Slashdot Mirror


New Zealand Firm's Four-Day Week an 'Unmitigated Success' (theguardian.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: The New Zealand company behind a landmark trial of a four-day working week has concluded it an unmitigated success, with 78% of employees feeling they were able to successfully manage their work-life balance, an increase of 24 percentage points. Two-hundred-and-forty staff at Perpetual Guardian, a company which manages trusts, wills and estate planning, trialled a four-day working week over March and April, working four, eight-hour days but getting paid for five. Jarrod Haar, professor of human resource management at Auckland University of Technology, found job and life satisfaction increased on all levels across the home and work front, with employees performing better in their jobs and enjoying them more than before the experiment. Work-life balance, which reflected how well respondents felt they could successfully manage their work and non-work roles, increased by 24%. In November last year just over half (54%) of staff felt they could effectively balance their work and home commitments, while after the trial this number jumped to 78%. Staff stress levels decreased by 7 percentage points across the board as a result of the trial, while stimulation, commitment and a sense of empowerment at work all improved significantly, with overall life satisfaction increasing by 5 percentage points.

10 of 281 comments (clear)

  1. Already known by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just ask my brother-in-law: he works no days a week and reports it an unmitigated success. Zero stress as well!

  2. Missed Most Important Metrics by ranton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hope this firm's 4-day work week is an unmitigated success, but this story misses the most important metrics for measuring the success: increased worker productivity, increased retention, various recruitment KPIs, etc. These are the metrics which can show that this plan will work for a larger number of companies. If the only thing that happens is happier employees, it is a failed experiment. Just give every employee a million dollars if you only care about happy employees. If you want to find a way to improve employee well-being while running a sustainable successful business, then you need to real metrics for success.

    --
    -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    1. Re:Missed Most Important Metrics by Kokuyo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I am as cynical as they come but how is this a failed experiment if you lose nothing but have happier employees?

      Sure there'll be asshats who don't get science who think it is not in their favor unless the bottom line shows it but to anyone with more than two braincells to rub together it's pretty clear that if you don't lose anything by enhancing the lives of people around you, then it's a win. Even if only for the fact that you sleep better at night.

      This has to be proven scientifically of course, but I have a hard time imagining how happier and thus more motivated workers could not improve your bottom line...

      Also think about this: The work that took five days previously now gets done in four. That automatically leaves you one day more to be productive. You just need a few more bodies. In a sense this is similar to working shifts.

  3. Re:Face Palm by kilfarsnar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, next we should try a three-day week. Then imagine how much better a two-day week will be! When we get to zero, the work-life balance will be perfect!

    At that point you wouldn't be working. Work-Life balance not found. But sure, I'd love a three or two day work week, if I could still maintain my comfortable lifestyle. Why wouldn't we want that?

    I must say, it's impressive how conditioned we are to work. Our society's needs are over-filled. We produce too much, and throw away a lot of it. Automation is getting to the point where we could all work less, have more leisure time, and still have all the products we need. Yet when we hear stories like this one, in which people are working less and reporting measurable benefits, the reaction of many is to scoff at it. Why? Do we feel so trapped in our 40+ hour week lives that we resent the people making an improvement? Do we think the only thing of value in our lives is the work we do?

    Personally, I work to live. If I could live a fairly comfortable life, like I do now, without working, I would quit my job tomorrow. The only reason I put up with the bullshit I do, day after day, is that it gets me a nice house and a nice car, the ability to travel and eat at restaurants, and all the other nice things money can buy (including a lack of financial anxiety). If I could have all that, with less of the daily bullshit, it would be great. I'd probably even give up a bit in order to work less. It's not laziness. It's the recognition that I want more out of life than being someone's employee.

    I understand that our Capitalist and monetary systems require us all to stay on the hamster wheel. That's a whole other discussion. I'm just remarking on the negative reactions of many to the idea that working less would be nice.

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  4. Re:You're assuming some very important questions by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It claims to have "employees performing better in their jobs and enjoying them more than before the experiment." That at least suggests a per-hour productivity increase.

    I'd like to know some real metrics, too. I want four 7-hour days, and have observed that office work is not time-productive: a lot happens in downtime, where employees wait for other work to be done, or think on things and rest their minds to improve problem-solving. This is the phenomena that you cannot do 10 hours of work by compacting it into 5 hours even though you only spent 4 of those 10 hours actually working.

    Multi-tasking represents one approach: do something else while you can't simply move to the next step. Multi-tasking sacrifices some productivity when the delay is internal: if you're dealing with programmers, engineers, marketing, and other creative problem solvers, loading them with a different task disrupts their capacity to solve all tasks.

    Leisure is an alternate approach: get up and leave. Come back to this later.

  5. Re:Face Palm by Dragonslicer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But then you'd have less value to society. As long as we're capitalistic-focused, your value in society is in what you produce and what you consume. Do less of either, and you're a less valuable person to society.

    A major point of this company's change to a 32-hour work week is that overall performance improved. So by working 4 days per week instead of 5, these people are producing more. Pure capitalist ideology should dictate that many more companies make the same change.

  6. Re:Face Palm by jiriw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Capitalism has nothing to do with societal values of persons.

    But then again, our economies (I'm Dutch, I suppose you're from the U.S.) are not capitalist - too much regulation for that, for better or worse, and too many (near) monopolies. And in both our societies, the people that work the most are definitely not the ones considered most valuable. Quite the opposite. It seems those that are valued the most produce the least or are sometimes even counter-productive. They often have the most wealth 'though...

  7. Re:Face Palm by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's also variations within each job. I'm a web developer. There are weeks when I could work three days of 8 hours each and finish all of my projects. Then there are weeks when I could work five 10 hour days and STILL not keep up.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  8. Re:Face Palm by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You have discovered the reason yourself: Conditioning

    The population is conditioned to believe that they need to work to death and to hate and attack anyone who offer an alternative solution. And the conditioning is so strong that I just need to write a small number of "trigger words" here to immediately attract enraged comments and hate for no apparent reason.

    --
    Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
  9. Re:Face Palm by kilfarsnar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You have discovered the reason yourself: Conditioning The population is conditioned to believe that they need to work to death and to hate and attack anyone who offer an alternative solution. And the conditioning is so strong that I just need to write a small number of "trigger words" here to immediately attract enraged comments and hate for no apparent reason.

    Oh, yes, I'm well aware. The pro-capitalist propaganda has been quite effective, the the US at least. Work, work, work, you're lucky to even have a job, so shut up! People think wage-slavery is the only way it can be.

    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)