Quality of Work Life (QWL) is the degree to which employees are able to shape their jobs actively, in accordance
with their options, interests and needs. However if the organization provides the appropriate authority to design work
activities to the individual employees, then it is highly possible that the work activities can match their employees’
needs that contribute to the organizational performance, Beukema (1987). QWL is thus the extent of relationships
between individuals and organizational factors that are existing in the working environment. It is focusing strongly
on providing a work environment conducive to satisfy individual needs. It is assumed that if employees have more
positive attitudes about the organization and their productivity increases, everything else being equal, the organization
should be more effective. It is seen from various researches that employees of an organization often take their work
to home due to heavy work demands, by which they cannot pay right attention to their family problems, take care of
their family members, which ultimately leads to a disturbed and unbalanced work-life. The main purpose of this
research is to investigate the overall quality of work life of O. P. Jindal Group, New Delhi. A literature review of
previous study is given along with a questionnaire survey has been done using a standard questionnaire. To fulfill
the objectives correlation of the factors among each other and also with QWL is calculated. The findings of the
study reflect that the QWL of the group is positively influenced by the factors taken for the study.

1. Aizzat, M. N, Ramayah, T. & Osman, M.
(2001). Job satisfaction and organizational
commitment among workers in Malaysian
manufacturing companies. Proceedings of the 4th
Asian Academy of Management Conference. Asian
Management in the new economy Prospects and
challenges. 10-13 November, Pahang, Malaysia.
2. Akdere, M. (2006). Improving Quality of Work-Life:
Implications for Human Resources. The Business
Review, Cambridge, 6(1), December, 173- 177.
3. Allen, N.J., & Meyer, J.P. (1990). The Measurement
and Antecedents of Affective, Continuance and
Normative Commitment to the Organization. Journal
of Occupational Psychology. 63(1). 1-18.
4. www.ccsenet.org/ijbm International Journal of
Business and Management Vol. 5, No. 10; October
2010, 80 ISSN 1833-3850 E-ISSN 1833-8119
5. Elizur, D., & Shye, S. (1990). Quality of Work Life
and its Relation to Quality of Life. Applied
Psychology: An International Review. 39 (3), 275-291.
6. Gregory and Griffin, (2009), Introduction to
Organizational Behaviour, New Delhi, Cengage
Learning, pp. 420-421.
Factors W.E F.T.W S & C Oppr H.S.S T & D P. A. S.M. QWL
W.E. 1 0.570356
F.T.W. 0.375523 1 0.58427
S & C 0.214388 0.57138 1 0.638775
Oppr. 0.574185 0.08365 0.16279 1 0.639812
H.S.S 0.27252 0.45715 0.39501 0.42136 1 0.779008
T & D 0.221183 0.50843 0.60087 0.32136 0.754098 1 0.808148
P.A. 0.487188 0.14744 0.28364 0.58985 0.421324 0.41483 1 0.746547
S.M. O.107402 0.07202 0.21983 0.35635 0.411241 0.45405 0.55081 1 0.596675
71
7. Gupta and Sharma, (2010), “Factor Credentials
Boosting Quality Of Work Life Of BSNL Employees
In Jammu Region”, APJRBM Volume 1, Issue 2.
8. Hackman J &Oldham G (1974) The Job Diagnostic
Survey. New Haven: Yale University
9. Heskett, J.L., Jones, T.O., Loveman, G.W., Sasser,
W.E. Jr and Schlesinger, L.A. (1994), “Putting the
service-profit chain to work”, Harvard Business
Review, March-April, pp. 164-74.
10. Heckett, P.D., Bycio, P., & Hausdorf, P.A. (1994).
Further assessment of Meyer and Allen’s three
components model of organizational commitment.
Journal of Applied Psychology. 79, 15-23.