A Comparative Study of Job Satisfaction, Occupational Stress, Work–Life Balance, and Organizational Commitment among Employees of Nationalized and Private Sector Banks in Bhagalpur Division, Bihar

Abstract

The banking sector has undergone remarkable transformation over the past two decades due to rapid technological advancement, financial liberalization, digital banking, increasing customer expectations, and intense market competition. These changes have substantially influenced the psychological experiences of bank employees by altering their work environment, job responsibilities, and organizational expectations. Employees working in nationalised and private sector banks often encounter different organizational cultures, employment policies, performance appraisal systems, workload, and career development opportunities. These organizational differences may significantly influence employees’ job satisfaction, occupational stress, work–life balance, and organizational commitment. The present study aimed to compare these psychological characteristics among employees of nationalised and private sector banks operating in Bhagalpur Division, Bihar. A descriptive comparative research design was adopted. A total of 240 employees, comprising 120 employees from nationalised banks and 120 employees from private sector banks, were selected through stratified random sampling. Standardized psychological instruments were used to assess job satisfaction, occupational stress, work–life balance, and organizational commitment. Descriptive statistics, independent sample t-tests, Pearson’s correlation, and Cohen’s d were employed for data analysis. The findings indicated that employees of nationalised banks reported significantly higher job satisfaction, stronger organizational commitment, and better work–life balance than employees of private banks. Conversely, employees in private sector banks experienced significantly higher occupational stress. Correlation analysis revealed positive relationships among job satisfaction, work–life balance, and organizational commitment, while occupational stress showed significant negative associations with these variables. The study highlights the importance of supportive organizational practices, effective stress management, employee welfare policies, and work–life balance initiatives in improving psychological well-being and organizational effectiveness. The findings contribute to organizational psychology and banking management by providing empirical evidence regarding psychological differences between employees working in different banking systems.

Authors & Affiliations

* Corresponding Author. Author contact details are available in the published PDF article as per journal policy.

Keywords & Indexing Terms

Download Center

Indexing & Verification

G Google Scholar Check indexing visibility by DOI Crossref / DOI Verify permanent DOI record ORCID Author identifier support Open Access Free reader access Indexing Ready Scholar metadata compatible OAI-PMH Metadata harvesting ready Article Metrics Views & download analytics

Article Metrics

Metrics are indicative and may update periodically after indexing, downloads and citation tracking are enabled.

Article Integrity & Transparency

License & Copyright

© 2026 The Author(s). The author(s) retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License .

How to Cite

PDF Preview

If the PDF preview does not load on your device, open the PDF directly or use the Download PDF button. Open PDF in new tab

Declarations

Publisher's Note

References

Showing first 3 references. Click “Show All References” to view complete list.

1. 1. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands–Resources model: State of the art.
2. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328.
3. 2. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed
4. Methods Approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
5. 3. Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles.
6. Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 76–88.
7. 4. Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction–job
8. performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127(3),
9. 376–407.
10. 5. Kaur, R., & Kaur, G. (2018). Job satisfaction among public and private sector bank employees: A
11. comparative analysis. International Journal of Research in Management Studies, 5(2), 45–53.
12. 6. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. Springer.
13. 7. Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook
14. of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (pp. 1297–1349). Rand McNally.
15. 8. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational
16. commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89.
17. 9. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and employee engagement.
18. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 293–315.
19. 10. Singh, A., & Sehgal, P. (2015). Occupational stress among employees of public and private sector
20. banks. International Journal of Management Research and Business Strategy, 4(2), 84–93.
21. 11. Spector, P. E. (1997). Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment, Causes, and Consequences. Sage
22. Publications.
23. 12. Warr, P. (1990). The measurement of well-being and other aspects of mental health. Journal of
24. Occupational Psychology, 63(3), 193–210.
25. 13. Yousef, D. A. (2002). Job satisfaction as a mediator of the relationship between role stressors and
26. organizational commitment. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17(4), 250–266.
27. 14. Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2002). Organizational behavior: Affect in the workplace. Annual
28. Review of Psychology, 53, 279–307.
29. 15. Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational Behavior (18th ed.). Pearson.

Related Articles