Identifying optimal work hours is essential for maximizing both employee well-being and economic productivity.
Work, according to the Surgeon General’s 31-page Framework, is an important social determinant of worker health, and improving the work environment to support workplace mental health and well-being calls for workers at the table. The Framework is centered on the worker’s voice and equity, these Five Essentials support workplaces as engines of well-being. Each essential is grounded in two human needs shared across industries and roles. Creating a plan to enact these practices can help strengthen the essentials of workplace well-being.
A balanced life encompasses physical health, mental well-being, and a harmonious work-life interface. A 30 to 40-hour workweek, as new research suggests, effectively balances efficiency, reduces stress, and mitigates burnout. Flexible schedules and shorter workdays can notably improve mental health and job satisfaction, decrease absenteeism, and maintain—or even enhance—productivity.
The historical evolution of work hours reflects significant economic and technological changes. Employees now work 20 to 30 hours less every week compared to the 19th century. Average work hours in developed countries fell from 3,000 hours per year in 1870 to between 1,500 and 2,000 hours per year by 1990.
The U.S. began tracking work hours in 1890, leading to pivotal labor reforms such as the 40-hour workweek, formalized through the Adamson Act of 1916 and the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.
Henry Ford’s introduction of the 40-hour workweek at Ford Motor Company on September 25, 1926, aimed to increase consumer demand through enhanced leisure time, resulting in a 25% productivity boost and a 10% reduction in production costs.
Many workers, despite these benchmarks, now exceed the 40-hour limit, which often leads to decreased productivity. While good intentions and a strong work ethic motivate individuals to go above and beyond, several studies show that excessive overtime can actually reduce focus, creativity, decision-making abilities, and overall job performance over time.
A 2023 survey data from Slack’s Workplace Lab, which queried some 10,000 desk-based employees, found that people who log off at the end of the work day reported 20% higher productivity scores than those who feel the pressure to work after hours.
Earlier, a 2014 study had shown that employee productivity declines sharply after 50 hours of work per week, drops even more drastically beyond 55 hours, and yields no additional benefits from working 70 hours.
For white-collar jobs, productivity decreases by approximately 25% for those working over 60 hours per week, while manufacturing jobs see a 2–3% decline for every 10% increase in overtime. Extended work hours are also associated with health issues, such as cardiovascular risks, depression, and increased substance abuse.
Interestingly, a Boston University study on consultants showed that managers could not distinguish between those who genuinely worked 80 hours per week and those who only appeared to do so.
Largely adding to the fact, research from the World Health Organization, published in September 2021, also demonstrated that working 55 or more hours per week is linked to an estimated 35% greater risk of stroke and a 17% higher risk of dying from heart disease.
But if not carefully planned, a 40-hour or shorter workweek, particularly with reduced hours (e.g., 32 hours) or compressed hours (e.g., four 10-hour days) can be significantly counterproductive for both employees and employers, as studies have suggested.
Some key challenges, according to a report from the Global Journal of Human Resource Management (2023), include: increased stress and burnout, scheduling and productivity challenges, workload and managerial pressure, and employer challenges.
67% of workers reported heightened stress and burnout since the pandemic, and compressed workweeks (10-hour days) could further contribute to these problems due to the pressure to complete the same amount of work in less time. Compressing a typical five-day schedule into four 10-hour days can increase stress and lead to health concerns. For workers prone to overworking, longer days may exacerbate harmful health effects, like increased stress.
Employees, particularly parents, face issues with balancing childcare and school schedules. Childcare typically aligns with the traditional 8‑hour, 5‑day workweek, leading to challenges in arranging suitable after-school care for employees working longer days. The shift to four 10-hour days can infringe on family time.
Research by Cheryl Sundari Dembe, who holds a BS from the University of Michigan, an MS (’70), and a PhD (2018) from the University of Chicago, elucidates how working two extra hours per day significantly cuts into prime socialization time with family, particularly between 5 and 7 p.m.
Extended workdays do not guarantee increased productivity. The notion that extended hours equate to hard work persists in many organizations, where a disproportionate emphasis is placed on ‘face time’—the belief that physical presence in the office for longer hours signifies commitment.
This perspective overlooks the reality that productivity is not solely determined by the number of hours spent at a desk but by the quality of focus, engagement, and output during those hours. Employees must optimize their time, as distractions such as social media and emails—on average consuming 1½ hours per day—pose risks to productivity, particularly in longer working days.
A NIH study published in September 2022 reveals that employees lose approximately 9.285% of their productivity daily due to social media use during work hours, spending nearly 52 minutes on these platforms.
When asked what are the benefits of using media during work hours, employees provided the following responses:
‘Md Belal Ahmad and his team found that 81% of employees engage in social media at work—primarily to stay updated and manage stress—leading to a notable impact on productivity. Many were reported as viewing social media use as a distraction, with around 57% feeling it wastes work time and negatively affects their productivity. Consequently, about 80% of employees believe their organizations should establish policies to regulate social media use during work hours.
The researchers have recommended, therefore, that it is important for all organizations to implement a policy on social media use at the workplace and to inform employees about both the positive and negative effects of social media on productivity.
While the intent of a 4‑day workweek is to reduce stress, it can lead to intensified work intensity and managerial pressure. Workers may face expectations to maintain the same levels of productivity in fewer days, potentially limiting breaks and stifling creativity.
The shift to a four-day, 10-hour workweek could deepen gender gap in employment, disproportionately affecting female employees who often shoulder greater childcare responsibilities. Another NIH study published in 2021 showed that during the COVID-19 pandemic, mothers took time off four to five times more often than fathers, widening the gender gap in work hours by 20–50%. Mothers’ employment was particularly impacted, especially those with young children.
Another downside could be that companies may encounter logistical challenges when transitioning to a 4‑day workweek, such as costs for hiring additional staff, increased wages, and training to meet workload demands. Moreover, businesses that operate seven days a week find it difficult to accommodate extra days off for employees.
In states like California and Nevada, overtime rules create added complications, as employees working beyond eight hours per day are entitled to overtime pay. Employers, particularly in the U.S., must also reconsider policies on sick leave and benefits when shifting to a reduced workweek, because the U.S. still stands out as the only industrialized nation without legally mandated annual leave or a guarantee of paid leave for its workers.
Yes! Most countries globally have laws that set maximum workweek lengths and minimum paid vacation days, with the United States being an exception. European nations require a minimum of 20 paid vacation days per year, with some countries offering up to 25 or more days. Australia and New Zealand mandate at least 20 vacation days annually, while Canada and Japan require a minimum of 10 paid days off.
Beyond these challenges of reducing work hours, some partially reject the notion that a 40-hour or shorter workweek is suitable for everyone and insist that it is not the responsibility of others to define what career happiness should mean for an individual.
The argument is that if you are working 11 hours a day, five days a week, and believe your current schedule genuinely fulfills you, who is anyone else to dispute that? What this perspective emphasizes is that happiness is personal, and individuals have the right to determine how they live their lives and pursue their own sources of joy.
From a productivity perspective, supporting fewer work hours is justified because productivity levels have historically fluctuated and may not have always been as high as they are today. In fact, data shows that productivity has been increasing exponentially for over a century while work hours have decreased.
An average worker today, therefore, must work 11h per week to produce as much as the one working 40h per week in 1950.
What are ideal work hours, then? Recent studies reveal key trends, including algorithmic management and work time fragmentation, that influence our understanding.
Agnieszka Piasna, a senior researcher at the European Trade Union Institute (ETUI), has shown in her 2024 Working Paper that algorithmic management and AI-enabled supervision, initially prominent in the gig economy, are now increasingly extending to traditional employment.
With the growing prevalence of algorithmic management and AI-enabled monitoring, Piasna highlights a shift toward more detailed control over working hours, which risks undermining traditional employment standards and protections. This development leads to increased surveillance, fragmented schedules, and threats to job security and autonomy.
In this context, platform work intensifies these issues by fostering global competition for tasks, which exacerbates disparities between lower-wage and higher-wage workers. Research by Valeria Pulignano et al. (2024) and Mariana Fernández Massi and Julieta Longo (2024) reveals that workers from distant regions frequently vie with local talent, resulting in extended unpaid hours and deepening income inequality.
This global competition not only affects job quality but also compounds the challenges introduced by enhanced surveillance and fragmented schedules, further compromising worker well-being.
Fx Devetter and Julie Valentin (2024) have also documented growing inequalities in working hours. Lower-skilled workers often face extended unpaid workdays, while higher-skilled workers benefit from more stable and well-compensated work. This disparity challenges efforts to reduce working hours while addressing income needs.
The complexity of distinguishing between paid and unpaid time, especially with non-standard contracts such as platform work, blurs the lines between essential job activities and unpaid ‘idle time’. This phenomenon affects earnings and job quality.
Reducing working hours to enhance job quality aligns with Marx’s vision of leveraging technology to alleviate drudgery and increase meaningful work. Achieving democratic control over technology and shorter work hours is crucial for creating a positive work environment.
However, latest researches challenge the idea that reduced work hours negatively impact productivity.
A study showed that shorter workweeks can enhance both productivity and well-being. Trials in Iceland, involving approximately 1% of the workforce, revealed that reducing work hours from 40 to 35 or 36 per week—while maintaining salaries—either preserved or increased productivity and service quality, with improved well-being reported by workers.
Similar experiments by Perpetual Guardian in New Zealand and Microsoft Japan suggest that shorter workweeks can lead to higher productivity and reduced stress. Microsoft Japan leaders attributed the success of their four-day workweek experiment to a few things: Many meetings were eliminated or truncated. And employees, knowing they had to fit five days of work into four, became more economical and efficient with their time.
“By shortening the time when employees are at work,” said Joyce Maroney, executive director at The Workforce Institute, “you’re forcing them to hyper-prioritize and cut out low-value work and activities to be more efficient.
This could involve shortening or even canceling meetings—similar to how Microsoft in Japan reduced standard meeting times from one hour to 30 minutes—or dedicating less time to administrative tasks, checking email, or browsing social media, according to Maroney.
These findings indicate that shorter workweeks could enhance productivity and employee satisfaction, potentially reshaping future work environments.
Remarkably, global comparisons also support the case for shorter workweeks. In Northern Europe, where average work hours are shorter, higher levels of worker satisfaction and better health outcomes are observed. Countries like Denmark and France, which have experimented with shorter workweeks, report higher satisfaction and productivity despite fewer annual work hours compared to the U.S.
Following are the names of countries that are either taking trials or have permanently introduced this new working culture in government or non-governmental organizations. Countries such as India, the USA, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Wales, Canada, New Zealand, and Finland are likely to take trials in the coming months.
In Europe, trade unions have long been advocating for the four-day workweek, citing increased worker satisfaction and productivity. Belgian Prime Minister Alexander de Croo, for instance, hopes that adopting a shorter workweek will enhance flexibility in Belgium’s labor market and improve work-life balance, fostering a more dynamic economy.
“The goal is to give people and companies more freedom to arrange their work time,” he said. “If you compare our country with others, you’ll often see we’re far less dynamic”.
In Sweden, a 2015 trial of a four-day workweek produced mixed results. Despite concerns over costs, positive outcomes were observed in the orthopaedics unit of a university hospital, including increased job satisfaction among staff.
But, Finland did not implement a four-day workweek, despite earlier reports suggesting otherwise. The Finnish government later clarified that these reports were inaccurate.
Portugal, following the success of other trial programs across Europe, has taken the plunge and joined a growing list of countries experimenting with the four-day workweek. As part of a government-funded pilot announced in early June last year, 39 private companies have signed up to participate in the initiative, collaborating with the non-profit advocacy group 4 Day Week Global. These companies are expected to adhere to the “100:80:100 model”—offering 100 percent of the pay for 80 percent of the time, while committing to maintaining at least 100 percent productivity.
According to the World Economic Forum (WEF), Germany already has one of the shortest average working weeks in Europe, with an average of 34.2 hours. Despite this, trade unions in Germany have been advocating for further reductions in working hours, and it appears they may be closer to achieving their goal due to the country’s current labor shortages.
As of February 1, 45 companies in Germany began testing a four-day workweek in a six-month experiment. This initiative, which includes only companies whose operations can be adapted to a shorter workweek, is led by Berlin-based management consultancy Intraprenör in collaboration with the non-profit organization 4 Day Week Global (4DWG).
71% of German workers would like the option to work just four days a week, according to a Forsa survey. Over three-quarters of those surveyed support the government exploring the introduction of a four-day week. Among employers, more than two-thirds also support this exploration.
A substantial majority—75%—believe that a four-day workweek would be desirable for employees, and 59% feel it should be achievable for employers as well. Nearly half of the employers (46%) find trialing a four-day workweek in their own workplaces to be feasible.
In New Zealand, Unilever is conducting a year-long trial of a four-day workweek at full pay. If successful, this model may be extended to other countries. Meanwhile, in the U.S. and Canada, there is significant interest in shorter workweeks.
A Qualtrics survey found that 92% of U.S. workers favor the idea, citing improved mental health and productivity. Similarly, Canadian employers are exploring shorter workweeks, with a majority of full-time workers open to the change.
Similarly, companies in the UK that participated in a six-month trial of the four-day workweek are now considering making the shorter workweek permanent, having hailed the experiment as “extremely successful.”
Launched in June 2022, this experiment was the largest of its kind, involving 61 companies and over 3,300 employees. The program aimed to assess the impact of reduced working hours on productivity, worker well-being, environmental sustainability, and gender equality.
The study, organized by researchers from Cambridge and Oxford Universities, Boston College, 4 Day Week Global, and other advocacy groups, adopted the “100:80:100 model,” which ensures that employees work 80% of their previous hours for 100% of their pay while maintaining 100% productivity. A remarkable 92% of participating companies have decided to retain the four-day workweek, calling it a “major breakthrough.”
Similar programs are set to launch in the US and Ireland, with additional plans in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, according to Joe Ryle, director of the 4 Day Week UK Campaign.
In Scotland, a government study for civil servants began in January 2024, with around 140 public servants at South of Scotland Enterprise testing a 32-hour workweek without a pay cut. This follows a campaign promise by the Scottish National Party (SNP) and aims to explore the feasibility of a broader implementation. The Scottish government cited positive poll results and Iceland’s success with reduced hours as motivating factors.
Wales is also exploring a four-day workweek, with the Petitions Committee recommending a pilot scheme after a 2023 report. Jack Sargeant, a Member of the Senedd, emphasized the historical significance of such changes and the potential for increased productivity.
In Spain, a pilot program began in December 2022, allowing SMEs to reduce their workweek by at least half a day without reducing salaries, supported by a €10 million government fund. The initiative aims to boost productivity while partially financing wage costs and funding training.
Iceland’s extensive pilot from 2015 to 2019 involved reducing work hours from 40 to 35–36 per week without pay cuts, resulting in significant improvements in worker stress, burnout, and work-life balance. Nearly 90% of Iceland’s workforce now benefits from reduced hours.
However, Sweden’s 2015 trial of a four-day workweek with full pay faced mixed reactions, with some positive results in specific sectors, such as the orthopaedics unit of a university hospital, but limited broader adoption.
Finland, despite initial reports suggesting a shift to a four-day workweek, later clarified that these claims were inaccurate. The idea, while discussed, has not been formally pursued by the government.
With Microsoft’s 2019 experiment showing a 40% increase in productivity by offering three-day weekends, large corporations are exploring shorter workweeks in Japan.
These global examples support the notion that shorter workweeks can lead to increased satisfaction and productivity. Meanwhile, this aligns with many of economists’ arguments that optimizing work hours requires balancing individual well-being with economic productivity.
As mentioned earlier, evidence also suggests that beyond a certain threshold, additional work hours do not yield proportional output gains; instead, excessive work hours contribute to burnout, reduced job satisfaction, and lower productivity.
Adopting flexible work arrangements, including shorter workweeks, may thus offer improved outcomes for both employee well-being and economic performance. Shorter workweeks also address broader economic issues, such as talent retention amid demographic challenges like an aging population. They contribute to a more sustainable work environment by reducing overwork and associated health risks.
But what about challenges and cultural Norms?
Despite growing evidence supporting shorter workweeks, implementing these changes requires overcoming cultural norms and extensive practices.
In countries like Japan, where long hours are culturally ingrained, transitioning to shorter workweeks may encounter substantial obstacles. The rise of gig and platform work complicates traditional labor laws, particularly regarding unpaid waiting times.
The future of workplaces and work hours will be shaped by several key trends.
The workforce is increasingly diverse in ethnicity, age, and employment types. The U.S. workforce has become notably more racially and ethnically diverse over the past decade, with a growing presence of older workers.
By 2050, those aged 50 and over are expected to constitute 45% of the workforce. This demographic shift drives multigenerational workplaces and an increased focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DE&I) initiatives, with 93% of companies demonstrating leadership support for DE&I efforts.
The traditional job model is evolving, with a significant rise in freelance and contract work. The global freelance workforce now represents 48% of the total, with 64 million Americans, or 38% of the U.S. workforce, engaged in freelancing. The pandemic has accelerated the shift towards remote and flexible work arrangements, particularly among Gen Z and Millennials.
The tables below list the happiest countries as well as the unhappiest countries in the OECD; happiness scores range from 0 to 10, with a 10 representing the best life possible. Based on the data, there appears to be some degree of correlation between a person’s happiness and the amount of hours they work.
OECD data includes full- and part-time workers. While this affects the entire data set, Japan’s high share of part-time workers (37% as of 2017) suggests it is particularly vulnerable to underestimation.
Office environments are adapting to new work models. While a full return to office work was anticipated post-pandemic, current trends show that 49% of workers are in hybrid arrangements.
Although remote work’s popularity is waning, hybrid models pose challenges in building professional relationships and maintaining company culture.
Office designs are evolving to include sustainability and neurodiverse-friendly features, with coworking spaces projected to grow significantly.
AI is significantly influencing work processes. Forty-one percent of business leaders anticipate redesigning processes with AI in the next five years. AI is enhancing analytics, learning, development, and performance management. Despite concerns about job displacement, AI contributes to increased sales and customer satisfaction across various sectors.
Employee well-being remains a top priority, with 92% of workers valuing organizations that support mental health. However, only 36% are very satisfied with current mental health support, highlighting a gap in adequate services. Improving health insurance, break culture, and mental health days are critical areas for development.
Sustainability is becoming essential for attracting talent and securing contracts. Eighty percent of workers prioritize sustainability in employers, seeking companies committed to ethical practices and environmental responsibility.
Governments are implementing policies to promote fair labor practices, including banning non-compete clauses and increasing pay transparency. In Europe, mandatory time tracking is being introduced to ensure work-life balance.
Another NIH study led by Timo ANTTILA, Mikko HÄRMÄ and Tomi OINAS offers a comprehensive overview of future trends in working hours across four key dimensions: duration, timing, intensity, and autonomy.
Global trends indicate a decrease in working hours in developed countries due to increased productivity, although long hours persist in some regions. South Korea and Japan, for example, have seen significant reductions in annual working hours, despite ongoing long hours in specific sectors.
Regional variations exist, with Europe and North America generally exhibiting shorter working hours compared to Asia and Northern Africa. Long working hours are associated with health issues such as cardiovascular disease and cancer.
Optimizing work hours is therefore not a simple issue; it requires a scrupulous equilibrium between productivity and employee well-being, considering that employees seek varying degrees of happiness, success, or meaning in their lives.
Nevertheless, when we set aside these individual differences, shorter workweeks and flexible schedules can improve both job satisfaction and economic performance, provided they are effectively implemented.