Interested in more careers-related content? Check out our new weekly Work Life newsletter. Sent every Monday afternoon.
At a time when we moan – or is it brag? – about the speed, intensity and all-encompassing nature of change in the workplace, the 40-hour, five-day work week remains firmly entrenched as the societal standard and rarely questioned.
Ulysses S. Grant first instituted it for American federal government workers after the Civil War, a New England mill became what is believed to be the first factory to adopt it in 1908, Henry Ford championed it in the 1920s and it became law in Canada and the United States in the 1930s and 1940s. So, as an idea, it’s 150 years old and, as a practice, around a century old, yet still a basic organizing principle in an age of the internet and artificial intelligence, despite the many people who have predicted productivity gains over that period of time would translate into more leisure.
Joe O’Connor, chief executive officer of the Toronto-based consulting group Work Time Revolution, and Toronto freelance writer Jared Lindzon, a regular Globe and Mail contributor, believe that transitioning the standard work week to four days – without adjusting employee compensation or employer expectations – is one of the most effective ways for individuals, businesses and societies to address some of the problems that stem from current societal and technological upheavals.
“The top-performing organizations will utilize the four-day work week to empower their teams, make the most out of every working hour and ultimately do more in four days than their competitors accomplish in five,” they write in Do More in Four: Why It’s Time for a Shorter Workweek.
That sounds counter-intuitive. But remember Parkinson’s Law: Work expands to fill the time allotted for its completion. When Mr. O’Connor was working in 2018 for Fórsa, Ireland’s largest union for public sector workers, he became intrigued by the fact some women had shifted to a four-day schedule with reduced pay but because expectations and responsibilities had not similarly switched they were accomplishing the same productivity as before.
Digging deeper into the data, he found that when workers were given thirty-five hours to complete a task, they got it done in thirty-five; when schedules were extended to thirty-seven hours, most accomplished the same; and when they were asked to do the same task in thirty-two hours, they adjusted their processes accordingly and got the same amount of work done in less time.
That has proven true with various organizations he has worked with since: Cutting the work week by 25 per cent does not mean a 25-per-cent cut in productivity. Usually, the result is productivity staying the same. And it doesn’t result in people so hard-pressed that they resemble a video-clip played at a faster speed. They tend to be happier.
Managerially, it’s important to note that in most organizations shifting to a four-day week they don’t then opt for a three-day version on weeks with a statutory holiday. They stay at four, so the cut in work hours annually is less than the initial math suggests. Absenteeism tends to sharply decline – people now have more personal time to handle doctors’ appointments and similar matters – sick leave drops and so does turnover, again countering the productivity losses we might expect.
“For employees, research suggests you can get a lot more done in less time when you are energized, well rested, more engaged in your work, and less distracted by personal responsibilities,” Messrs. O’Connor and Lindzon write.
The pioneering four-day organizations tend to treat the fifth day as a flex day rather than a day off, so employees remain available if contacted by customers or an emergency comes up. One New York marketing agency cleverly arranged its 32-hour work week to accommodate a later start Monday morning, eliminate Friday afternoons and shave off the last 30 minutes of every other day, essentially not having to work during less productive times.
When the pandemic struck, most organizations dramatically rearranged how they operated, highlighting that work can be handled in different ways. This allows organizations to more thoughtfully redesign work as they contour to four days. It addresses work-life balance and flexibility, but for all, not just those who demand it. Most organizations try the four-day format initially as an experiment, allowing them to return to five days if it doesn’t work, but it in fact works out for many.
It even has succeeded in the billable hours world for Ylaw Group in British Columbia. Targets for lawyers were reduced to 1,400 billable hours a year from 1,500 with the shift to a four-day, nine-hour per day workweek, and most hit that target with some continuing to reach 1,500. “Our turnover is almost zero,” founder Leena Yousefi told the authors, with only one lawyer having left while others have insisted they can’t imagine working anywhere else in a five-day format.
The only unintended consequence was a huge spike in applications to work there.
“We do sometimes get applicants that confuse this policy with permission to be lazy – they apply because they’re lazy, not because they want to be healthy,” she says.
A probationary period was therefore added in which newcomers work a standard work week. But she adds: “We’ve gotten applicants that we never imagined getting in a million years. A lot of senior lawyers don’t want to be under so much pressure and just want an environment where we still work very hard but it’s a little bit more relaxed and not as stressful.”
More relaxed. Not as stressful. Equally productive. In an era of change, maybe one more to consider.
Cannonballs
- Executive coach Kelly Meerbott recommends asking this question to your direct reports: “What’s one obstacle slowing you down this week?”
- A study of more than 400 customer service calls found employees need to be both warm and competent, but at different times. Warmth works at the start and end of the conversation. Using competence-oriented language at the start and end can actually be a hindrance but is needed when solving customer’s needs in the conversation’s middle.
- Keep brainstorming, even when you think you’re done. Research shows the quality of ideas improves as the session goes on. “If you’re struggling, keep going,” advises Loran Nordgren, a professor of management and organizations at the Kellogg School.
Harvey Schachter is a Kingston-based writer specializing in management issues. He, along with Sheelagh Whittaker, former CEO of both EDS Canada and Cancom, are the authors of When Harvey Didn’t Meet Sheelagh: Emails on Leadership.