Impact of Hybrid Work on Employee Engagement: The Moderating Role of Work-Life Balance Among Academic and Administrative Staff in Universities of Pakistan

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to explore the relationship between hybrid work and employee engagement among the staff members of the universities in Pakistan with work-life balance as a boundary condition. It fills the lacuna in the higher education literature in South Asia and confirms the validity of strong measurement tools.

Design/Methodology/Approach: In this study, 412 university employees were selected as the sample and they were asked to fill out culturally adapted scales. The relationships were tested using hierarchical moderated regression, Pearson correlations, and group comparisons. The instruments were validated with rigorous psychometric testing.

Findings: Engagement was significantly positively associated with hybrid work (r = .42, p < .001). Work-life balance also had a positive coefficient with engagement (r = .45, p < .001) that was high. The hybrid work-engagement relationship was significantly moderated by work-life balance (ΔR² = .032, p < .01); that is, the positive relationship between hybrid work and employee engagement is heightened when the work-life balance is high. There were greater levels of engagement among academic staff than administrative staff (t = 3.12, p < .01), and the private sector staff had more positive experiences with hybrid work than public sector staff (t = 2.96, p < .01). There was a higher level of engagement among female employees than male employees (t = 2.54, p < .05). The internal consistency of all scales was excellent (α = .86 to .89).

Originality/Value: This study contributes to the evidence base of the Job Demands-Resources and Conservation of Resources approaches in a non-Western context, as hybrid work is a job resource when supported by work-life balance.

Practical Implications: University leaders should prioritize infrastructure that supports hybrid work arrangements and policies to enhance work-life balance. There is a call for specific support for administrative support and public institutions and to have HR policies that are flexible and deal with boundaries.

References

Ahmed, S., & Asif, M. (2026). The impact of hybrid working on employee well-being with the moderating role of organizational performance: A case study of IT sector in Pakistan. Qualitative Research Journal for Social Studies, 3(2), 1006-1030. https://doi.org/10.63878/qrjs1173

Ahmed, I., & Asif, M. (2026). The Role of HR in Managing Quiet Quitting and Employee Disengagement in Gen Z Employees of Telecom Sector. Policy Journal of Social Science Review, 4(6), 118-151. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20581688

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage Publications.

Aparna, S. M., Sahney, S., & contributors. (2026). Green organizational culture, job satisfaction, and work engagement in enhancing sustainable performance. Discover Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-026-02690-3

Arifah, I. D. C., Hadi, H. K., Dewi, R. S., Dhenabayu, R., & Tanuwijaya, H. (2025). Flexible work dynamics in higher education: Unveiling the influence of work engagement and technology adoption on lecturer performance. International Journal of Organizational Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-11-2024-4995

Asif, M., Abid, M., & Riaz, A. (2026). Psychological drivers of investment decision making: A multi‑bias analysis of an emerging market’s retail investors. Contemporary Journal of Social Science Review, 4(2), 677–688. https://doi.org/10.63878/cjssr.v4i2.2608

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309-328.

College and University Professional Association for Human Resources (CUPA-HR). (2025). The CUPA-HR 2025 higher education employee retention: Remote/hybrid work gaps analysis. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED675833.pdf

Çivilidağ, A., & Durmaz, Ş. (2024). Examining the relationship between flexible working arrangements and employee performance: A mini review. Frontiers in Psychology, 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1398309

Grant, C. A., Wallace, L. M., & Spurgeon, P. C. (2013). An exploration of the psychological factors affecting remote e-worker's job effectiveness, well-being and work-life balance. Employee Relations, 35(5), 527-546.

Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513-524.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

International Research Consortium. (2025). Unpacking the link between flexible work arrangements and job stress: Job satisfaction mediation. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0335279

International Research Consortium. (2026). Work-life balance in the digital era: Configuring demands and resources at work. Human Resource Management Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2026.2650420

Iqbal, S., Hanif, M., & Khan, S. (2024). Impact of staff training on university productivity through job satisfaction: ISO 9001-certified institutions. PLOS ONE. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11232989/

Italian University Research Team. (2024). Psychological stress in university employees: Mandatory vs. voluntary remote working. PMC. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11050619/

Kavya, R., Mathew, J., & Raghavendra, A. N. (2025). The mediating effect of work-life integration on the relationship between hybrid work practice and work engagement. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/23220937251339289

Khan, R. D. A., Ping, H., & Asif, M. (2026). The impact of green human resource management on employee green performance through green commitment and transformational leadership. Center for Management Science Research, 4(5), 635–677. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20510765

Marinoni, G., van't Land, H., & Jensen, T. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 on higher education around the world. International Association of Universities.

Muchinsky, P. M. (1996). The correction for attenuation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(1), 63-75.

Multi-sector Research Team. (2024). The impact of remote work on productivity and work-life balance. International Journal of Applied and Advanced Scientific Research.

Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(7), 600-619.

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 293-315.

Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701-716.

Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71-92.

Serbia-based Research Team. (2024). The mediating role of employee engagement in the relationship between flexible work arrangements and turnover intentions. PMC. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9952613/

Sultan, M., Khan, B. A., Mahmood, N., & Imran, M. (2025). Work-life balance and employee engagement: Key drivers of career success in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's university faculty. Journal of Social Signs Review, 3(1).

University Research Team. (2024). Exploring academic staff engagement in a time of crisis and change: Multilevel job demand-resources analysis. Higher Education Research & Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2024.2371076

Zhou, L., & Wang, X. (2026). The longitudinal impact of emotional intelligence and psychological empowerment on work engagement. Frontiers in Psychology, 16.

Zimbabwe Open University Study Team. (2025). The moderating role of gender on the effects of flexible work arrangements on employee performance. Cogent Social Sciences, 11(1), Article 2486553. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2025.2486553