open-ended answers, the respondents also highlighted (7) Work Overload (8) Lack of Physical Exercise and Bad Body Postures (9) No Shutter Down for Work, and (10) High Expectations from the Boss as challenges of working from home.

5.3 Effectiveness of Work from Home:

The respondents were asked to rate their level of agreement on a set of factors improving ‘the effectiveness of working from home on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is the lowest and 5 is the highest level of agreement. The following hypothesis was tested using the ANOVA technique.

H3₀: There is no significant difference in the level of agreement on factors improving the effectiveness of work from home.

H3_A: There is a significant difference in the level of agreement on factors improving the effectiveness of work from home.

From Table No. 8, it is observed that there is agreement on all the listed variables as factors improving work from home effectiveness (average>3). However, it is also noted that the P value is more than 0.05 hence null hypothesis H3₀ is accepted and alternate hypothesis H3_A is rejected at 5% level of significance. Hence it is inferred that there is no significant difference between the levels of agreement on factors improving effectiveness of working from home. Respondents equally agree on all listed factors as factors improving work from home effectiveness.

Table 8: ANOVA (Effectiveness of Work from Home)

ANOVA: Single Factor
SUMMARY
Groups				Count	Sum	Average		Variance
Communication and Support from the Organization				228	879	3.85		1.09
Support from Manger				228	905	3.96		1.05
Timely Feedback and Appreciation				228	856	3.75		1.10
Clear expectations of Work Output				228	887	3.89		1.18
Support from family members				206	806	3.91		1.07
ANOVA
Source of Variation	SS	Df	MS		F		P-value		F crit
Between Groups	5.77790	4	1.444476		1.311403		0.263738		2.379926
Within Groups	1225.94	1113	1.101474
Total	1231.71	1117

The factors influencing effectiveness of Working from Home are (1) Support from Manager, (2) Support from Family Members and (3) Clear expectations of Work Output, (4) Timely Feedback and appreciation and (5) Communication and Support from Organization. In the analysis of open-ended responses, respondents highlighted the Need for (6) Dedicated Work Desk (7) Aadequate privacy (8) Self-discipline (9) Resources availability and (10) Gamification of work for improving the effectiveness of working from home.

5.4 Comparison of Office and Home work setting:

A set of factors were listed to compare and contrast office and home as work settings. Respondents were asked to select one work setting they feel is more suitable in accordance with the listed factors. The comparative analysis is shown in figure 1.

It can be observed from figure 1 that for all the listed factors, majority of respondents selected office as a better works setting. This emphasises the fact that work from home as a work setting still has a long way to go and office set up is comparatively advantageous. When asked to compare Offices and Homes on various parameters, offices stood out to be a better and appropriate work arrangement. Respondents selected appropriate work arrangement for a list of factors by the respondents. Majority of respondents selected office as a better work arrangement for all the factors. Work environment in offices is conducive for higher productivity. Quality of output is better in offices. Better teamwork and collaboration are possible in office set-up, Teams can be monitored well, and discipline can be maintained. There is higher task variety and effective time management in offices compared to working from home. This reflects the challenge of bringing out effectiveness in remote working.

Table 9: Preference of Working from home in future

Continue working from home post pandemic and lockdown
Yes	10%
No, prefer office work setting	25%
Mix of working from Office and Home	65%

From Table 9 it can be seen that only around 10% of the respondents would like to continue working from home fully post lockdown while 25% would like to go back to offices. Interestingly, majority of respondents (65%) would prefer a mix of working from Office and Home. Hence organizations have a huge scope of redefining work settings and implementing a blended approach suitable to the needs and preferences of organization and employees.

6. DISCUSSION:

The study was undertaken with a purpose to understand the perceptions and attitudes of employees around various aspects of working from home. The primary and secondary data analysis reveals various findings. Most of the employees in general are satisfied with work from home but there are undeniable issues which need attention of employee as well as the organization. Understanding the positives and negatives of work from home will help the stakeholders minimize the damage and maximise the effectiveness.

The biggest benefit of working from particularly for employees living in metro city is the fact that it saves travelling time and cost, employees need not spent time, money and energy in commuting to workplace. Work from home allows family time and flexible lifestyle which is again a boon for employees who struggle with work life balance and do not get to spend much time with family because of work. Employees find working from home convenient and comfortable, they are also happy with work from home as they need not be in formal attire and presentable appearance all the time, this highlights the option of adapting to informal and casual dressing at workplaces to bring comfort and convenience. This is already in practice by some organization like Google.

Pahuja (2017) highlights significant positive relationship and impact of work life balance on working parent’s personal and professional life. The level of performance and level of satisfaction at work is significantly affected by work life balance (Wadhwa and Shetty, 2017). The work life balance strategy offers a variety of means to reduce stress levels and increase job satisfaction in the employee while enhancing business benefits for the employer (Kumari, 2011). Modern concept of Work Life Balance is focused on offering the employees the flexibility to work anywhere and anytime. (Uma M.H, 2016). Thus, creating a work from home strategy which is flexible and allows work life balance can be advantageous to companies.

Employees highlighted that working from home allows better focus, they can focus on issue at a time as office pressure and disturbance by colleagues is less also there is less time wasted in office politics. Work from home also allows time for exploring other activities and interests. Because of the autonomy to schedule the work and possibility of frequent breaks, employees can enjoy some extra morning sleep or a power nap during afternoon and they also get to eat home cooked meals. Working from home is psychologically peaceful compared to offices.

The biggest challenge of working from home is the fact that it results in longer working hours for most of the employees. There is work overload while working remotely and most of the employees are doing more work than usual and putting in more hours and efforts than usual. The employees felt there is no shutter down for work, as employees are expected to be available even beyond office hours till late night and they can’t say no. There are high expectations from boss, Manager and Colleagues do not respect the work timings resulting in disturbed work schedule and multi-tasking family commitment and work responsibilities is a challenge particularly during the lockdown times. In work from home, there are distractions at home from family members particularly children, internet connectivity issues and technical errors make work from home challenging. There is no face-to-face interaction with the team, social disconnect and communication difficulties also pose a challange. Besides these, lack of physical exercise and bad body postures result in body pain and lethargy.

The ways to improve effectiveness of working from home require communication and support from organization. Support is also required from line manager and family members. Clear expectations of work output and timely feedback and appreciation will help the employees channelize his efforts in right direction. Openness and trust, effective communication and good deal of time spent by supervisor listening to employees’ ideas and suggestions helps in creating a better organizational culture and eventually results in retention of talent (Arora, 2016).

Apart from these, as self-help measures, employees must have a dedicated desk or work station with proper and comfortable furniture, seating arrangement. A separate workspace with adequate privacy is required for effective work with least interruption and disturbances. Maintaining a fixed daily schedule, clear prioritization of tasks and self-discipline improves the work output. Prompt technical and resource support from IT, HR and management and availability of required resources to complete the work are equally important. Gamification of work can considerably improve employee engagement and productivity. Many respondents (mainly female workers) also highlighted the undeniable role of house helps in effective working from home. Working from home is difficult for female workers without proper support system. There is dual responsibility of home and office if maids are unavailable. Availability of housemaids helps in effective working from home as physical and mental stress of women is reduced and office work can be done with focus and attention.

7. CONCLUSION:

The study on understanding working from Home during the Corona Virus pandemic outbreak and consequent lockdown gave following results. Majority of employees can complete a large extent of their work responsibilities online, indicating greater scope of remote working in the post pandemic world. There is average satisfaction among employees working from home. Employees still regard offices as a better work arrangement for many factors like better productivity, better engagement and teamwork, high task variety and better monitoring and discipline. Working from home has benefits like flexible lifestyle, saving of travel cost and time, family time and flexible lifestyle. The challenges of working from home include disturbed work schedule, multi tasking work and family responsibilities and longer working hours. For effective working from home, support from manager and family members is a must. The respondents also highlighted the need to have a dedicated workstation with adequate privacy as requirement for effective working from home. In the post pandemic world, majority of respondents would prefer a mix of blended work setting including office and home working and not complete remote working.

8. MANAGERIAL IMPLICATION:

The findings of this study are useful for organizations in order to develop an effective work from home strategy. Managers must draw a line and follow systematic work schedule and timings to avoid stress and burnout in employees because of overburden of work. Organizations and managers must support their employees by having clear expectations of output and providing necessary resources required for working from home effectively. Timely feedback and appreciation will keep the employees motivated and performing.

9. LIMITATIONS OF STUDY:

The primary study was based on limited sample. Also, the study is particularly about remote working during coronavirus lockdown. The study involves opinions and perceptions of employees which are subjective.

10. CONTRIBUTION OF RESEARCH:

The study highlights the on-going concerns of many employees working for corporate sector. The strategies highlighted by the research are useful for employees and companies in order to improve the effeciencies of work from home setting. Employees have to manage their work and schedule in a way that does not compromise the work output as well the quality of personal life.

11. REFERENCES:

1. Wankhede Darshana Kumari. COVID-19- Problem faced by Indians during Lockdown. Asian Journal of Nursing Education and Research. 2020; 10(4): 501-504.

2. Sinha Gurvishal. The vista of Pandemic in the world and its adaptation by Society: Statistical significant precautions on COVID. Asian Journal of Management. 2020;11(4): 453-456

3. Michael Christine. Psychological impact on people Due to Pandemic of Covid-19 in selected Areas of Mumbai. Asian Journal of Nursing Education and Research. 2021; 11(4): 541-1

4. Sethi Gurleen Kaur and Saini Navreet Kaur. COVID-19: Opinions and Challenges of School Teachers on work from Home. Asian Journal of Nursing Education and Research. 2020;10(4): 532-536

5. Saxena Ritu (2018), Achieving Work-Life Balance through Flexible Work Schedule: A Conceptual Study, Asian Journal of Management, 9(1): 307-312

6. Nakrošiene Audrone, Buciuniene Ilona, Goštautaitė, Bernadeta. Working from home: characteristics and outcomes of telework. International Journal of Manpower. 2019;40(1):87-101 https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-07-2017-0172

7. Basile, K.A., Beauregard, T.A. Strategies for successful telework: how effective employees manage work/home boundaries. Strategic HR Review. 2016;15(1): 106-111

8. Tietze, Susanne and Musson, Gillian. Identity, Identity Work and the Experience of Working from Home. Journal of Management Development. 2010; 29(1): 148-156. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621711011019288.

9. Delanoeije Joni, Verbruggen Marijke. The Use of Work-Home Practices and Work-Home Conflict: Examining the Role of Volition and Perceived Pressure in a Multi-Method Study, Frontiers in Psychology, 2019;10(1): 23-62, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02362

10. Tammy D. Allen, Timothy D. Golden, Kristen M. Shockley. How Effective Is Telecommuting? Assessing the Status of Our Scientific Findings, Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2015;16(2): 40-68

11. Singh R., Kumar A., Varghese S. Impact of Working Remotely on Productivity and Professionalism. IOSR Journal of Business and Management (2017) 19(5): 17-19

12. Amabile, T., and Kramer, S. Working from home: A work in progress. Harvard Business Review. 2013. available on https://hbr.org/2013/07/working-from-home-a-work-in-pr

13. Richardson, B., and Writer, M. C. The pros and cons of working from home. 2017. available on https://www.monster.com/career-advice/article/pros-cons-of-working-from-home.

14. Pahuja Saloni. A Study on Work Life Balance of Working Parents in Educational Sector, Asian J. Management. 2017;8(1): 25-29

15. Wadhwa Shalini and Shetty Krishna. Work Life Balance Policy and its Impact on Employee Engagement. Asian J. Management; 2017;8(4): 1064-1074

16. Kumari P. Vakula. A Study on Work Life Balance (With Special Reference to Executives Working at NTPC, Korba). Asian J. Management 2011;2(1): 25-27

17. Uma M.H. Is Work Life Balance Important? Asian J. Management. 2016;7(2): 153-155

18. Arora Ritu Gandhi, Organization Culture: A Strategic Tool to Retain Talent (The Case of Indian Banking Industry). Asian J. Management; 2016:7(2): 73-79

Received on 23.02.2022 Modified on 02.07.2022

Asian Journal of Management. 2023;14(1):19-28.

DOI: 10.52711/2321-5763.2023.00005

Sr. No.	Author	Year	Findings	Gaps
1	Tietze and Musson	2010	Employees working from home have to deal with conflicting demands from their socio-cultural environments	Benefits of working from home are not identified
2	Amabile and Kramer	2013	Work from home has increased productivity and lead to more employee satisfaction	Challenges and factors leading to effective work from home are not identified
3	Tammy et al	2015	Telecommuting is gaining popularity among organizations	Conceptual paper, primary data is not studied
4	Basile and Beauregard	2016	Employees create boundaries between work and home during telecommuting	Benefits of working from home are not identified
5	Richardson and Writer	2017	Working remotely impacts productivity, makes supervision and communication difficult	Benefits of working from home are not identified
6	Singh et al	2017	Negatives of work from home outweigh the positives	Factors leading to effective work from home are not identified
7	Delanoeije and Verbruggen	2019	Pressure experienced from the work and/or the home environment give rise to work-home conflicts	Factors leading to effective work from home are not identified
8	Nakrošiene et al	2019	Reduced communication with co-workers, supervisor’s trust and support, suitability of the working place at home are important impacting different telework outcomes	Benefits of working from home are not identified