ARE WE READY FOR 4-DAY WORK WEEKS?

“Reducing the workweek is like trimming the branches of a sick tree; without addressing the deep roots, the tree will never truly blossom.” – (Marcello de Souza, PhD)

The quest for a shorter workweek and longer weekends has become a significant topic of debate in recent decades. The implementation of a four-day workweek is gradually being adopted by 21 Brazilian companies as an innovative experiment. While this proposal may initially seem like an attractive solution to improve employees’ quality of life, it is crucial to delve deeper into the discussion and consider whether this change alone can address the more profound challenges related to organizational culture and climate.
The history of the workweek and weekends leads us to reflect on the evolution of labor practices over time. The concept of a day of rest dates back to ancient civilizations, with the Jews establishing Shabbat—a day of rest every six days of work—as a precursor to modern labor regulations. However, achieving the two-day weekend was not a simple feat.
On May 1, 1926, as the world celebrated International Workers’ Day, established by the Second International Socialist in Paris in 1889 in honor of the Chicago workers who were massacred by American police in May 1886 during protests for better working conditions, one of the debated issues was reducing the workweek from six to five days and from thirteen to eight-hour days.
From that point on, the Ford Motor Company became the first U.S. company to adopt a 40-hour workweek with five days. It is a myth to believe that this change was solely motivated by a desire to protect employees. In reality, Henry Ford realized that for workers to consume the goods they produced, they needed free time. The adoption of the two-day weekend in 1926 not only promoted consumption but also contributed to a more prosperous lifestyle and a more sustainable economic cycle.
On the other hand, economist John Maynard Keynes predicted in the 1930s that technology would enable two-day workweeks in developed countries while maintaining productivity and employee compensation. Although technology has increased efficiency, Keynes’ forecast of a 15-hour workweek did not materialize. One reason is the fear that automation would cause mass unemployment, a concern that did not come to pass. In fact, highly automated countries like Japan and the United States continued to create jobs to replace those that were automated.

REPEATING PATTERNS

The discussion about work efficiency goes far beyond the number of hours spent in the office. It leads us to a deep analysis of the quality of jobs created and how tasks are executed. In the 1980s, various studies showed that a significant portion of work time was dedicated to unproductive activities. These studies raised serious concerns, and experts of the time, known as self-help and reengineering gurus, suggested that there was untapped time that could potentially be used to shorten the workweek.
The phenomenon identified as “bullshit jobs” describes occupations where the occupants themselves often struggle to justify their purpose, as they spend most of their time performing tasks with little real impact on businesses or society. But what is really behind this?
A notable study conducted by consulting firm McKinsey in 2018 revealed that about 30% of work hours are spent on activities that add no value, such as unproductive meetings and excessive email management. This not only wastes precious resources but also affects employee motivation. When employees perceive that a significant portion of their time is dedicated to tasks that do not substantially contribute to the company’s goals or society, their job satisfaction and sense of purpose are deeply undermined.
Moreover, the concept of “bullshit jobs” is not a recent phenomenon. As mentioned earlier, it emerged in the early 20th century when economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that with technological advancement, workweeks would be reduced to 15 hours, but the reality was different. Instead, many workers found themselves stuck in tasks that, despite being performed diligently, did not result in significant progress for their organizations.
The fundamental question that arises is: why have so many jobs that could be shorter and more efficient not been optimized? The cost of inefficiency in the workplace goes beyond the waste of resources; it undermines employee motivation and engagement. A 2022 Gallup survey revealed that only 15% of employees feel truly engaged in their work, an alarming number that reflects the impact of an ineffective and demotivating work environment.
In this sense, the responsibility for these “bullshit jobs” does not solely fall on the employees but also on leaders and managers who should continually reassess and reformulate work structures. It is imperative to promote significant changes that not only increase efficiency but also restore a sense of purpose and job satisfaction. To achieve this, a critical examination of organizational culture and a commitment to creating work environments that value creativity, innovation, and genuine employee contributions are necessary.

BULLSHIT JOBS

Blaming others is always the easiest path, especially when the work environment is already contaminated. In this sense, analyzing “bullshit jobs”—those positions or tasks lacking purpose and productivity—leads us to deeply question organizational structure and leadership paradigms in many companies. Ideally, effective management should leave no room for these roles. However, reality often shows otherwise. These “bullshit jobs” do not arise out of nowhere; they are often the result of a vision tainted by a narrow and limited approach to management and leadership.
Leaders and managers play a critical role in setting goals, strategies, and work practices. When the focus is solely on production and numbers, without considering the intrinsic value and significance of tasks, it opens up space for the creation of jobs with little real impact. Moreover, the constant pressure for short-term results often forces managers to focus only on meeting immediate goals, at the expense of critical analysis and optimization of activities. This “do whatever it takes to hit the targets” mentality can inadvertently contribute to the proliferation of “bullshit jobs.”
Before pointing fingers, senior management should effectively eliminate these unproductive roles through change management, adopting a more open and holistic approach to management and leadership. This includes fostering a culture that values creativity, innovation, and efficiency. Managers should be encouraged to look beyond the numbers and consider the intrinsic value of the activities performed by their teams. Additionally, creating work environments that foster collaboration, open communication, and employee participation in goal-setting and work practices is crucial. When employees feel like an integral part of the decision-making process and have a voice in defining their tasks, motivation and efficiency increase, reducing the likelihood of “bullshit jobs.”
Pointing fingers is easier, but the responsibility for eliminating these unproductive roles largely rests on the shoulders of those who lead and manage organizations. Shifting mindsets, promoting more inclusive management practices, and constantly reassessing organizational structure are essential steps towards a more motivating and productive work environment, where “bullshit jobs” become a relic of the past.

REDUCING THE WORK WEEK

REDUCING THE WORKWEEK
“Motivation is a personal and multifaceted territory, a deep pursuit that goes beyond the number of hours worked. Are we ready for this journey?” (Marcello de Souza, PhD)

Let’s return to the main discussion. Reducing the workweek may seem like an appealing solution, but it’s crucial to recognize that simply decreasing the number of hours might be just a temporary fix if we don’t address the quality and efficiency of the activities performed during that time. In addition to considering the length of the workweek, it’s essential to rethink and optimize the tasks performed at the workplace, eliminating unproductive activities and focusing on what truly matters. Only then can we create a more motivating and productive work environment.
I believe that the discussion about work efficiency leads us to a fundamental question: the need for a complete overhaul of organizational culture and climate. While implementing a four-day workweek has shown impressive results in some companies, it’s important to critically analyze these results and consider the diversity of contexts.
Case Studies and Relevant Data:

1. 4 Day Week Global Study
The British NGO 4 Day Week Global promotes experiments with reduced workweeks. Results from a global study conducted in 2021 showed:
Productivity: Companies that adopted the four-day workweek observed an average productivity increase of 25%.
Well-Being: Employees reported a significant improvement in their mental and emotional well-being.
Turnover: There was a reduction in turnover and greater job satisfaction.

2. Experiment at Technology Startup: Buffer
Context: The technology startup Buffer, known for its social media management platform, implemented a four-day workweek.
Results:
Productivity: Buffer observed an increase in productivity and improved team collaboration.
Satisfaction: Employees reported higher levels of satisfaction and well-being, with a positive impact on company culture.
Challenges: Adjusting the workload to ensure quality was a challenge.
Reference: Buffer’s official blog on their four-day workweek experiment.

3. Experiment in the Service Industry: Perpetual Guardian, New Zealand
Context: The financial services company Perpetual Guardian conducted a four-day workweek experiment.
Results:
Productivity: Productivity increased by 20%.
Satisfaction: There was a significant increase in employee satisfaction and work-life balance.
Costs: Reduction in absenteeism and related operational costs.
Reference: Perpetual Guardian’s case study on their four-day workweek trial.

4. Experiment in the Retail Industry: SME (Society of Manufacturing Engineers)
Context: Some small businesses and manufacturing industries in the US, including SME, tested reduced workweeks.
Results:
Productivity: Modest increase in productivity, with improvements in operational efficiency.
Challenges: Adjusting production processes and ensuring production goals were met was a major challenge.
Satisfaction: Improvement in employee satisfaction and reduced absenteeism.
Reference: Reports and case studies published by SME on workweek reduction.

5. Experiment in Public Organizations: Gothenburg Municipality, Sweden
Context: Implementation of a four-day workweek for workers in some departments.
Results:
Productivity: Productivity did not change significantly, but there were improvements in employee satisfaction and general health.
Costs: Initial implementation costs were high, but the benefits in terms of well-being offset the costs.
Challenges: Resource management and maintaining service quality were significant challenges.
Reference: Göteborg city’s four-day workweek experiment report.

6. Experiment in the Technology Industry: Microsoft Japan
Context: Implementation of a four-day workweek in August 2019.
Results:
Productivity: 40% increase in productivity.
Costs: 23% reduction in energy costs.
Satisfaction: Improvement in employee satisfaction and positive perception of the reduced workload.
Reference: Microsoft Japan’s report on their four-day workweek experiment.

7. Experiment in Healthcare Organizations: Cleveland Clinic
Context: Tested a reduced workweek for some healthcare professionals.
Results:
Productivity: Patient care quality was not compromised, and efficiency increased.
Satisfaction: Improved staff morale and reduced burnout.
Challenges: Required detailed planning and adjustments in scheduling to ensure adequate coverage.
Reference: Case study from Cleveland Clinic on workweek reduction in healthcare.

These examples provide a more diverse view of the effects of reducing the workweek across different sectors and types of organizations. They help illustrate how the change can impact variables such as productivity, employee satisfaction, and operational costs, and can be incorporated into your article to provide a more comprehensive analysis.
But how long will this extend? If we exhaust all our cognitive, emotional, and physical resources in four days, will three days of rest truly help recover mental and physical health?
It is crucial to recognize that reducing the workweek is just one aspect of a broader change that needs to occur within organizations. Without a deep reassessment of human relationships, organizational culture, management practices, and how tasks are distributed and evaluated, reducing the workweek may not reach its full potential. If a company’s culture remains toxic, employees may simply face even greater pressure to complete their tasks in less time.
Moreover, the quality of relationships between superiors and subordinates, effective communication, and fostering a collaborative work environment are essential elements to consider. Reducing the workweek without addressing power dynamics, authoritarian impositions, and technocracy may result in an even more stressful and less healthy work environment.
The truth is, every time I read about these palliative proposals in response to superficial discussions about reducing the workweek, I miss serious and well-founded studies that can demonstrate, in practice, what motivates an employee to give their best. This reminds me of a recent experience with a client who has been striving to implement a High-Performance Culture and even appointed a CHO (Chief Happiness Officer), while at the same time, cases of burnout and turnover continue to grow.
In this context, it is relevant to recall Peter Drucker’s words. When asked about how to motivate people, his intriguing response leads us to reflect. He admits that after studying motivation throughout his life, he does not have a definitive answer on how to motivate someone but has clarity on what demotivates.
So, what happens within organizations that demotivates people? Drucker’s perspective on motivation offers profound insights with direct implications for the discussion on reducing the workweek and its impact on organizational culture. Drucker, one of the most influential management thinkers, challenges us to think not only about how to motivate people but also about what we do that demotivates them. Even for Drucker, after a lifetime of studying motivation, he did not have a definitive answer on how to motivate someone. This, in itself, is a powerful reflection on the complexity of human nature and the diversity of factors influencing each individual’s motivation. Motivation is a personal and multifaceted territory, varying from person to person and from organizational culture to organizational culture. It is deeply connected to each individual’s identity.

THE WORK WEEK GAME
In this context, Drucker had clarity about what demotivates people. This clarity leads us to a critical aspect of the discussion on reducing the work week and organizational culture. What demotivates people is often related to work practices that undermine quality of life and work-life balance—in other words, we are talking about organizational climate.
The contemporary work culture is permeated by elements that systematically undermine employee motivation. Lack of flexibility, constant pressure to meet deadlines, absence of autonomy, and obsessive focus on production goals represent a trap for employee motivation. These insidious practices erode employees’ vitality and generate a climate of discontent.
Lack of flexibility in working hours is like a straitjacket that stifles creativity and personal fulfillment. It denies employees the ability to harmonize their professional and personal lives, restricting their time to care for family, pursue personal interests, or even relax. The result is a workforce drained, struggling to balance the relentless demands of work with the fundamental need for personal time.
Constant pressure to meet tight deadlines is a burden that weighs heavily on employees. Under this relentless pressure, the quality of work is often sacrificed in the name of meeting unattainable goals. The stress that accompanies this frantic pursuit of efficiency stifles creativity and intrinsic motivation. The idea of “doing your best” is replaced by the relentless mantra of “doing more, faster,” resulting in exhausted and disillusioned employees.
Absence of autonomy is another wound that undermines employee motivation. When there is no active voice in their tasks and work processes, the sense of responsibility and satisfaction disappears. The feeling of being merely a pawn on a corporate chessboard is disheartening, and lack of autonomy strips employees of their power to shape their own destiny. The obsession with goals often results in burnout and loss of meaning in work, undermining motivation and satisfaction.
An excessively long work week, without adequate time for rest, is like a silent poison that destroys enthusiasm and energy. Burnout is an inevitable consequence of an unrelenting work schedule that denies the right to enjoy free time to recharge and nourish creativity.
However, it is crucial to note that implementing a four-day work week, while innovative, is not a magical solution to all organizational problems. Reducing one workday a week does not address the deep-rooted issues related to organizational climate and culture that sustain demotivation. True change requires a systemic approach that reevaluates and reforms existing practices and structures.
Here is the fundamental question: by reducing working hours, do we risk merely shifting stress and concerns outside the corporate environment into employees’ personal lives? One less workday might paradoxically mean an increase in the mental and emotional load employees take home. Instead of finding relief, they may carry the same pressures and anxieties, merely condensed into a different timeframe. The true success of a reduced work week is not just in the decrease in hours but in how these hours are truly lived and balanced.

In Conclusion
The discussion about reducing the workweek is complex and multifaceted. While reducing hours might seem like an attractive solution, it is crucial to understand that it alone does not solve all the challenges organizations face. For this change to be truly effective, it is necessary to adopt an integrated approach that considers:

• Organizational Culture: The change must be accompanied by a thorough examination of the company culture. Without transforming a toxic environment into a more collaborative and respectful space, reducing working hours may only shift pressure and stress without eliminating them.
• Quality of Relationships and Communication: The quality of interactions between superiors and subordinates and effective communication are crucial. Reducing working hours without addressing power dynamics and internal communication can result in an even more stressful environment.
• Efficiency and Planning: Task efficiency and strategic planning are essential. It is necessary to ensure that reduced time is used productively, eliminating unnecessary activities and optimizing processes.
•
We are facing a unique opportunity to redefine the future of work. It is not just about reducing hours; it is about creating an environment where our employees can thrive, innovate, and feel truly fulfilled. I invite you to join this transformation journey, challenge the status quo, and work towards a more human and sustainable work environment.
True transformation in the workplace begins with an internal change – in how we value time, the quality of interactions, and respect for our employees’ well-being. As philosopher and educator Paulo Freire said, “Education does not transform the world. Education transforms people. People transform the world.” Let’s start this transformation today and build a future where work is a positive force in our lives.

“It’s not enough to adjust the clocks; it’s essential to transform culture, leadership, and our view of work. The reduction of the workweek is just the beginning of a deep and necessary change. True progress starts with internal renewal.” – (Marcello de Souza, PhD)

Did you like this article?

THANK YOU FOR READING AND SEEING MARCELLO DE SOUZA IN ANOTHER EXCLUSIVE PUBLICATION ABOUT HUMAN BEHAVIOR

Hello, I’m Marcello de Souza! I started my career in 1997 as a leader and manager in a large company in the IT and Telecommunications market. Since then, I have participated in important projects of structuring, implementation, and optimization of telecommunications networks in Brazil. Restless and passionate about behavioral and social psychology. In 2008, I decided to delve into the universe of the human mind.

Since then, I have become a professional passionate about deciphering the secrets of human behavior and catalyzing positive changes in individuals and organizations. Doctor in Social Psychology, with over 25 years of experience in Cognitive Behavioral and Human Organizational Development. With a wide-ranging career, I highlight my role as:

– Master Senior Coach and Trainer: Guiding my clients in the pursuit of goals and personal and professional development, achieving extraordinary results.

– Chief Happiness Officer (CHO): Fostering an organizational culture of happiness and well-being, boosting productivity and employee engagement.

– Expert in Language and Behavioral Development: Enhancing communication and self-awareness skills, empowering individuals to face challenges with resilience.

– Cognitive Behavioral Therapist: Using cutting-edge cognitive-behavioral therapy to help overcome obstacles and achieve a balanced mind.

– Speaker, Professor, Writer, and Researcher: Sharing valuable knowledge and ideas in events, training, and publications to inspire positive changes.

– Consultant and Mentor: Leveraging my experience in leadership and project management to identify growth opportunities and propose personalized strategies.

My solid academic background includes four postgraduates and a doctorate in Social Psychology, along with international certifications in Management, Leadership, and Cognitive Behavioral Development. My contributions in the field are widely recognized in hundreds of classes, training sessions, conferences, and published articles.

Co-author of the book “The Secret of Coaching” and author of “The Map Is Not the Territory, the Territory Is You” and “The Diet Society” (the first of a trilogy on human behavior in contemporaneity – 05/2024).

Allow me to be your companion on this journey of self-discovery and success. Together, we will unravel a universe of behavioral possibilities and achieve extraordinary results.

By the way, I invite you to join my network. As a lover of behavioral psychology, social psychology, and neuroscience, I have created my YouTube channel to share my passion for cognitive behavioral development with more people.

Please note that all data and content in this article or video are exclusive, written, and reviewed by Marcello de Souza based on proven philosophical concepts and scientific studies to ensure that the best possible content reaches you.

Don’t forget to follow Marcello de Souza on other social media platforms and join the VIP list to receive exclusive articles weekly by email.

✍️ Leave your comment

📢 Share with friends

🧠 The official channel Marcello de Souza_ was created to simplify the understanding of human behavior and complement the information on the blog: www.marcellodesouza.com.br

🧠 Subscribe to the channel: www.youtube.com/@marcellodesouza_oficial

🧠 Marcello de Souza’s latest book: /www.marcellodesouza.com.br/o-mapa-nao-e-o-territorio-o-territorio-e-voce/

🧠 Commercial Contact: comercial@coachingevoce.com.br

🧠 Write to Marcello de Souza: R. Antônio Lapa, 280 – Sexto Andar – Cambuí, Campinas – SP, 13025-240

Social Media

🧠 Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/company/marcellodesouzaoficial

🧠 Instagram: @marcellodesouza_oficial

🧠 Instagram: @coachingevoce

🧠 Facebook: www.facebook.com/encontraroseumelhor/

🧠 Facebook: /www.facebook.com/coachingevoce.com.br/

🧠 Official website: www.coachingevoce.com.br/ www.marcellodesouza.com

🧠 VIP list to receive exclusive articles weekly of my own authorship: contato@marcellodesouza.com.br

🧠 Portfolio: https://linktr.ee/marcellodesouza

🧠 Presentation and adaptation: Marcello de Souza

#emotions #selfcontrol #selfawareness #emotionalrelationship #selfhelp #motivation #overcoming #personaldevelopment #selfdevelopment #mindset #positivethinking #positiveattitude #success #positivity #leadership #coachingleader #executivecoaching #teammanagement #consciousleadership #resilience #mentalstrength #resilient #overcomingobstacles #winningmentality #balance #professional life #personal life #careercoaching #qualityoflife #PersonalDevelopment #Selfknowledge #EmotionalIntelligence #PersonalGrowth #Mindfulness #WellBeing #BalancedLife #PositivePsychology #Resilience #HumanBehavior #Motivation #SelfEsteem #SocialSkills #Empathy #MentalBalance #MentalHealth #PersonalTransformation #HealthyHabits #SelfImprovement #InnerHappiness