ISO 9001:2015

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, MODERN MANAGEMENT, APPLIED SCIENCE & SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJEMMASSS) [ Vol. 7 | No. 4 (III) | October - December, 2025 ]

Workforce Caregiving, HRM Responsiveness and Employee Retention: An Empirical Study of Organizational Support Systems in Post-Pandemic Workplaces

Dr. Rajeta

Workplace dynamics have been transformed by the effects of COVID-19 and heightened employees’ caregiving roles across different industries. Increasingly, as individuals try to provide care for children, elderly parents and provide health services to family members, how responsive Human Resource Management (HRM) systems are to employees is one of the key factors influencing employee wellbeing and organisational stability. While there has been increased awareness regarding work-life integration, the research investigating the role of organisational support systems and employee retention due to caregiving in the workforce remains limited. This research utilizes a quantitative method, which includes the study of other sources of information for gathering data about organizations and the reporting of their environmental, social and governance (ESG) data to create a global workforce database. This research is concerned with how the extent to which human resource management (HRM) is flexible and responsive to employee needs during the COVID-19 pandemic, as indicated through flexible working arrangements, caregiving leave and employee assistance programs, impact retention in post-COVID workplaces by comparing selected organizations. In general, firms that are highly responsive to the needs of their caregiving employees have significantly lower levels of attrition compared to other organizations and have much higher levels of employee engagement and commitment. The study emphasizes that the issue of caregiver assistance has changed; it is now no longer seen as an auxiliary concern in human resources, but rather recognized as critical to talent retention and, thereby, the long-term viability of an organisation. Finally, the review contributes to advancing the discourse on building people-centred workplaces by providing empirical support and establishing a requirement for the inclusion of caregiving issues within Human Resource Policies and Environmental Social Governance (ESG) frameworks. These findings are of significance to organizations that seek to build a sustainable, inclusive company in the world of work that is quickly changing.

Rajeta, R. (2025). Workforce Caregiving, HRM Responsiveness and Employee Retention: An Empirical Study of Organizational Support Systems in Post-Pandemic Workplaces. International Journal of Education, Modern Management, Applied Science & Social Science, 07(04(III)), 240–248. https://doi.org/10.62823/IJEMMASSS/07.04(III).8674
  1. Allen, T. D., Johnson, R. C., Kiburz, K. M., & Shockley, K. M. (2013). Work–family conflict and flexible work arrangements: Deconstructing flexibility. Personnel Psychology, 66(2), 345–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12012
  2. Beauregard, T. A., & Henry, L. C. (2009). Making the link between work-life balance practices and organizational performance. Human Resource Management Review, 19(1), 9–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2008.09.001
  3. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Wiley.
  4. Greenhaus, J. H., & Allen, T. D. (2011). Work–family balance: A review and extension of the literature. In J. C. Quick & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.), Handbook of occupational health psychology (pp. 165–183). American Psychological Association.
  5. Kossek, E. E., & Perrigino, M. B. (2016). Workplace flexibility policies and practices. In T. D. Allen & L. T. Eby (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of work and family (pp. 249–270). Oxford University Press.
  6. Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698–714. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.698
  7. Shockley, K. M., & Allen, T. D. (2015). Deciding between work and family: An episodic approach. Personnel Psychology, 68(2), 283–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12077
  8. Voydanoff, P. (2005). Toward a conceptualization of perceived work-family fit and balance. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(4), 822–836. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00178.x

Reports and Organizational Sources

  1. International Labour Organization. (2021). Working from home: From invisibility to decent work. https://www.ilo.org
  2. World Economic Forum. (2023). Future of jobs report 2023. https://www.weforum.org
  3. NASSCOM. (2023). Strategic review of the Indian IT industry. https://www.nasscom.in

Company Reports (Secondary Data Sources)

  1. Infosys. (2025). ESG report 2024–25. https://www.infosys.com
  2. Infosys. (2025). Quarterly results and fact sheet (Q4 FY25). https://www.infosys.com
  3. Tata Consultancy Services. (2025). Annual report 2024–25. https://www.tcs.com
  4. Wipro. (2025). Annual report and ESG disclosures 2024–25. https://www.wipro.com
  5. HCLTech. (2025). Annual report 2024–25. https://www.hcltech.com
  6. Tech Mahindra. (2025). Annual report and sustainability disclosures 2024–25. https://www.techmahindra.com.

DOI:

Article DOI: 10.62823/IJEMMASSS/07.04(III).8674

DOI URL: https://doi.org/10.62823/IJEMMASSS/07.04(III).8674


Download Full Paper:

Download