Abstract
Abstract
Studies on conflict between work and family which has contributed to the understanding of work–life balance, but the interplay between invisible academic demands, AI-induced workload pressures, and institutional monitoring in today's universities has not been well understood. This cross-sectional quantitative study analyses the newer institutional pressures and their impact on the balance between life and work, employment satisfaction, and career development of female academics in an academic role, founded on the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) Model, Emotional Labor Theory, and Work–Family Border Theory. Responses collected from 300 women faculty were analysed using SPSS, including reliability and validity checks, correlation testing, regression modelling and bootstrapped mediation, and the statistical output cross-checked with the raw data. The results indicated that Invisible Academic Labor and AI-Enabled Workload were each negatively related to Work Life Balance (β = −0.353 and β = −0.243 respectively, both p < .001), and that Institutional Surveillance had no significant relationship to Job Satisfaction (β = −0.025, p = .662). A robust positive predictor of Career Progression emerged in Work–Life Equilibrium (β = 0.459, p < .001), which also carried both job demands' influence through to career progression via indirect pathways (− 0.169 and − 0.110 respectively), confidence intervals for which stayed clear of zero; direct pathways, by contrast, showed no statistical significance. There was no meaningful common method bias in additional testing. All of these findings suggest a rethinking of how universities distribute workload, govern AI deployment, and design how to promote in a digitally transformed academic world.