Iceland Ran a 4-Year Experiment on Shorter Working Weeks. The Results Are Great

[Warpy]

For four years between 2015 and 2019, roughly 2,500 Icelanders were involved in two major experiments to see how a shorter working week would affect productivity. Now the results are in – and the experiments seem to have been a resounding success.

Some key points: reducing a 40-hour working week to 35 or 36 hours didn't lead to any drop in productivity or the provision of services, while worker wellbeing improved substantially across a range of metrics, including perceived stress and burnout.

https://www.sciencealert.com/iceland-s-experiment-with-a-shorter-working-week-actually-went-really-well

Long-ish article but well worth the read, detailing improvements in creativity and worker cooperation, as well as well being metrics.

Anybody who thinks he's getting the best out of his employees by having them work long hours is fooling himself.

[Moostache]

1. Unsurprising...

I probably "work" about 20-25 hours a week...actual, nose-to-the-grindstone "work" - split fairly evenly between projects I handle personally and interacting with my direct reports who are running other tasks.

I spend an additional 20 hours a week in useless meetings, updates to managers, conference calls and trainings.

I also have to spend the requisite 5 hours or so a week in face-time - being seen in my office after everyone else has left for the day to give the added impression that more blood is being squeezed from this turnip. Failure to do this, despite it being well-known as "fuck-off time" is detrimental to one's performance evaluation and impressions to upper managers.

A straight assignment based and team approach - where individuals are able to work on projects across lines and artificial barriers - is far more conducive to increasing productivity. That, and increased compensation for added performance that really gets to the actual creators and achievers - and not his boss's boss's boss on the quarterly bonuses are the best ways to get the most from people who are engaged in jobs that they are suited to. BUT - put the right person in the wrong job and you'll get only the exact amount you pay them not to quit on everything.

Anything that benefits those at the bottom - without adequate kick backs to the chain of command - is heresy in corporate think, no matter how true it may actually be.

[WHITT]

2. France Did This

a while back with similar results.

[orwell]

3. In my experience...

...providing IT support for many local small businesses who don't have an IT person on staff, many people spend an inordinate amount of time f*cking off. They pick up their activity when the boss is around, but out comes the phone when he/she is gone.

Then there are the "work all the time, even into break time" go getters who generally make the business run. I think these kinds of people would work as hard no matter the compensation level. They just have a work ethic. If they are on the job, they are working.

I am always amazed how this pattern repeats itself.

One local business had over 20 employees. I would guess that they could have gotten by with half that. But there were 5 or 6 people that worked like demons. And it doesn't matter where in the organization they are. I have seen lazy bosses and workaholic bosses. I have seen lazy entry level staff and workaholic low level staff.

I think most people would be far more productive with task related assignments and flexible hours. Unfortunately, some jobs just require a body during certain hours of the day.

4 day weeks are long overdue. They key would be to pay the same amount for 4 days instead of 5. I would wager that for the most part productivity would either stay the same or increase.

[Warpy]

4. The data are in, people are most productive during 4 hours of deep work

and nobody's as productive for additional hours, whether or not they are workaholic. Anyone who thinks they are needs to take a closer look at what they are actually doing.

IT is going to throw a hell of a lot of people out of work completely. This country is going to have to adapt to that, the service economy is just as vulnerable as the office economy and will do a poor job of absorbing them.

https://www.inc.com/melanie-curtin/in-an-8-hour-day-the-average-worker-is-productive-for-this-many-hours.html

[orwell]

5. I agree...

...the explosion in productivity that information technology brought about has transferred massive profits to a very few instead of higher standards of living and shorter work weeks to the many.

There is no reason that we need people working 19th century factory shifts in a modern economy...

But at least Richard Branson can launch himself into suborbit...