In addition to flexible work arrangements and hybrid work becoming the norm, there are more and more voices asking for a four-day workweek. Recently, a new trial has started in the UK with 3,300 employees across various industries and 70 companies. The trial will last until January 2023. There have been other trials such as Microsoft in Japan and another trial in Reykjavik, Iceland, with 2,500 workers which as been called an "overwhelming success". But before leaders consider a four-day workweek, let's look at why we should consider a four-day workweek and what options we have.
Why Even Consider a Four-Day Workweek?
Taking a step back for a moment, it's worth reminding ourselves that the concept of weekends and a five-day workweek is over a hundred year old. It was originally introduced in 1908 at a factory in New England. John Maynard Kenyes wrote in 1928 that within 100 years, the workweek would be reduced to 15 hours and again in 1965 the Senate subcommittee predicted that Americans would only work 14-hour weeks by 2000. Those predictions were off, however, it is worth remembering this because it means the five-day workweek is not a natural law written in stone. It is man-made.
In 2020, 62% of people reported they experienced burnout "often" or "extremely often" within the last 3 months. A Deloitte report from 2022 on mental health shows that 46% of Gen Z and 45% of Millennial respondents agree that they feel burnt out at work. The benefits of a four-day workweek include reduced stress, reduced risk of burnout and therefore improved mental health. Improved mental health in return leads to higher levels of productivity, less disruption due to extended sick leaves or employee turnover.
As for the UK trial so far, it has been reported that the companies have been able to attract more professionals, have better engagement and are able to hire more diverse people. Now 86% of workers in Iceland are working reduced hours or would be able to do so if they wanted to.
Three Different Models
There are generally three different models to consider when implementing a four-day workweek.
Firstly, 32 hours of work over 4 days with 3 days off at 100% of the previous output and the same pay. This is the 100:80:100 model - 100% pay, 80% input, 100% output - that is being applied at the trial in the UK.
Secondly, 32-hour weeks with 20% less input, 20% less output, 20% less pay. This model basically means scaling back the overall workload and expected output but also reduces the compensation proportionally. While this option might make sense at first glance, if this is forced onto employees, there is a high chance that those who actually want (or have to!) work 40 hours a week for better pay, will decide to move on.
Thirdly, there is the compressed workweek where 40 hours of work are performed in 4 days at the previous pay level. So, in return for a 3-day weekend, people are expected to work 10 hours per day. That is not accounting for potential overtime which might be required.
What we need to recognize here though is that the current workload oftentimes is already excessive and intense with limited slack in the system. That is why people feel burnt out and exhausted! Expecting 100% output with 20% less input can actually lead to increased stress and even further remove time for socializing and banter with colleagues. Combined with remote work which already reduces social interactions between colleagues, this can be a substantial risk. It might lead to people feeling further isolated and disengaged.
Lastly, people with intensive workloads tend to ruminate about work outside of working hours and are unable to properly switch off. That's why removing access to work - voluntary or not - does not actually mean the work itself is removed and therefore does not solve the underlying issue.
But Wait, There's More - Rethinking the Status Quo
The original 40 hour workweek was popularized by Henry Ford in 1926, almost 100 years ago. However, there is no scientific study proving that 40 hours a week are the holy grail of performance and output.
Actually, when we look at other countries, we can see that there are countries with low weekly average working hours such as Norway, Denmark and Germany. Denmark is known for being one of the happiest countries in the world and Germany is still the economic powerhouse of Europe and one of the largest economies worldwide. Even the OECD average is 37 hours.
So, maybe, there is actually no need to squeeze 40 hours of work into the week or the output-equivalent thereof. Maybe, a four-day workweek with 20% less input and potentially a little bit less output at 100% the previous compensation is a viable option. The five-day workweek and the 40-hour workweek are both concepts that are about a hundred years old and man-made. Our lives in general and work in particular have drastically changed since then. This might be the time for us to rethink and redesign the "when", "where", "how" and "how much" of work.
Conclusion
To really make a positive impact here, we need to take a long-term holistic approach with a focus on the well-being of the employees. Implementing a four-day workweek might be one of the ideas. It is not a magic bullet and as so often, the devil lies in the details. A four-day workweek also needs to be put into context especially if the organization has already implemented remote or hybrid work. How do people stay engaged and connected? What systems, structures and rituals are in place that help bridge the gap and connect people, engage them and ensure they are doing well, not only from a performance but also a mental health perspective? As so often, leaders need to be the role models here and build a culture that values work life balance and the well-being of their employees.
What have you tried at your company and what are your thoughts? Let us know by emailing us.
Comments