Mayas Publications logo
Buy Books Buy journals

Journal Issues

Back To Archive
A Study on Stress Management of Online Food Delivery Executives at Swiggy
Dr. R. Sukanya Assistant Professor, Department of Commerce, Karnataka State Open University.
Pages: 1-23 | First Published: 05 Mar 2026
Full text | Abstract | PDF | References | Request permissions

Abstract

            The rapid expansion of app-based food delivery platforms has transformed urban employment patterns, particularly within the gig economy. While these platforms generate significant livelihood opportunities, they also expose delivery executives to various occupational stressors. The present study examines stress management among online food delivery executives working at Swiggy across three metropolitan cities—Bengaluru, Hyderabad, and Chennai. The research aims to analyses job stress factors, assess their physical, behavioral, and emotional consequences, evaluate coping mechanisms, and examine the relationship between stress levels and job performance outcomes.

            The study adopts a descriptive research design using both primary and secondary data. Primary data were collected from 600 Swiggy delivery executives (200 from each city) through a structured questionnaire. Statistical tools such as descriptive analysis was employed to measure the intensity of job stress factors and stress outcomes.

            The findings reveal that delivery executives experience high levels of stress primarily due to workload pressure, strict time deadlines, customer-related issues, heavy traffic, financial burden from fuel costs, and lack of supervisory support. Physical responses such as headaches, musculoskeletal pain, fatigue, dehydration, and sleep disturbances were widely reported. Behavioral responses included difficulty in concentration, neglect of responsibilities, disturbed eating and sleeping patterns, and social withdrawal. Emotional responses such as sadness, irritability, anxiety, and reduced resilience were also prevalent, with a concerning proportion reporting severe psychological distress. Despite these stressors, variations in stress intensity were observed across individuals and cities.

            The study highlights the urgent need for structured stress management programs, improved working conditions, supportive supervision, mental health interventions, and policy-level reforms to safeguard the well-being of gig economy workers. The findings contribute to the growing body of literature on occupational stress in platform-based employment and offer practical implications for enhancing employee sustainability and organizational effectiveness.

Keywords: Occupational stress, Gig economy, Food delivery executives, Stress management, Emotional well-being, Swiggy, Urban employment.

References

  1. Ayyagari, R., Grover, V., & Purvis, R. (2011). Technostress: Technological antecedents and implications. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 831–858. https://doi.org/10.2307/41409963

  2. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands–resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115

  3. Beehr, T. A., & Newman, J. E. (1978). Job stress, employee health, and organizational effectiveness: A facet analysis, model, and literature review. Personnel Psychology, 31(4), 665–699. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1978.tb02118.x

  4. Cooper, C. L., Dewe, P. J., & O’Driscoll, M. P. (2001). Organizational stress: A review and critique of theory, research, and applications. Sage Publications.

  5. De Stefano, V. (2016). The rise of the “just-in-time workforce”: On-demand work, crowdwork, and labor protection in the gig economy. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 37(3), 471–504.

  6. Ganster, D. C., & Rosen, C. C. (2013). Work stress and employee health: A multidisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 39(5), 1085–1122. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313475815

  7. Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(2), 285–308. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392498

  8. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer Publishing Company.

  9. Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2016). Understanding the burnout experience: Recent research and its implications for psychiatry. World Psychiatry, 15(2), 103–111. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20311

  10. Sonnentag, S., & Frese, M. (2003). Stress in organizations. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 453–491). Wiley.

  11. Wood, A. J., Graham, M., Lehdonvirta, V., & Hjorth, I. (2019). Good gig, bad gig: Autonomy and algorithmic control in the global gig economy. Work, Employment and Society, 33(1), 56–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017018785616

  12. World Health Organization. (2019). Burn-out an “occupational phenomenon”: International classification of diseases (11th ed.). WHO.

The AI Pyramid: A Conceptual Model Outlining Workforce Capability
Dr. Nijina Jose Assistant Professor, Department of Commerce: N. Subhashree III B. Com (Accounting & Finance): A. Hemalatha III B. Com (Accounting & Finance). Valliammal College for Women.
Pages: 24-31 | First Published: 05 Mar 2026
Full text | Abstract | PDF | References | Request permissions

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) marks a major shift in technological change by extending cognitive labor rather than just automating routine tasks. Recent evidence shows that generative AI is impacting highly educated, white-collar jobs more than expected. This challenges traditional assumptions about which parts of the workforce are most vulnerable. As a result, conventional approaches to digital and AI literacy are no longer sufficient. This paper introduces “AI Nativity,” the ability to seamlessly integrate AI into everyday thinking and decision-making. It also proposes the AI Pyramid as a framework for understanding workforce capabilities in an AI-driven economy. The pyramid includes three interconnected layers: AI Native, AI Foundation, and AI Deep capabilities. AI Native serves as a baseline for participation, while AI Foundation focuses on building and maintaining systems. AI Deep capability advances cutting-edge AI knowledge and innovation. The framework emphasizes capability development as ongoing infrastructure, shaping policy, education, and workforce strategies.

References

  1. Brynjolfsson, E.,Li, D., & Raymond, L. (2025). Generative AIat work. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 140(2), 889–942. 

    https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjae044

  2. Cazzaniga, M.,Jaumotte, F., Li,L., Melina, G.,Panton, A. J.,Pizzinelli, C., Rockall, E. J., & Tavares, M. M. (2024). Gen-AI: Artificial intelligence and the future of work. IMF Staff Discussion Notes, 2024(001). https://doi.org/10.5089/9798400262548.006

  3. Deming, D.J., & Noray, K. (2020). Earnings dynamics, changing jobskills, and STEMcareers.

  4. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 135(4), 1965–2005. 

    https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjaa021

  5. Felten, E. W., Raj, M., & Seamans, R. (2023). Occupational heterogeneity in exposure to generative AI (SSRN Working Paper No.4414065). SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4414065

  6. Hosseinioun, M.,Neffke, F., Zhang, L., & Youn, H. (2025). Skill dependencies uncover nested human capital. Nature Human Behaviour, 9(4), 673–687. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-02093-2

  7. Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020). What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. In Proceedings ofthe 2020 CHIConference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–16). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727

  8. Strobel, J.,& van Barneveld, A. (2009). Whenis PBL moreeffective? A meta-synthesis of meta-analyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 3(1), 44–58. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1046

  9. Clark, A.(2025). Extending minds with generative AI.Nature Communications, 16,Article 4627. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-59906-9