Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 304

4th ASEAN Conference on Psychology, Counselling, and Humanities (ACPCH 2018)

The Effects of Work-Life Balance towards Employee Engagement

in Millennial Generation

Dwi Putri Larasati Nida Hasanati

University of Muhammadiyah Malang University of Muhammadiyah Malang
Nida3105@gmail.com

Istiqomah
University of Muhammmadiyah Malang

Abstract. Company needs to maintain and to give consideration to their employees as they want the company
productivity to gain profits. The majority employees in the company are from millennial generation. Millennial
generation without a doubt leaves their company when they have not felt yet attached to the company. Employee
engagement is one of the ways that can make the employee stay at the company. Employee engagement which consists
of vigour, dedication and absorption dimension are known to have a positive impact on the employee productivity. In
contrast, employee disengagement can destruct the company. One of the aspects that can improve employee
engagement is work-life balance. The objective of this study is to find out the effects of work-life balance on employee
engagement in millennial generation employees. The research participants in this study were employees of PT. Senwell
Indonesia from Banjarmasin. In collecting the data, researchers employed a work-life balance scale and the Utrecht
work engagement Scale. A simple linear regression was recruited so as to analyse the data. The results have shown that
the percentage of work-life balance on employee engagement shows 14.3 %. Companies that give consideration to the
welfare of employees’ personal life and work life are proven to be able to influence the level of employee engagement in
the company.

Keywords: Work-life balance, employee engagement.

Introduction of employees are bound or involved in part of their

In modern era, all needs are demanded to be quickly workplace, and 9% of employees refuse to be engaged.
and correctly. Recently, the company wants to be On another hand, only 1 of 4 employees is fully engaged
proactive, initiative, self-directed and responsible in working with the company.
employees for their own development and performance In addition, the challenge of employee engagement
(Bakker, Schaufeli, Leiter and Taris, 2008). The lies on the company proper as they face the challenge of
company requires the energetic, dedicated workers, and entering the millennial generation in the world of work.
fully concentrate on their work, or have an attachment Millennial generations have different thoughts and
on their work (Bakker, et al, 2008). demands from previous one. According to Shah (2017),
Organizational productivity is determined by the millennial generations need attention because of their
effort and attachment of work by the employees growing numbers in the workplace. Further, they are
(Musgrove, Ellinger, & Ellinger, 2014). Furthermore, also different from prior generations. The best attraction
the research states that the employees who are engaged and retention of millennial generations are very
consistently proved more productive, profitable, safer, important for any business to maintain and to grow in
healthier, and tend to persist in their companies the future.
(Fleming & Asplund, 2007; Wagner & Harter, 2006 in Furthermore, a research conducted by Mohd, Shah,
Ahuja and Modi, 2015). Employee engagement is one and Zailan (2016), states that the factors that can
way to retain employees done by a company. influence employee engagement are reward, work
Likewise, a study done by Dale Carneige Indonesia environment, and work-life balance. Reward is able to
released in October 2017 states that around 25% of reduce complaints regarding compensation / payment,
millennial employees are fully engaged or involved with reduce turnover, reduce absenteeism, and reduce
the company where they work. Moreover, nearby 66% employee performance problems (Scott & McMullen,

Copyright © 2019, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press. 390

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 304

2010). According to Anitha in Mohd, Shah, and Zailan Work-life balance (WLB) is two demands where
(2016), there is a significant connection between work and one's life must be in line (Lockwood, 2003).
employee, work environment and employee Whereas, according to Hill (2001), WLB is someone
engagement. A safe work environment can attract new who is able to balance the demands of time, emotion,
employees in the vacant position. attitude, and responsibility on his work.
Work-life balance (WLB) is very important to attach WLB provides benefits in the form of a combination of
to millennial generations. For tem, having leisure time is increasing job satisfaction and loyalty, promoting job
an important source of well-being in the workplace performance, reducing costs due to turnover,
(Kultalahti & Viitala., 2014). The definition of WLB can absenteeism, recruitment and selection, increasing
be interpreted as the amount of time spent on doing a job organizational productivity (Lazar, Osoian, & Ratiu,
compared to the amount of time spent with family and 2010), talented employee retention, productive
doing things they may enjoy (Meenakshi, innovation through increased employee involvement
Subrahamanyam, and Ravichandran, 2013). (Benito-Osario, Muñoz-Aguado & Villar, 2015). All of
WLB benefits employees and organizations these aspects lead to desired outcomes in the form of
collectively (Mesimo-Ogunsanya, 2017). WLB is about improving employee and organizational performance.
how to help employees maintain a healthy and beneficial The right action of WLB will prevent behavioural
lifestyle that affects their performance improvement irregularities in the world of work (Osibanjo,
(Grimm, 2017). According to Oludayo, Falola, Olubusayo, Olalekan, & Adenike, 2015). According to
Obianuju, & Demilade (2018), WLB is a concept Lazar, Osoian, & Ratiu (2010), the benefits of WLB for
designed to improve job predictability and career companies include: (1) reducing the level of absence and
sustainability of employees. delay; (2) showing employee commitment and loyalty;
Employee engagement for the company is very (3) reducing employee turnover; (4) increasing customer
important because it is an effort to improve the retention; and (5) growing productivity.
relationship between the company and its employees. Furthermore, millennial generations are individuals
Departing from above statements, researchers are going born in the 198s to 2000s. Millennial generations use
to examine the effect of WLB on employee engagement instant communication technologies such as email,
in millennial generations. Consequently, researchers will SMS, instant messaging, and social media through
more focus on revealing the positive effect between Facebook and Twitter. In other words, millennial is the
WLB and employee engagement. generation grows up in the booming internet era (Lyons,
2004). The characteristics formed in millennial
Review Literature generation are internet addiction, confidence, high self-
esteem, open-mindedness, and tolerance for change
Anitha in Mohd, Shah, and Zailan (2016) have (Kilber, Barclay, & Ohmer, 2014).
argued that employee engagement is the level of Moreover, a study conducted by Nnambooze &
commitment and employee involvement that impacts on Parumasur (2016) mentions the important factors for
the organization or company where it works and it millennial including salary, recognition for individuals,
values. (Brunetto, Teo, & Far-Wharton, 2014) as well flexible work schedules, and career advancement.
mention and measure emotional and intellectual Unfortunately, there are also intrinsic factors that affect
commitment of employees to the organization. millennial satisfaction, which are opportunities for
According to Joshi (2011), determinants of employee organizational ownership, training, perceptions of
engagement cover job content, compensation and supervisory support, varied and meaningful work, and a
benefits obtained by employees, WLB, relationships balance between personal life and work life (Solnet &
between superiors and employees, career paths, and Hood 2008).
teamwork. Some factors that hinder or even damage the Work-life balance (WLB) is defined as the
level of employee engagement are insecurity, injustice, steadiness between work life and life outside the work
work without space, under pressing work with little (personal life). According to Benito-Osario et al (2015),
flexibility or autonomy, poor management behaviour, WLB has a role in increasing the employee engagement.
bullying, and non-stop working period (Saks, 2006). In addition, according to Lazar, Osoian, & Ratiu (2010)
Schaufeli et al (2008) divide the dimensions of the benefits of WLB are the existence of commitment,
employee engagement into 3 aspects. The first aspect is the loyalty and increasing the employee productivity.
the aspect of vigor, characterized by high levels of According to Wastermen & Yamamura (2007), the
strength and mental resilience at work, high will for entry of millennial generation in companies has their
work, and persistence in facing difficulties. The second own demands that can affect productivity, motivation,
aspect is dedication, marked by a feeling that is full of and raise retention problems and turnover. Millennial
meaning, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride, and being generations have demands to have more flexible
challenged at work. The latter is absorption, working hours as a source of their welfare (Kultalahti &
characterized by a deep concentration and interest in the Viitala, 2014). Employees who have more flexible
work. In this dimension, individuals find it difficult to working hours are able to take responsibility in their
free themselves from their work. lives, to provide psychological benefits (reduce anxiety
and stress), and to deliver benefits to companies such as

391
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 287

improving performance, concentration, loyalty, were three aspects that led to WLB; (1) Work
motivation, and commitment (Downe & Koekemoer, Interference with Personal Life (WIPL), how far could
2011). work interfere their personal life, (2) Personal Life
The relationship between the application of WLB Interference with Work (PLIW), how far could personal
and employee engagement is explained by using social life interfere their job, and (3) Personal Life
exchange theory (Blau in Slack, Corlett, & Morris, Enhancement of Work (PLEW), how far could personal
2014). This theory explains that companies care and life improved individual performances on their job. The
provide opportunities for their employees. Hence, ratio used for the variable was classified by Hayman.
employees will show certain attitudes and behaviours. WLB’s ratio had validity value of 0.309-0.665 and
More precisely, employees receive favourable treatment reliability value of 0.828 with the total item of 11.
they tend to reciprocate which leads to benefits between Employee engagement was a positive attitude
the company and employees (Eisenberger, applied by the employee concerning the value of
Stinglhamber, Vandenberghe, Sucharski, & Rhaodes, organization and company. There were three dimensions
2002). of employee engagement, namely (1) vigour, (2)
Application of social exchange theory to WLB lies dedication, and (3) absorption (Schaulfeli et al, 2008).
when employees feel that the company helps the balance The variable of this study was adapted via Utrech Work
of work and personal life. Accordingly, employees feel Engagement Scale (UWES) ratio classified by Schaufeli
cared for and supported by the company. With & Bakker (2003). The ratio of employee engagement
reciprocal norms, employees feel obliged to reciprocate had validity value of 0.442-0.704 and reliability value of
the facilities given by the company by providing better 0.900 with the total item of 16.
attitudes and behaviour in the workplace. Employees
respond to these things by increasing positive feelings Results
for work (Aryee, Srinivas, & Tan, 2005). When
employees are given attention by the company, the Table 1. Research Respondents’ Description (N=52)
employees will respond with a certain level of employee Freque
Categories Percentages %
engagement (Saks, 2006). ncies
To conclude, WLB has a positive impact on the Gender Male 28 53.9 %
employee engagement for millennial generation Female 24 46.1 %
employees in maintaining and optimizing their Latest
capabilities. Education SMA 42 80.8 %
D3 2 3.8 %
Millennial Work- Life Employee S1 3 5.8 %
Generation Balance Engagement S2 2 3.8 %
S3 3 5.8 %
Figure 1. Theoretical Framework
Based on the table above, it was discovered that
Methods
percentage of 28 male respondents was 53.9% and 24
The research participants were employees of PT. women respondents was 46.1%. Each respondents had
Senwell Indonesia located in Banjarmasin. There were the different education background divided into four
105 employees recruited to take a part in this current categories. There were 42 Senior High School graduates
study. The researchers used purposive sampling with a percentage of 80.8%, there was only one diploma
technique to select participants who were in accordance graduate and master graduate showed 3.8%, and
with the criteria proposed in this study. There were three bachelor graduate and doctoral graduate displayed 5.8%.
criteria used to select a sample from the population: (1)
From analysis, it was discovered that the WLB
the employees worked for at least 48 hours a week, (2)
variable had a maximum value of 44 and minimum 17.
the employees were 18 to 36 years old, (3) and the
The empirical median value was 32.39, while the
employees had worked in the company for 1 year. Then,
hypothetical median was 27.5. The variable employee
the researcher recruited 52 employees who met these
engagement had a maximum value of 80 and the
criteria.
minimum value was 37. The empirical value of the
In this current study, researchers proposed two
variable was 65.65 and the hypothetical mean was 48. It
variables; Variable X or independent variable
was clear that the empirical mean value was bigger than
represented by Work-life balance (WLB), and Variable
the hypothetical mean and the data had a high tendency.
Y or dependent variable characterized by employee
This result implied that PT. Senwell tent to be high.
engagement. In scale of WLB, there were four options,
such as totally agree, agree, disagree, and totally Based on the test of the product moment, there was a
disagree. Meanwhile, the employee engagement’s ratio calculated F value of 8.357 and F table of 3.96. If F
used alternative options, which were never, seldom, count were bigger than F table, the hypothesis would
sometimes, often, and always. have been accepted. There was a significant relationship
WLB was defined as the balance between work life between WLB and employee engagement with a number
and personal life. According to Hayman (2005), there

392
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 287

of significance values of 0.006. Significant relationships engagement needs to see what the organization proper
were characterized by a significance value smaller than must do. In addition, the level of attrition will be
0.05. In the t test, the number 2,891 and t table were reduced and the organization can concentrate on
1,989. If t count were bigger than t table, the hypothesis improving the ability of employees which can have an
would have been accepted. From the above test, it could impact on organizational performance. The company or
be seen that there was an influence between WLB and organization certainly wants to maximize the outcome.
employee engagement. Henceforth, the high productivity is needed.
Coefficient of correlation or R value based on the Organizational productivity is determined by the work
table was 0.378. It indicated that there was positive and attachment of work by employees. Employee
relation between WLB toward employee engagement. engagement can help organizations with the purpose of
The higher WLB, the higher employee engagement level employees are able to work better beyond the proposed
was. Meanwhile, the coefficient of determination or R standard.
Square value implied that WLB’s variable provided In short, the result shows that there is a relation
14.3% impact toward employee engagement’s variable. between WLB with employee engagement which
In addition, the remnant in value 85.7% was affected by contributes 14.3%. It means that there is nearby 86.7%
the factor or variable which was unavailable in this factor affects the level of employee engagement. Lastly,
study. there are several factors which increase the employee
engagement, such as senior’s behaviour, challenges,
Discussion partner relation, etc.

This study has found a positive correlation between Conclusion & Implication
WLB variables and employee engagement variables
with R Square values of 0.143 or 14.3%. The results also This study concludes that there is an acceptable
discovers F value of 8.357 and F table of 3.96. hypothesis. It means, WLB is one of factors which
Therefore, the hypothesis is accepted. affects employee engagement on millennial generation.
Employee engagement for employees can be The majority of PT. Senwell Indonesia employees have
influenced by WLB. The acceptance of the hypothesis in higher tendency level of WLB and it affects the level of
this study explains that WLB is one of the factors that employee engagement. For company, it is expected that
can affect employee engagement. The higher the this study will able to give information the impacts of
employee WLB, the higher the level of employee WLB toward employee engagement in order to pay
engagement is. attention to the prosperity between personal life and
Important factors for WLB of millennial generations work life for employees. There are some aspects that can
are salaries, recognition of individuals, flexible work be done from company in increasing WLB, such as
schedules, and career advancement (Huybers, 2011). taking care the structural consistency, creating the
WLB itself can be interpreted as an individual effort in conducive work atmosphere, giving leisure time and
balancing between personal life and work life. In a providing a training or upgrading the employees’
sense, WLB can fulfil several factors that are important abilities. For the next researchers, it is highly suggested
for millennial generations. The impact obtained by that another factors in increasing the employee
employees who have achieved WLB including reducing engagement between emotional intelligence,
absenteeism, working more effectively, reducing tuning, harassment, and burnout can be examined.
and increasing employee retention.
In this study, WLB becomes one of factors which References
increases the employee engagement. According to
Patricia (2017) and Oludayo et al (2015), when the Ahuja, S., & Modi, S. (2015). Employee Work
employees get the chance to manage their personal life, Engagement: A Multi Dimensional State of The
positively they will increase their employee engagement Art Review. International Journal of Marketing
productivity. Moreover, a study done by Sheppard and Technology, 3, 51-69.
(2016) explains that the employees become more Aryee, S., Srinivas, E., & Tan, H. (2005). Rhytms of
satisfied and actively obligated when they officially get Life: Antecendents and Outcomes of Work-
social support from the company. Family Balance in Employed Parents. Journal
Blau and Slack, Corlett & Morris (2014) explain that of Apllied Psychology, 90, 132-146.
social exchange theory can be found where employees Bakker, A., Schaufeli, W., Leiter, M., & Taris, T.
show certain attitudes when the company takes care and (2008). Work Engagement : An Emerging
gives chance for the employees. On the other hand, the Concept in Occupational Health Psychology.
employees who get beneficial treatments tend to respond Journal of Work & Stress, 22, 187-200.
with the result of beneficial outcomes for them Benito-Osario, D., Muñoz-Aguado, L., & Villar, C.
(Eisenberger, Stinglhamber, Vandenberghe, Sucharski & (2015). The Impact of Family and Work-Life
Rhaodes, 2002). Balance Policies on the Performance of Spanish
According to Sheppard (2016), any organization that Listed Companies. Journal of Management, 17,
wants to exploit the potential and to achieve employee 214-236.

393
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), volume 287

Brunetto, Y., Teo, S. T., & Far-Wharton, R. (2014). Musgrove, C., Ellinger, A. E., & Ellinger, A. D. (2014).
Emotional Intelligence, Job Satisfaction, Well- Examining The Influence of Strategic Profit
being and Engagement: Explaining Emphases On Employee Engagement and
Organisational Commitment and Turnover Service Climate. Journal of Workplace
Intentions in Policing. Human Resources Learning, 26, 152-171.
Management Journal, 22, 428-441. Nnambooze, B. E., & Parumasur, S. B. (2016).
Eisenberger, R., Stinghambler, F., Vandenberghe, C., Understanding The Multigenerational
Sucharski, I., & Rhoades, L. (2002). Perceived Workforce: Are The Generations Significantly
Supervisor Support: Contributions to Perceived Different or Similar? Corporate Ownership and
Organizational Support and Employee Control, 13, 244-257.
Retention. Journal of Apllied Psychology, 87, Oludayo, Falola, Obianuju, A., & Demilade, F. (2018).
565-573. Work-Life Balance Initiative As A Predictor of
Grimm, G. H. (2017). From Engagement to Employees Behavioural Outcomes. Academy of
Commitment: A New Perspective On the Strategic Management Journal, 17, 1-17.
Employee Attitude-Firm Performance Osibanjo, A. O., Olubusayo, F. H., Olalekan, A. J., &
Relationship. International Leadership Journal, Adenike, A. A. (2015). An Assessment of
9, 3-29. Workplace Deviant Behaviours and Its
Hayman, J. (2005). Psychometric Assesment of an Implication On Organizational Performance In
Instrument Designed to Measure Work Life A Growing Economy. Journal of
Balance. Research and Practice in Human Organizational Psychology, 15, 90-98.
Resources Management, 13, 85-91. Patricia, B. (2017). Bi-directional Work to Life Conflict:
Hill, E. J., Hawkins, A. J., Ferris, M., & Weitzman, M. An Investigation of Work Life Balance for
(2001). Finding An Extra Day A Week: The Nurses in Acute Public Hospital Settings in
Positive Influence of Perceived Job Flexibility Ireland. Thesis in NUI Galway.
on Work and Family Life Balance. National Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecendents and Consequences of
Council on Family Relations, 50, 49-58. Employee Engagement. Journal of Managerial
Joshi, R. J., & Sodhi, J. S. (2011). Drivers of Employee Psychology, 21, 600-619.
Engagement in Indian Organizations. Indian Schaufeli, W., Taris , T. W., & Rhenen, W. v. (2008).
Journal of Industrial Relations, 47, 162-182. Workaholism, Burnout, and Work Engagement:
Kilber, J., Barclay, A., & Ohmer, D. (2014). Seven Tips Three of A Kind or Three Diffrent Kinds of
for Managing Generation Y. Journal of Employee Well-being? Applied Psychology An
Management Policy and Practice, 15, 4-9. International Review, 57, 173-203.
Kultalahti, S., & Vitala, R. (2014). Sufficient Challanges Scott, D., & McMullen, T. (2010). The Impact of
and A Weekend Ahead- Generation Y Rewards Programs on Employee Engagement.
Describing Motivation at Work. Journal of World at Work, 6, 1-10.
Organizational Change Management, 27, 569- Shah, R. (2017). Work Engagement Among Millennials.
582. International Research Journal of Human
Lazar, I., Osoian, C., & Ratiu, P. (2010). The Role of Resources and Social Sciences, 4, 276-286.
Work-life Balance Practices in Order to Sheppard, G. (2016). Work Life Balance Programs to
Improve Organizational. European Research Improve Employee Performance. Walden
Studies, 13, 201-214. University Scholar Works: Doctoral Thesis.
Lockwood, N. (2003). Work Life Balance: Challanges Slack, R., Corlett, S., & Morris, R. (2014). Exploring
and Solutions, Society for Human Resource Employee Engagement with (Corporate) Social
Management. Research Quarterly, 2, 1-12. Responsibility: A Social Excanhe Perspective
Lyons, S. (2004). An Exploration of generational Values on Organisational Participation. Springer, 127,
In Life and At Work. ProQuest Dissertations 537-548.
and Theses, 411-441. Solnet, D., & Hood, A. (2008). Generation Y as
Meenakshi, S. P., C. V, V. S., & Ravichandran, K. Hospitality Employees: Framing a Research
(2013). The Importance of Work-Life-Balance. Agenda. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism
IOSR Journal of Business and Managemnt, 14, Management, 15, 59-68.
31-35. Team, E. (2018, March 20). Dale Carneige. Taken back
Mesimo-Ogunsanya, E. A. (2017). Organizational from Dale Carneige:
Support and Employees' Work-Life Quality. http://www.dalecarnegie.co.id/media-
International Journal of Emrging Research in coverage/mayoritas-milenial-galau-dalam-
Management & Technology, 6, 74-77. pekerjaan-kamu-juga/
Mohd, I. H., Shah, M. M., & Zailan, N. S. (2016). How Wasterman, J. W., & Yamamura, J. H. (2007).
Work Environment Affects The Employee Generational Preferences For Work
Engagement In A Telecommication Company. Environment Fit: Effects On Employee
International Conference on Business and Outcomes. Career Development International,
Economics (hal. 1-9). Future Academy. 12, 150-161.

394