Building belief, achieving balance: how organizational climate fosters self-efficacy for a fulfilling work–life

Women’s roles are evolving globally due to urbanization, industrialization, technology, changing organizational policies, and a growing gender-inclusive culture. With increased education and awareness, women are moving from traditional domestic roles to prominent positions in various professions, comprising 40% of the global workforce. Businesses recognize the importance of gender diversity in leadership, as research shows positive business outcomes. However, this transition presents challenges for women, particularly in achieving work-life balance, amidst the changing nature of work. Work-Life balance (WLB) signifies an employee’s ability to juggle and manage their professional commitments alongside their personal needs without experiencing undue stress or feeling like they’re neglecting either domain (Clark, 2000). Women in academia often face challenges in balancing work and personal life because they handle demanding roles in research, teaching, and administration while also managing caregiving responsibilities, which can slow their career progress (Misra, Lundquist, Holmes, & Agiomavritis, 2011; Perna, 2005; Ward & Wolf-Wendel, 2012). Limited flexible work options, inadequate maternity leave, and insufficient childcare support add to these difficulties (Mason, Wolfinger, & Goulden, 2013; O'Meara & Campbell, 2011). These barriers often lead to stress and burnout as women try to meet both professional and family responsibilities (Sallee, Ward, & Wolf-Wendel, 2016; Ridgeway, 2011). Research suggests that work-life balance is influenced by organizational, extra-organizational, and personal factors. The organizational climate, reflecting the workplace atmosphere and employee perceptions, plays a crucial role. It impacts work-life balance through motivation, perspectives, and interpersonal dynamics. Furthermore, research indicates that individual characteristics play a significant role in how organizational and extra-organizational factors affect work-life balance. One such influential factor identified is self-efficacy, which empowers individuals to pursue their objectives actively (Mulki, Jaramillo, & Locander, 2008). In this study, we propose that Self Efficacy mediates the relationship between organizational climate and work life balance as, a supportive organizational climate can enhance an employee’s self-efficacy by providing resources, supportive management, and positive feedback. As a result, this empowerment equips employees to adeptly navigate their work and personal duties, fostering an enhanced work-life balance and vice versa. Despite a rich tapestry of research exploring these constructs, significant gaps persist. While extant research has delved into organizational climate and work-life balance as standalone constructs, their interrelationship remains largely underexplored, particularly within the nuanced context of higher education institutions. Existing literature often overlooks how organizational climate shapes self-efficacy in managing work-life balance. Furthermore, although studies have highlighted the significance of self-efficacy in influencing work-related outcomes, its role as a mediator between organizational climate and work-life balance remains underexplored, offering a fertile ground for investigation, especially in gendered contexts. By adopting a multi-dimensional approach to organizational climate, this research endeavors to unravel the complex interactions between institutional policies, individual agency, and gendered experiences in academic settings. Understanding these dynamics can inform not only organizational practices but also societal advancement. By identifying the factors affecting women’s experiences in academia, universities can implement targeted interventions to improve work environments and support systems, ultimately leading to greater gender equity and organizational effectiveness. Additionally, insights from this study may inform policy initiatives aimed at promoting work-life balance and gender equality in academia and beyond. When universities promote a supportive environment that builds self-efficacy, they empower women to reach their full potential both professionally and personally, creating a more successful and thriving academic institution (Acker, 2006). This approach fosters an innovative and inclusive atmosphere that inspires future generations of women by showing that they can achieve both work-life balance and academic success. The knowledge gained from this research can inform policies beyond academia, creating a ripple effect towards a more balanced and fulfilling work experience for women across society. In light of the foregoing, this paper concludes with suggestions for organizational strategies to cultivate a supportive climate for women employees, as well as recommendations for future research endeavors to further explore the intricate interplay between organizational dynamics, individual factors, and work-life experiences to illuminate pathways towards more resilient, inclusive academic communities.

The theoretical foundation of this study is Self-Efficacy Theory, initially proposed by Bandura (1977), which asserts that an individual’s belief in their capacity to perform tasks and achieve goals significantly influences their motivation, behavior, and emotional reactions. Self-efficacy refers to the confidence individuals have in their ability to exert control over their own functioning and over events that affect their lives (Bandura, 1997). In the context of this study, self-efficacy is proposed as a mediator between organizational climate and work-life balance among women employees in higher education institutions (HEIs) in Jammu and Kashmir. By placing self-efficacy at the center of this theoretical framework, this study explores how organizational climate—through factors like autonomy, integration, and supervisory support—can influence women’s confidence in their ability to achieve work-life balance. Bandura’s (1997) theory is particularly relevant here as it explains not only the direct effects of self-efficacy on individual outcomes but also its role as a mediator that bridges organizational structures and personal well-being (Schwarzer, Jerusalem, Weinman, Wright, & Johnston, 1995). The higher the level of perceived self-efficacy, the more likely an individual is to effectively balance work and life, as they believe in their ability to control work demands and personal challenges simultaneously.

Women are an integral part of human existence. Out of 7.762 billion people present on earth, 49.584% (i.e. 3.847 billion) represent women population (World Bank, 2023). Status of women in the social order has been altering fast due to numerous factors such as increased level of education, cognizance of rights, urbanization, industrialization, and impact of media. Today the Female labor participation rate stands at 47.312% in the world (World Bank, 2023). More and more women desire to be involved with some form of employment, for a financial contribution to their family or with an intention of excelling in their careers. In today’s world, work-life balance has become a vital idea due to the growing understanding of the complex interactions that exist between work, family, and personal life. In an effort to fully convey the complex nature and significance of work-life balance, scholars have discussed and defined it from a variety of angles in great detail. According to Parasuraman and Greenhaus (2002), achieving work-life balance means reducing role conflicts while achieving effective functioning and enjoyment in both the work and home spheres. The focus is expanded by Felstead, Jewson, Phizacklea, and Walters (2002), who highlight the connection between institutional and cultural elements of work and leisure activities. The notion of “Work-Life balance” which integrates the professional, family, and personal domains, is introduced by Aycan, Al-Hamadi, Davis, and Budhwar (2007). The multiplicity of viewpoints about work-life balance is indicative of its intricate nature. Certain academics adopt a multi-role perspective, recognizing the reciprocal relationship between the realms of work and non-work (Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). Some place more emphasis on role equity, concentrating on how time and pleasure are distributed (Greenhaus, Collins & Shaw, 2003). Kirchmeyer (2000) and Clark (2000) emphasize that the key to work-life balance is individual happiness across a range of life domains, whereas Greenhaus and Allen (2011) look at role salience and how it fits with priorities in life. Crucial components of work-life balance also include conflict and role facilitation (Frone, 2003; Grzywacz & Bass, 2003). In order to attain balance, these psychological notions emphasize how crucial it is to minimize role conflicts and maximize role facilitation. Furthermore, a person’s sense of control over their tasks is important since it shows autonomy in juggling work and non-work obligations. (Fleetwood, 2007).

While challenges related to work-life balance (WLB) exist across various sectors, the academic sector presents unique pressures due to its highly demanding nature. Academics are often required to dedicate substantial time to research, teaching, and administrative duties, which can blur the boundaries between work and personal life (Misra et al., 2011). Additionally, the pressure to publish, particularly for women, can add to stress and conflict with personal responsibilities (Sallee et al., 2016). Despite the perception of academia as offering flexible schedules, women in academia frequently report a lack of true flexibility due to rigid institutional structures and responsibilities (Kossek, Hammer, Kelly, & Moen, 2014). According to Priyanka, Mily, Billal, and Arani (2024), university faculty experience higher work-family conflict (WFC) than professionals in fields like engineering and healthcare, largely due to the continuous demands of research and teaching. Additionally, corporate and government sectors increasingly adopt flexible work arrangements, aiding employees in balancing personal and professional lives (Ward & Wolf-Wendel, 2012). This contrast highlights academia’s lag in supportive WLB measures, as many universities lack structured policies to accommodate work-life integration, a shortfall that disproportionately affects female academics (AAUP, 2021). These challenges are further amplified in Jammu and Kashmir, where the socio-political environment adds additional barriers, such as limited resources and support systems. Moreover, societal expectations in the region often place additional caregiving and domestic responsibilities on women, making it even more difficult for them to achieve a balance between their professional and personal lives (Cahusac & Kanji, 2014; Perna, 2005). This combination of institutional and regional factors significantly complicates the WLB challenges faced by women in academia in Jammu and Kashmir.

Human resource management and organizational behavior recognize organizational climate as a crucial, multifaceted concept that shapes employees' perceptions of their work environment, including the policies, practices, and procedures of an organization (Glisson & James, 2002; Campbell, Dunnette, Lawler, & Weick, 1970; James & Jones, 1974; Litwin & Stringer, 1968; Schneider, 2000). This climate significantly influences employee outcomes like job satisfaction, engagement, performance, and well-being (Patterson et al., 2005). A positive climate aligns with employee expectations, enhancing work-life balance through flexibility, diversity, and supportive policies (Steinke, Dastmalchian, & Baniasadi, 2015; Kossek, Baltes, & Matthews, 2011). Effective organizational climates also encourage innovation, autonomy, and integration, contributing to overall organizational effectiveness (Zohar, 1980; Anderson & West, 1998). In this paper we have used the dimensions of Organizational Climate given by Patterson et al. (2005) who have used The Competing Values Model to illustrate the dimensions of Organizational Climate. The Competing Values model was developed by Quinn and colleagues (e.g. Quinn & McGrath, 1985), which suggests that the best way to understand organizational effectiveness criteria in the literature is to organize them along fundamental dimensions: flexibility versus control and internal versus external orientation. The four quadrants (The Human Relations Approach, the internal process approach, the open systems approach, the rational goal approach) of the framework provide four major categories of desired results and related managerial philosophies regarding the methods by which these results could be obtained. For this study we have used the six dimensions from the Human Relations Quadrant. These are:

Academic research defines job autonomy as giving workers flexibility in how they schedule their work and approach their responsibilities (Saragih, 2011; Ho & Nesbit, 2014; Özkoç, 2016; Burcharth, Præst Knudsen, & Søndergaard, 2017). According to some, employees' job autonomy is defined as their ability to make decisions about their responsibilities (Kim, Cable, Kim, & Wang, 2009; Lin, Lin, Lin, & Lin, 2011). Wu, Griffin, and Parker (2015) offer another layer to the concept of job autonomy by stating that it allows employees to control their behavior and meet goals in accordance with their own preferences and understanding. Employees with greater autonomy can better manage their time and tasks, aligning work with personal commitments to improve work-life balance. This control reduces stress and anxiety by enabling efficient management of deadlines and task prioritization, leading to enhanced personal engagement after work hours. Autonomy also boosts effectiveness and productivity, potentially decreasing the number of hours worked and increasing time for personal pursuits. Furthermore, it fosters a deeper connection and ownership over work, enhancing decision-making and problem-solving skills, which in turn can improve work efficiency and further balance. This empowerment also cultivates a sense of competence and mastery, enhancing overall wellbeing and positively affecting personal life (Amabile, 1990; Deci & Ryan, 2000). Thus, we hypothesize:

Integration is defined as the collaboration, coordination, and trust among departments that facilitate the achievement of shared goals. This concept has been explored by Lawrence and Lorsch (1967) and Nauta and Sanders (2000), who discuss its role in addressing the challenges of departmentalization and specialization. Ancona and Caldwell (1992) emphasize its importance in aligning efforts toward common objectives, while Tsai (2002) notes its necessity for effective communication and decision-making. Integration fosters creativity by merging diverse viewpoints (Tushman & O’Reilly, 1996) and is crucial for dispute resolution through collaboration (Pinto, Pinto, & Prescott, 1993). Furthermore, integration enhances organizational adaptability and growth, and significantly improves employees' work-life balance by promoting flexible work arrangements and a supportive work environment (Hill, Hawkins, Ferris, & Weitzman, 2001). It also reduces workplace stress and increases job satisfaction (Kossek, Lewis, & Hammer, 2010; Greenhaus et al., 2003), while fostering a culture that boosts employee engagement and retention (Clark, 2000). These benefits underline the critical role of integration in improving both employee well-being and organizational performance. Based on these insights, we propose the following hypothesis:

Employee involvement is integral to organizational climate, emphasizing active participation in decision-making and innovation. This approach transforms employees from task executors into essential contributors, enhancing their impact on the company’s success. Schneider (1987) identifies organizational climate as shared perceptions of acceptable behaviors, stressing involvement’s role in boosting engagement and motivation. Kahn (1990) notes that involved employees demonstrate higher commitment and psychological presence. Lawler (1986) promotes empowerment and decentralized decision-making as methods to increase involvement, thereby enhancing organizational performance and employee satisfaction. Moreover, involvement fosters a community sense among employees, increasing commitment to the company’s success (Rothbard, Phillips, & Dumas, 2005). It also enhances job satisfaction and reduces stress by making employees feel valued (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). Additionally, a culture that prioritizes engagement respects individuals' needs for work-life balance, reduces work-life conflict (Thompson & Bunderson, 2001), and often encourages flexible work arrangements (Hill et al., 2001).These aspects underscore the critical role of involvement in creating a supportive workplace that promotes well-being and productivity. Based on these insights, we hypothesize:

Supervisory support, which includes the help, encouragement, and empathy employees receive from their direct supervisors, is crucial for enhancing engagement, job satisfaction, and overall well-being. Cummins (1990) and Eisenberger, Stinglhamber, Vandenberghe, Sucharski, and Rhoades (2002) emphasize its significant impact on increasing job satisfaction, reducing stress, and boosting employee motivation. Supervisors who provide emotional backing help employees manage job-related stress, which significantly contributes to improved work-life integration, as shown in research by Hammer, Kossek, Yragui, Bodner, and Hanson (2009). Additionally, flexible work arrangements such as telecommuting or adaptable work hours, often promoted by supportive supervisors, have been found to reduce work-family conflict, allowing employees to manage their personal and professional responsibilities more effectively (Allen, Johnson, Kiburz, & Shockley, 2013). Supervisory support also minimizes role conflict by helping employees juggle the competing demands of work and family, leading to reduced work-family interference and greater well-being, as evidenced by Michel, Mitchelson, Pichler, and Cullen (2010). Furthermore, supervisory support aids in career development and work-life balance, with Hammer et al. (2009) noting its role in mentoring and family-supportive behaviors. Collectively, these observations highlight the complexity of supervisory assistance and its significant effects on worker outcomes, emphasizing its critical role in fostering a healthy and productive work environment, helping us to hypothesize:

Organizations are increasingly investing in training as a strategic approach to develop staff competencies, enhance competitiveness, and adapt to changing business environments. Training initiatives focus on bridging skill gaps, fostering creativity, and supporting both professional and personal development, which in turn improve performance, satisfaction, and retention. Research by Gattiker (1990) highlights the importance of technical training for effective technology use, while Morrow, Jarrett, and Rupinski (1997) link training to improved employee attitudes and organizational commitment. Noe (2017) offers an in-depth analysis of training processes, emphasizing the importance of needs assessment and efficacy evaluation. Furthermore, Salas, Tannenbaum, Kraiger, and Smith-Jentsch (2012) and Blume, Ford, Baldwin, and Huang (2010) provide insights into effective training techniques and implementation strategies. Additional research shows that time management training can reduce workplace stress and enhance goal-setting (Michel, Kotrba, Mitchelson, Clark, & Baltes, 2011), while stress management training improves psychological health (Richardson & Rothstein, 2008). Development of soft skills like communication and emotional intelligence helps reduce conflict and manage workplace dynamics (Grawitch, Gottschalk, & Munz, 2006). With the increasing prevalence of remote work, training in technology use and best practices for remote work is crucial (Golden, Veiga, & Dino, 2008). These insights demonstrate the multifaceted role of training in aligning with organizational goals and fostering a culture of continuous learning and adaptability. Based on these arguments, we hypothesize:

Employee welfare is a crucial aspect of organizational management, reflecting a company’s dedication to the well-being of its workforce. It involves mutual expectations between employers and employees that, when met, enhance commitment, loyalty, and satisfaction. Guest (1998) emphasizes the importance of fair treatment, job stability, and work-life balance in sustaining this contract and improving organizational outcomes. Beyond health and safety, employee welfare includes emotional support through flexible work schedules, development programs, and recognition initiatives. Studies by Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) and Allen (2001) link strong welfare practices to reduced turnover and increased productivity, highlighting its strategic value in human resource management. Further research by Allen (2013) and Shockley, Shen, DeNunzio, Arvan, and Knudsen (2017) demonstrates that flexible work arrangements and wellness programs not only reduce stress but also increase job satisfaction, thereby boosting retention and overall employee contentment. Thus, we hypothesize:

A fundamental tenet of Albert Bandura’s social cognitive theory is self-efficacy, or the conviction in one’s own capacity to carry out certain activities and produce desired results. This idea underpins how individuals establish goals, put out effort, overcome obstacles, and respond to setbacks. It has a significant impact on cognitive, motivational, emotional, and decision-making processes (Bandura, 1977, 1986, 1994, 1997). High self-efficacy not only enhances academic, professional, and psychological outcomes but also encourages setting ambitious goals and proactive problem-solving. In various domains, self-efficacy has profound impacts. It promotes engagement in health behaviors and disease management (Luszczynska & Schwarzer, 2005), and boosts motivation and perseverance in education (Zimmerman, 2000). Within workplaces, it correlates positively with job satisfaction, performance, and commitment (Judge, Jackson, Shaw, Scott, & Rich, 2007), and fosters creative problem-solving (Bandura, 2001).

Integrity and autonomy in the workplace are essential for raising employee self-efficacy, which in turn can promote a better work-life balance. Autonomy allows employees to take control over their tasks and execution methods, providing opportunities for mastery and stress reduction, thereby reinforcing their belief in their capabilities (Gagné, Ryan, & Bargmann, 2003; Deci & Ryan, 2000; Bandura, 1977). Employees can successfully reduce work-life conflict by setting clear boundaries, working efficiently, and psychologically distancing themselves from their work because of greater sense of control and self-efficacy (Saragih, 2011). Similarly, workplace integration enables employees to apply their professional skills in home life and vice versa, enriching both areas. This integration fosters a sense of effectiveness and belonging through positive cooperation and effective role navigation. By boosting self-efficacy, integration helps employees comfortably balance professional and personal responsibilities, supporting a healthy work-life dynamic. Research by Zimmerman (2000) and Saragih (2011) shows that self-efficacy not only drives but also strengthens the mutually beneficial relationship between workplace practices and individual well-being. Their findings also highlight the mediating role self-efficacy plays between work-life balance and job characteristics like autonomy and integration. Fundamentally, workplace integration and autonomy both increase employees' sense of self-efficacy, which in turn can promote a more satisfying work-life balance. Thus, we hypothesize:

Participation of workers in decision-making procedures fosters a feeling of agency and significance. Employees' self-efficacy in handling work-related activities and their capacity to positively impact results are increased when they feel that their input is valued. Improved work-life balance techniques may result from this increased sense of self-efficacy (Spreitzer, 1995; Fayaz, Mushtaq, Naseer, Farooq, & Gulzar, 2024). Also, supportive managers are essential in raising staff members' self-efficacy because they give them the tools and feedback they need to be successful at work. Knowing that their superiors support them, employees are more confident in their skills and are motivated to engage in work-life balance-promoting practices (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Thus, we put forward the following hypotheses:

Employees who have access to training and development opportunities feel more competent and equipped to handle the demands of their jobs, which has a direct influence on their self-efficacy. Employees may be better able to balance their personal and professional obligations as a result of their enhanced expertise (Judge & Bono, 2001). Employee welfare initiatives, on the other hand, show that a firm cares about its workers' welfare. These initiatives can raise employees' self-efficacy by giving them the tools and encouragement they need to deal with work-related and personal issues. Employees who feel more competent of handling the demands of both domains are likely to have better work-life balance as their self-efficacy rises (Allen, 2001). These arguments help us to put forward the hypothesis:

Figure 1 illustrates the research model of the study, examining the interrelationships among 8 key constructs: Autonomy, Integration, Involvement, Supervisor support, Training, Welfare policies, Self-Efficacy, and Work-Life Balance.

This research adopted a cross-sectional survey design. The study employed quantitative methods to gather data, ensuring a systematic collection of measurable information for statistical analysis (Bukhari, Abas, Farrukh, & Zargar, 2024). This approach facilitated the examination of relationships between organizational climate dimensions, self-efficacy, and work-life balance. Data was analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to test the proposed hypotheses and uncover the underlying mechanisms influencing work-life balance.

The study population comprised women employees working in 11 universities across Jammu and Kashmir. A stratified random sampling technique was used to ensure a representative sample across different universities, academic roles and departments. The population was first divided into distinct strata based on important demographic and organizational characteristics, such as:

• (1)

  Institution: Women employees were stratified by the 11 universities in Jammu and Kashmir included in the study.

• (2)

  Job Roles: We further stratified based on job roles, including administrative staff and academic staff.

• (3)

  Departments: Within each university, we included participants from a range of academic departments (e.g. sciences, humanities, administration, etc.) to capture diverse experiences.

Once the strata were defined, participants were randomly selected from each stratum to ensure that each group was adequately represented in the final sample. This method allowed us to maintain the diversity of the sample while ensuring that the findings could be generalized to the broader population of women employees in academia.

The data collection process involved distributing a structured questionnaire to the selected participants. Participants were informed about the study’s purpose, its confidentiality, and voluntary nature before completing the survey. After distributing 700 questionnaires, 593 were received, indicating an 84.7% response rate. Before conducting the analysis, the collected data underwent a thorough cleaning process to ensure accuracy and reliability. First, we removed incomplete responses where key variables were missing. Second, responses with evident patterns of straight-lining or inconsistent answers (e.g. identical responses across all items) were excluded to avoid bias in the results. Finally, we checked for outliers and any inconsistencies in demographic data to ensure that the final dataset was robust for analysis. After completing this process, a total of 587 valid responses were retained for further analysis. The data analysis phase involved PLS-SEM to examine the relationships between organizational climate, self-efficacy, and work-life balance, providing insights into the factors that significantly influence the work-life balance of women employees in the academic sector.

Table 1 presents the socio-demographic details of the 587 respondents of the study.

The study adopted 29 items of the Human Relations Quadrant from the standardized, structured and validated OC measurement developed by Patterson et al. (2005) based on competing values model (CVM). Sample items include “Management let people make their own decisions much of the time”, “Management involve people when decisions are made that affect them” and “People receive enough training when it comes to using new equipment”.

To measure respondents' general self-efficacy, we used a measure consisting of 10 items from Schwarzer et al. (1995). Sample items include “I can always manage to solve difficult problems if I try hard enough” and “I am confident that I could deal efficiently with unexpected events”.

Work-life balance was evaluated using a unidimensional scale which composed of four items and was developed by Brough et al. (2014). Sample items include “I feel that the balance between my work demands and non-work activities is currently about right”.

To test hypotheses, we use the Partial Least Square (PLS) approach, which takes into account the direct, indirect, and total effects of the variables. PLS was selected because it is a more appropriate approach than alternative SEM techniques for solving structural equation modeling (SEM), which in this case suits the study aims. According to Hair, Celsi, Money, Samouel, and Page (2015), PLS is an analytical technique that does not rely heavily on assumptions. Lastly, we choose PLS-SEM due to its usefulness and efficiency in prediction and research for both exploratory and confirmatory purposes (Chin & Dibbern, 2010; Ringle, Sarstedt, & Straub, 2012). The computation of the measurement and structural model parameters is done using Hair, Sarstedt, Hopkins, and Kuppelwieser (2014) guidelines. Hypothesis testing is carried out by examining the p-value generated by the inner model. The SmartPLS 4.0 tool is used to perform bootstrapping in order to determine the link between exogenous and endogenous variables.

The reliability of the measurement instruments was first confirmed through Cronbach’s alpha coefficients (Table 2), with values ranging from 0.937 to 0.973 for the different constructs. Such high alpha values indicate an excellent level of internal consistency within each construct, surpassing the widely accepted benchmark of 0.7 (Abas, Srikanth, Bukhari, & Fayaz, 2024; Taber, 2017), and thus demonstrating satisfactory reliability. Furthermore, composite reliability measures, including both rho_a and rho_c, provided similar assurances of internal consistency, with values well above the threshold, further affirming the instruments' reliability in assessing the targeted constructs.

The study also rigorously assessed the validity of the measurement model (Figure 2). Convergent validity was confirmed through Average Variance Extracted (AVE) metrics, with all constructs exceeding the minimum threshold of 0.5 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981), indicating that a significant portion of the variance in observed variables is captured by their respective constructs. Discriminant validity, essential for ensuring that constructs are distinct and measure unique dimensions, was evaluated using both the Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) (Table 3). The HTMT values ranged from 0.549 to 0.777, most falling below the 0.85 threshold suggested by Henseler, Ringle, and Sarstedt (2015), thereby indicating good discriminant validity among the constructs.

After establishing the validity of the measurement model, the structural model is analyzed (Sarstedt, Hair, Cheah, Becker, & Ringle, 2019) which starts by analyzing the Variance Inflation factor.

Kock (2015) offers valuable insights into addressing multicollinearity and potential common method variance (CMV) in variance-based SEM. He suggests that a Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) exceeding 3.3 may indicate pathological collinearity and potential CMV issues, which is a stricter threshold than traditional guidelines. In our study, all VIF values—ranging from 1.921 to 2.949—are well below Kock’s threshold of 3.3, indicating that multicollinearity is not an issue and reducing the likelihood of CMV affecting our results along with affirming the distinct contribution of each variable to our model (Table 4). Our model’s explanatory power is highlighted by R-square values, with 66.2% (Adjusted R-square: 65.7%) of the variance in self-efficacy and an impressive 76.8% (Adjusted R-square: 76.5%) of the variance in work-life balance explained by our predictors (Table 5). Moreover, the predictive relevance of our model, as demonstrated by Q-square values of 0.629 for self-efficacy and 0.733 for work-life balance (Table 6), underscores our model’s capacity to accurately predict these outcomes based on organizational climate dimensions. This suggests that the organizational climate not only affects but also predicts the work-life balance, guided by the mediating influence of self-efficacy.

Mediation analysis was performed to assess the mediating role of Self-Efficacy in the relationship between Organizational Climate and Work-Life Balance.

The research presented in this paper has illuminated the significant role of organizational climate in shaping the Work-Life Balance (WLB) of women employees. Notably, each dimension of organizational climate—Autonomy, Integration, Involvement, Support, Training, and Welfare—was found to have a direct, positive impact on WLB. Autonomy is positively linked to WLB, suggesting that control over work tasks and schedules enhances employees' ability to balance work and personal life. The research hypotheses tested reveal significant positive relationships between various organizational factors and work-life balance (Table 7). Autonomy (AUT) demonstrates a modest positive effect on WLB with a path coefficient of 0.136, supported by a T statistic of 2.573 and a p-value of 0.010, indicating that greater autonomy at work correlates with better WLB. This finding is in line with previous research by Hill et al. (2001), which demonstrated the importance of autonomy in facilitating work-life integration. Similarly, integration (INT) within the organization also enhances WLB, with a path coefficient of 0.154, a T statistic of 3.345, and a p-value of 0.001, showing strong support for its positive impact. This underscores the value of cohesive work environments where employees feel part of a unified team. Kossek et al. (2011) have similarly highlighted how integration can reduce work-life conflict. Employee involvement (INV) contributes positively to WLB, as evidenced by a path coefficient of 0.129, a T statistic of 2.635, and a p-value of 0.008. This aligns with the notion that empowerment and engagement in the workplace are key to achieving a satisfactory work-life balance (Greenhaus et al., 2003). Furthermore, Organizational support (SUP) emerges as the strongest contributor to WLB with a path coefficient of 0.174, a T statistic of 3.084, and a p-value of 0.002. This is consistent with findings by Thompson, Beauvais, and Lyness (1999), who noted the positive effects of perceived support on work-life balance outcomes. Training (TRA) also positively affects WLB, indicated by a path coefficient of 0.139, a T statistic of 3.388, and a p-value of 0.001, highlighting the role of training in promoting WLB. This suggests that professional growth initiatives can play a crucial role in enabling employees to manage work and life demands effectively, a finding echoed by Noe, Wilk, Mullen, and Wanek (1997). Lastly, welfare (WEL) measures are shown to significantly benefit WLB with a path coefficient of 0.113, a T statistic of 2.746, and a p-value of 0.006. This corroborates the research by Allen (2001), which found that welfare initiatives contribute to better work-life balance. Furthermore, the mediating role of Self-Efficacy in these relationships reveals an important psychological mechanism through which organizational climate dimensions influence WLB (Table 8). The study assessed the mediating role of Self-Efficacy in the relationship between organizational factors and Work-Life Balance (WLB), confirming significant indirect effects across all tested hypotheses. Self-Efficacy was found to partially mediate the impact of each organizational climate dimension on WLB, with the indirect effects of Integration and Support being particularly noteworthy. This aligns with Bandura’s theory that an individual’s belief in their own capabilities can significantly influence their life choices and balance (Bandura, 1977). The strong mediation effects also underscore the necessity for organizations to consider not only the structural but also the psychological aspects when devising policies and practices aimed at enhancing WLB for women employees. By bolstering Self-Efficacy, organizations can empower women to navigate work-life challenges more effectively, potentially leading to higher job satisfaction and retention rates (Shockley & Singla, 2011). The cumulative insights from this study underscore a multifaceted approach to enhancing WLB through organizational climate, emphasizing the importance of creating supportive, integrated, and empowering work environments. The mediation analysis further illuminates the psychological underpinnings of these relationships, offering a deeper understanding of how organizational practices influence employee well-being. This study contributes to the body of knowledge by affirming the direct and mediated relationships between organizational climate and WLB, supported by the robust analytical evidence. These findings not only align with but also extend previous research, suggesting practical implications for organizational policy and strategy aimed at fostering supportive climates to enhance work-life balance among women employees.

To encapsulate, the present study rigorously examines the intricate dynamics between organizational climate and work-life balance (WLB) among female academicians within the distinct socio-cultural confines of Jammu and Kashmir, underscoring the mediating influence of self-efficacy. The empirical evidence robustly substantiates that facets of organizational climate—specifically autonomy, integration, involvement, support, training, and welfare—exert a positive augmentation on WLB. Notably, this enhancement is significantly intermediated by self-efficacy, which serves as a critical bridge, mitigating the impact of organizational climate on WLB and simultaneously empowering employees to adeptly manage the confluence of professional and personal life domains. The findings elucidate the imperative for educational institutions to cultivate a supportive and nurturing organizational climate as a strategic priority. This objective extends beyond the mere provision of flexible work arrangements and autonomy to encompass the necessity for ongoing training, comprehensive welfare measures, and, paramountly, the cultivation of a culture of support and inclusion. Such an environment is conducive not only to professional success but also to personal fulfillment among women employees, thereby fostering an organizational ethos of holistic well-being. Additionally, the research advocates for a refined comprehension of self-efficacy as a pivotal mechanism through which WLB can be enhanced. This posits that institutions of higher education should proactively fortify the self-efficacy of their personnel through targeted interventions, including mentorship initiatives, professional development programs, and robust support mechanisms, specifically designed to address the unique challenges encountered by women in the academic sphere. Whilst the study presents compelling insights into the interplay among organizational climate, self-efficacy, and WLB within the academic sector of Jammu and Kashmir, it also lays the groundwork for subsequent research endeavors to explore these dynamics across diverse cultural and organizational landscapes. Such investigations could yield more comprehensive insights into the universal and contextual factors influencing how organizational climates impact WLB across various regions and sectors. In conclusion, the implications of this study extend far beyond the academic realm, offering a strategic blueprint for educational institutions, policymakers, and organizational leaders to foster work environments that support the professional development and personal well-being of women employees. This research contributes to the broader discourse on creating inclusive, supportive, and balanced workplaces across diverse sectors, underscoring the synergy between organizational climate, self-efficacy, and the attainment of a harmonious work-life balance.

Our study contributes significantly to the theoretical landscape of organizational behavior and work-life balance research, particularly within the context of higher education institutions in regions like Jammu and Kashmir. By focusing on women employees in this unique setting, the research enhances our understanding of how organizational climate facets—ranging from autonomy to welfare—affect work-life balance through the lens of self-efficacy. This empirical evidence reinforces and expands upon Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy by illustrating its mediating role in the relationship between organizational climate and work-life balance, providing a nuanced view of how individual belief in one’s capabilities can transform organizational influences into personal outcomes. Moreover, the study’s findings contribute to the burgeoning literature on gender and work-life balance, offering a deeper insight into the specific challenges and supports that women face in the academic sector. By illuminating the critical factors that influence work-life balance for women employees in universities, this research adds a valuable layer to gender studies, highlighting the intersectionality of gender, organizational context, and geographic location. Theoretically, this research underscores the complexity of work-life balance as a multifaceted construct influenced by both organizational and individual factors. It challenges and extends existing models by incorporating a geographic and cultural dimension, suggesting that the effects of organizational climate on work-life balance may vary significantly across different cultural and institutional contexts. This insight calls for a broader theoretical framework that accommodates the diversity of work-life balance experiences across different settings. In sum, the theoretical implications of our study are manifold, enriching the discourse on work-life balance, self-efficacy, and organizational climate. It invites future theoretical work to consider the nuanced interplays between these factors, encouraging an interdisciplinary approach that bridges organizational behavior, gender studies, and cultural research to build more inclusive and comprehensive theories.

This study offers several actionable insights for academic institutions aiming to improve work-life balance (WLB) for women employees. One key finding is the importance of fostering self-efficacy, which is crucial for achieving WLB. Institutions should focus on targeted professional development programs that help women build the confidence and skills needed to balance both professional and personal responsibilities. Workshops on time management, stress reduction, and leadership training can empower women to navigate their roles more effectively. Cultivating a supportive organizational culture that promotes both self-efficacy and WLB is equally important. Mentorship programs where senior staff provide guidance to women can help address the unique challenges they face in academia. Additionally, policies such as on-site childcare, parental leave, and wellness programs can create a more inclusive and supportive environment, improving both job satisfaction and retention. Institutions should also review their internal policies and leadership strategies to actively promote WLB. Leadership training that fosters a culture of empathy, inclusion, and an understanding of the specific challenges women encounter can significantly improve overall employee well-being and contribute to institutional success. Beyond traditional approaches, the study highlights several innovative strategies to enhance WLB. One such solution is the introduction of AI-driven personalized well-being programs. By leveraging AI and machine learning, institutions can assess individual workloads, stress levels, and personal commitments to offer tailored solutions like optimized work schedules and personalized wellness plans. This ensures that support is dynamic and responsive to employees' needs in real time. A supportive organizational climate that encourages autonomy and flexibility in work arrangements is also essential. As noted by Giauque, Renard, Cornu, and Emery (2022), allowing employees the freedom to manage their schedules and tasks not only improves WLB but also reduces exhaustion and enhances performance. Flexible work arrangements, such as telecommuting, part-time roles, and flexible schedules, help women balance the demands of both work and family, reducing burnout and boosting job satisfaction. The adoption of hybrid workspaces, blending in-person and remote work, is another crucial strategy. With the use of technologies like augmented reality (AR), women can integrate their personal and professional lives seamlessly without compromising productivity (Golden et al., 2008). This model provides the flexibility and adaptability needed to address the unique challenges faced by women in academia. Finally, ensuring the proper use of digital tools, coupled with strong organizational support, can prevent work-life conflict and emotional exhaustion. As Liu, Wang, and Liu (2023) demonstrate, well-managed digital communication and organizational support systems can significantly enhance WLB and reduce emotional strain. By implementing these strategies—such as limiting after-hours work communications, offering flexible work arrangements, utilizing AI-driven solutions, and strengthening organizational support—academic institutions can create a balanced, empowering environment where women employees can thrive both professionally and personally.

While our investigation offers valuable insights into the intricate relationships between organizational climate, self-efficacy, and work-life balance among women employees in universities across Jammu and Kashmir, several limitations should be acknowledged, providing opportunities for further research and refinement. Firstly, the study’s data collection was confined to women employees working in universities within Jammu and Kashmir, narrowing the scope of our findings to a specific academic and cultural context. This geographical and sectoral specificity limits the generalizability of our results to other regions or industries. Future research should aim to expand the scope to other sectors and cultural settings to validate and extend our findings across diverse organizational contexts. Additionally, our study employed a cross-sectional design, which limits our ability to draw causal inferences. Longitudinal or experimental designs in future research would allow for a more comprehensive understanding of how organizational climate and self-efficacy influence work-life balance over time, providing a clearer picture of the temporal dynamics involved. Our reliance on self-reported measures introduces the potential for response biases, such as social desirability or common method bias. To mitigate this, future studies could incorporate objective measures (e.g. performance data, work hours) to triangulate findings and enhance the validity of the results. Another limitation lies in the exclusive focus on self-efficacy as the mediating variable. While the study highlighted self-efficacy as a significant partial mediator, we recognize that other important mediators, such as organizational support structures or psychological safety, may also play a role in shaping work-life balance. Future research should consider exploring these additional mediators to offer a more comprehensive understanding of the underlying mechanisms. Moreover, positive constructs like self-efficacy may not always have a linear relationship with outcomes. As suggested by the Too Much of a Good Thing (TMGT) effect (Pierce & Aguinis, 2013), excessively high levels of self-efficacy could potentially lead to diminishing returns or even negative effects on work-life balance. Future studies could model these relationships and test for curvilinear effects, providing a deeper understanding of the potential boundary conditions for self-efficacy’s impact. In addition, the study did not account for certain control variables—such as personality traits, family size, and age of children, and work flexibility— that may have influenced the outcomes. The exclusion of these variables could potentially confound the observed relationships, limiting the precision of our findings. Future research should incorporate these control variables to provide a more nuanced analysis and mitigate potential biases. Finally, the rapid shift toward remote work, especially in response to global events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, has introduced new dynamics in the work-life balance equation. Although this study was conducted within the traditional work environment, future research should explore how remote and hybrid work models influence the relationships between organizational climate, self-efficacy, and work-life balance, particularly in the academic sector. Addressing these limitations in future studies will enhance the depth and generalizability of our understanding of how organizational climate and self-efficacy impact work-life balance, and contribute to the development of more tailored and effective organizational policies.