The Problem With a 4-Day Workweek? More Companies Won’t Try It

People work better when they cut a day out of the traditional five-day workweek. They’re happier, sleep better, feel more balanced, need fewer sick days, and are less likely to quit. And employers get more for their money. Shifting employees from a five- to a four-day workweek brings down costs, like those associated with time off, overtime pay, and hiring and training to replace workers who quit.

Those are just some of the findings from studies of a four-day workweek, including one of the latest large-scale trials recently done in the UK(Opens in a new window). Revenue from the beginning to the end of the trial largely stayed the same or grew, rising on average by 1.4% as people worked fewer hours.

While plenty of productivity software helps employees “work smarter, not harder,” the evidence from all these studies suggests that cutting time from people’s workweek without cutting their pay is perhaps a more surefire way to achieve the same end. Given all the corporate calls to run business by data, you’d think every organization under the sun would want to run their own four-day workweek experiment.

Those That Try It, Buy It

Businesses that actually try a four-day workweek and experience the benefits firsthand are overwhelmingly won over. In the UK study mentioned above, 56 of the 61 organizations that moved to a shorter workweek, about 92%, said they plan to stick with it. Of the five who said no, two have simply extended their trials—one had started late and the other is now experimenting with a four-and-a-half-day week. 

Another trial in Iceland(Opens in a new window) that reduced working hours to 35 or 36 per week for 1% of the country’s entire labor force was so successful that unions renegotiated work schedules afterward. Eighty-six percent of workers in the country got shorter workweeks or earned the right to them.

Those That Don’t Try It, Don’t Believe It

Show business leaders the data, however, and those who have never opted into a study to reduce work hours simply fight it. They say it won’t work for their type of business, even though studies have taken place in a wide range of companies: offices, hospitals, manufacturing settings, preschools, retail and hospitality businesses, nonprofits, and others.

The naysayers convince themselves that all the gains—increased revenue, lower rate of turnover, fewer sick days taken, happier employees—somehow magically won’t apply to them. I even ran into someone online who said that it wouldn’t work for businesses that bill by the hour because they’d lose a whole day of billing. That logic is about as sound as saying that companies should drag their feet to bill more hours—anyone who has done billable work knows that’s a path to failure, that instead they have to work efficiently to deliver good value to their clients. That’s how you keep clients, grow the business, charge a healthy rate, and raise your rates over time. Getting the work done more efficiently, while keeping workers happier and more committed, is indeed better for everyone.

Leadership’s Magical Thinking Is Nothing New

What’s depressing is that nothing here is new. Business leaders reject perfectly good data all the time that could improve the bottom line for reasons that amount to magical thinking. We’ve seen it with remote work: When done right, supporting remote work or hybrid work delivers many of the same benefits as a shorter workweek, including happier and more committed employees(Opens in a new window), fewer sick days(Opens in a new window), and increased productivity(Opens in a new window). 

We’ve seen the same thing with open-plan offices, which employees hate but employers believe will reduce costs, even though that’s simply not what the data shows(Opens in a new window). Time and again, research proves that working in a communal space without walls reduces(Opens in a new window) productivity, lowers morale, and increases sick leave taken(Opens in a new window). But people in leadership positions dig in their heels and say it fosters collaboration, even though research shows that doesn’t happen either(Opens in a new window).

Important Details of the UK Study

A few details about this latest UK study are worth pointing out, not because there are so many caveats to how and why the four-day workweek is successful, but because there are so few.

First, what does “four-day workweek” mean? The 61 organizations that participated in the UK study each got to define what it meant, as long as pay stayed at 100% and the reduction in work hours was “meaningful.” Whether everyone got Fridays off or there was a staggered schedule was entirely left to the businesses. 

Second, the types and sizes of businesses were diverse. Some had fewer than 10 employees, and some had more than 100 (the total did skew smaller, but still, 22% had 50 or more employees).

Third, what was measured? Revenue, absenteeism (sick days and personal days), resignations, and new hires. The researchers didn’t measure productivity outright, because it’s so different for each business. Instead, companies were allowed to submit two custom metrics to track, but only if they wanted to. In addition to collecting hard numbers, employee surveys captured other findings, such as burnout (71% of employees felt less burned out working a four-day week), stress (about half had no change in stress, and 39% had lower stress), and job satisfaction (about half were more satisfied than when they started).

Finally, and perhaps most important, the organizations had two months to prepare before reducing staff hours. During this time, everyone could ask questions and got workshops, coaching, mentoring, and more. Put another way, the businesses had ample time and support to be successful in reducing their hours, and communication with employees was clear and open. Too often, planning and communication are the secret ingredients missing when any kind of change happens at work. Here, people were set up to succeed.

It’s Time for More Companies to Try the 4-Day Workweek

It’s bonkers that the only time business leaders are won over by the data in favor of a reduced workweek is when they participate in a study and see firsthand that it’s a win for both employees and the company. No amount of actual data seems to do it. What matters is making the experience happen.

The promise of a four-day workweek or a 32-hour workweek has been around for decades. In 1956, then-Vice President Richard Nixon thought the writing was on the wall, and President Carter echoed its imminence in 1977. And maybe support is growing, especially as workers have become more empowered in the last few years with the rise of unions, low unemployment, and the Great Resignation that inspired many workers to rethink the value proposition of their jobs. Just last year, Newsweek identified more than 30 US-based businesses(Opens in a new window) that have tried or have in place a shortened workweek.

Maybe the time is finally nigh. If not now, when?