WORK IS SICKENING TIME — OR IS TIME SICKENING WORK?

Have you ever stopped to think that the way we work might be sabotaging our own biology?

We are so used to shaping our days around the market clock that we forget the most important clock of all: our internal clock.

In an attempt to standardize productivity, we have created a logic that treats time as a straight line — predictable, controllable, mechanized. But the human body, this complex and extraordinarily intelligent organism, operates in cycles. It pulses, oscillates, adapts — but does not negotiate with the tyranny of chronological time.

Today, millions of people wake up out of sync with their own biological rhythm. They produce less. They sleep worse. They get sick more. It’s not just the body that pays the price — it’s creativity, presence, cognitive clarity. It’s the work itself that becomes sick.

We are facing a silent collapse: the time of work is killing the time of life.

But… what if the question is different? What if it’s not work that is sickening time — but the way we treat time that is sickening work?

In this article, I invite you on a journey where neuroscience, behavioral psychology, and high-impact management intersect to propose a new perspective: Chronoworking. An approach that goes beyond flexible hours — and could redefine what it means to be productive, healthy, and human in the 21st century.

To start, I want you to imagine the scene: 9 AM. Alignment meeting. Julia, an agile manager and senior strategist in her field, enters the call with red eyes, a sluggish voice, and a blocked thought process. She went to bed at 2 AM, as she often does. Her peak creativity begins at 9 PM — but her performance is evaluated by what she delivers before 10 AM. The manager notes the drop in performance. The diagnosis? “Lack of commitment.” What he doesn’t see is that Julia is fighting against her own biological clock — every single day.

This type of subtle yet cruel judgment lies at the heart of a systemic issue: we confuse punctuality with productivity, discipline with blind obedience, and presence with performance.

But cognitive, behavioral, and neurobiological sciences have been exposing what traditional management still hesitates to accept: the industrial model of time organization — that of factory sirens and fixed hours — is not only obsolete. It is neuroincompatible with human functioning.

It’s a fact that since the First Industrial Revolution, little — or almost nothing — has questioned the standardized logic of work hours. The clock began to dominate human time as if we all had the same rhythm, focus, and disposition. For a long time, there were no scientific instruments capable of explaining human behavior throughout the day. But this changed radically with the advances in Behavioral Psychology, Neurosciences, and Environmental Social Psychology. These disciplines revealed that productivity, attention, and well-being are neither linear nor homogeneous — they are deeply affected by contextual, environmental, and biological factors.

In other words, for decades, willpower was romanticized as the ability to follow schedules without fail. But this daily “heroism” is often the silent denial of fundamental biological principles.

With the advancement of behavioral studies, it is now confirmed through research in neurochronobiology that the circadian rhythm and chronotypes — natural sleep and wake preferences — are not “laziness” or “poor organization.” They are genetic dispositions. According to Professor Till Roenneberg of Ludwig-Maximilians Universität München, forcing night owls to operate on morning cycles is comparable to imposing a chronic form of social jet lag. The body is present — the brain, delayed.

The impact is visible, though rarely discussed: exhausted professionals, cognitively overloaded leadership, and corporate cultures that still confuse sacrifice with competence — when, in fact, they are cultivating burnout disguised as merit.

We are at a silent crossroads: either we reinvent how we work with time — or we will be buried by an unproductive, tired, and unsustainable presenteeism.

What follows is more than just a critique of the status quo: it is a practical roadmap, grounded in science and tested in real companies, to help leaders, managers, and professionals enter the age of Chronoworking — the revolution that will bury the old paradigm of hour control and give rise to a new performance model based on energy, autonomy, and biological intelligence.

Get ready to question everything you’ve heard about discipline, productivity, and time.

Time as a Cognitive Resource — Not Just a Logistical One

Our brain does not function like a production machine, but rather as a biological organism immersed in cycles that need to be respected for its performance to be optimized. Each of us operates within ultradian cycles — periods of 90 to 120 minutes, as revealed in Nathaniel Kleitman’s studies and extensively expanded by Ernest Rossi in The 20-Minute Break (1991). These cycles have peaks and valleys that directly impact our attention, memory, and processing capacity.

Forcing productivity in a linear work model, ignoring these natural rhythms, is like forcing a marathon runner to run successive sprints, without time for hydration, recovery, or even clarity of the course. The inevitable result? Extreme fatigue and performance decline.

• According to the Stanford Neuroperformance Lab, disregarding ultradian rhythms can reduce our capacity for information retention and strategic decision-making by up to 40%. In other words, the famous “racing against time” is not only ineffective — it’s counterproductive.

• A study by the University of Illinois (Science, 2011) found that regular cognitive breaks, with intervals of at least 20 minutes, can improve performance in tasks requiring logical reasoning and working memory by 16%.
When we look at work without respecting these biological laws, we see what we call “mediocre hours generating mediocre results.” A room full of ideas but empty of innovation.

The expectation that innovation and creativity can emerge after a marathon of operational meetings is not just a fallacy — it’s a structured inefficiency. Neuroscientist David Rock, author of Your Brain at Work, observes that the prefrontal cortex — the region responsible for complex decision-making and problem-solving — experiences a significant decline after long periods of operational decisions, in a phenomenon he calls “decision fatigue.” In this state, not only is cognitive performance compromised, but creativity and strategic vision go into conservation mode, instead of creation.

The DCC Revolution in Practice

I confess that for over 27 years, I have worked with Cognitive Behavioral Development (DCC), diving into the relationships between mind, behavior, and human performance. Only recently, I turned my attention to a fascinating and still underexplored development: Chronoworking — intelligent time management based on biological rhythms and high-performance cycles.

This interest arose from a personal experience. A colleague, also a DCC specialist, invited me to a discussion group on the topic. From our intense and provocative exchanges, the opportunity arose to follow a case study he conducted at a Spanish tech startup, which I will call “XXXX.”

The problem was clear: a sharp decline in productivity. The company, highly delivery- and deadline-oriented, kept its employees trapped in a rigid logic of time and execution — as happens in most organizations — with no regard for each employee’s natural chronotypes. The result? The same thing that repeats in many other contexts: evening and night employees operating in constant cognitive fatigue, increased turnover, a drop in creativity, and an organizational culture suffocated by presenteeism and outdated metrics.

Over time, it became clear that the mismatch between biological rhythms and the workday was seriously compromising the results. Exhaustion became constant, turnover skyrocketed, and creativity — essential for the tech sector — collapsed. It was evident that the organizational culture was excessively focused on physical presence and the number of hours worked, which ultimately stagnated the team’s performance.

After a thorough analysis and in-depth studies on the neuroscience of work, my colleague and his team proposed a radically new approach, placing results at the center of attention, instead of fixed work hours. The proposal was clear: adopt a delivery-based work model — where the working hours would be guided by each employee’s energy and focus peaks, respecting their natural biological rhythms, rather than following the traditional “9 AM to 6 PM” convention.

The changes were structural and deeply strategic. Morning teams began working from 7 AM to 3 PM, while afternoon teams started their shifts at noon. Meetings were also reorganized based on each group’s energy peaks: afternoon teams only participated at 11 AM; morning teams, at 4 PM. For interchronotypic meetings, the meeting window was set between 2 PM and 4 PM — a period that accommodated both groups. One key rule: no meeting could exceed one hour.

Moreover, they implemented brief meetings at the start of each shift, lasting only 20 minutes. These meetings were essential to align expectations, define priorities, and, most importantly, strengthen collaboration among team members. It was a concrete way to foster a cooperative environment and collective intelligence.

Another innovative point was the implementation of cognitive breaks. Every 100 minutes of intense focus, employees took a 20-minute break, in alignment with the brain’s ultradian cycles of attention and recovery. This simple, neuroscience-backed measure was crucial to maintain focus, energy, and productivity throughout the day.

The results were nothing short of astounding. Over time, the team fine-tuned the model in an identity-driven way, until it fully integrated into the company culture — especially in the relationship between well-being and delivery of results. Cognitive performance — especially in creative tasks and problem-solving — increased by 22%, driven by the cognitive breaks. Productivity in new product development grew by 35%. But the most relevant data was the quality of the deliveries: instead of just meeting deadlines, employees began to operate more in line with their internal rhythms, producing more innovative solutions with higher added value.

The delivery-based work model also had a significant impact on talent retention. Turnover dropped by half, as the company created an environment that respected the biological rhythms and cognitive needs of its professionals. Satisfaction and engagement also grew noticeably. The team demonstrated an expanded capacity to innovate, not just to complete tasks, but to propose creative and disruptive solutions.

“XXXX” not only adapted to the concept of flexibility: it tested it, applied it, and refined it with deep strategy. It transformed its work structure into a true living laboratory of cognitive productivity. By adopting a model focused on delivery, it not only respected employees’ biological rhythms but positioned itself at the forefront of organizational innovation — creating a real and sustainable competitive advantage in the contemporary market.
The Real Impact of Time on Cognitive Performance

What does this mean in practice?

When we ask a professional, after an exhausting day of meetings, to create a strategic plan at 5:00 PM on a Friday, we are demanding high-level cognitive performance exactly when their mental resources are most depleted. It’s like expecting visionary decisions at a time when the ‘brain has already entered rest mode.’ It’s not just poor time management, but a profound neglect of the principles of neuroergonomics and performance psychology. Our brain, although incredibly adaptable, operates with limited reserves of cognitive energy — and ignoring this is compromising the quality of decisions and, consequently, the results.

WHAT THEY DIDN’T TELL YOU ABOUT TIME

Chronotypes ≠ Laziness

Society tends to romanticize the “early birds,” those who wake up at dawn and start working immediately. But the truth is, chronotypes are not a matter of laziness. Biology is clear: there are no good or bad rhythms. Each human being is biologically programmed to have peaks of energy at distinct moments throughout the day, and this is rooted in our circadian and ultradian rhythms.

• Afternoon and Night People: These professionals are not less productive, but biologically programmed to be more productive in the evening or early afternoon. Forcing a person with a night chronotype to deliver high performance results during the day is a strategic mistake.
• Morning People: On the other hand, these professionals, who have energy peaks in the morning, may struggle to maintain high levels of focus and productivity in the evening. Asking them to remain at high performance until late (for example, after 9:00 PM) is like asking an afternoon person to be active at 7:00 AM.

Focus is Not Infinite (And This Is Science)

The brain works in cycles. Ignoring the brain’s natural attention cycles — like the ultradian cycle, which lasts about 90 minutes — directly undermines cognitive performance. Forcing someone to keep working without a break after this critical period is like asking a motor to keep running without maintenance.

• Focus Limitation: Neuroscience studies show that after about 90 minutes of intense cognitive activity, our ability to maintain focus begins to decline. When we don’t respect these natural cycles, productivity significantly decreases, short-term memory is compromised, and the risk of burnout increases considerably.
• Cognitive Breaks: Implementing cognitive breaks is not just a recommendation; it is a biological necessity. These breaks are essential for the recovery and maintenance of long-term cognitive performance. Cognitive recovery every 90 minutes is fundamental to maximize performance without causing long-term damage.

Mediocre Hours Produce Mediocre Deliveries

We can no longer ignore that high performance requires a suitable environment, with adequate time and mental state. Companies that continue to promote a work environment where everyone must adapt to the same chronotype and schedule, without considering the biological and cognitive needs of each individual, are limiting their own capacity for innovation and productivity.

• Environment Design: The work environment is not just physical; it is also temporal and cognitive. By creating a schedule structure that respects employees’ biological rhythms, the organization allows everyone to work at their peak performance. This is not just a matter of preference, but a biological necessity, as demonstrated in several studies on cognitive neuroscience.
• Flexibility and Performance: When teams have the freedom to choose work hours that best align with their biological cycles, they experience a significant increase in the quality of their deliveries. It’s no longer about “how many hours you worked,” but how much you delivered and with what level of innovation. The delivery-based work model (rather than by hours) is one that, in addition to respecting biological rhythms, enhances creativity and innovation.

The Path to High Performance

In an ideal world, where we respect biological rhythms and apply scientific principles to workplace design, productivity is no longer a matter of how much time a person spends in front of a computer, but rather how they feel when performing their work. The mental state of calm and focus, provided by an environment that respects the body’s natural rhythms, results in higher quality, innovative, and satisfying deliveries.

Now, imagine a scenario where the workday adjusts to respect the biology and neuroscience of employees. The transition to a more flexible, delivery-based work model — rather than a fixed schedule — is not just a trend, but a strategic necessity for companies seeking sustainable high performance and disruptive innovation. Creating an environment that respects biological rhythms is not a matter of choice, but of organizational intelligence.

CHRONOWORKING IS NOT FLEXIBILITY — IT’S ADAPTIVE INTELLIGENCE IN ACTION

By now, I hope you’ve understood that the concept of Chronoworking transcends the ideas of flexibility or convenience that we often associate with remote work or adjustable hours. Instead, it’s adaptive intelligence that recognizes the uniqueness of employees’ biological rhythms, adapting management practices to optimize delivery and well-being.

The companies of the future will no longer be judged by the number of hours worked or mere physical presence, but by the quality and cognitive impact of the deliveries made. In this context, cognitive impact management emerges as a new evaluation parameter. And instead of simply counting how much time an employee spends in front of a screen, the emphasis shifts to how effectively and healthily they are using that time.

WHAT DOES THIS REALLY MEAN?

Imagine a software development team whose highest productivity occurs in the afternoon and evening. Forcing this team to adjust to the traditional 9-to-6 work schedule can compromise their cognitive performance and negatively impact innovation — a key factor in tech environments.

With the implementation of Chronoworking, employees can adjust their workdays according to their energy peaks, making the most of their cognitive abilities at times when they are naturally most productive. It’s not about complete freedom to choose hours, but rather a strategic organization of activities, aligning business demands with each professional’s internal rhythms.

This approach has shown significant results. According to studies from Harvard Business Review (2023), teams that align their tasks with their members’ natural rhythms experience a 32% increase in engagement, 22% more strategic deliveries, and an 18% reduction in turnover due to exhaustion.

Chronotyping goes beyond convenience. It’s a strategy to boost productivity, reduce burnout, and ensure more innovative and quality deliveries. The Chronoworking model creates an environment where employees don’t just complete tasks, but operate at their maximum cognitive performance, respecting their internal rhythms and achieving their full potential.

Therefore, Chronoworking is not just flexibility — it’s a high-performance strategy that integrates the neuroscience of work to ensure that each employee is in their best cognitive moment to deliver exceptional results. It’s a step towards the true corporate revolution: the intelligent management of time and human energy.

THREE PRINCIPLES OF NEUROCOMPATIBLE MANAGEMENT

When we talk about neurocompatible management, we are proposing a new paradigm: adapting to the neurobiological functioning of employees is no longer a choice, but a strategic necessity. Organizations that aim to evolve must abandon old metrics of time and presence and adopt models that promote greater well-being, productivity, and innovation. To achieve this, three fundamental principles must be adopted:

1. Cycles, not hours

The first principle of neurocompatible management is understanding the natural cycles of energy and attention of employees, rather than measuring productivity by the hours worked. Time is a valuable resource, but energy is what truly drives human performance.

• Plan work according to each employee’s energy rhythms. Some people are naturally more productive in the morning, others in the afternoon or evening. Respecting these cycles is key to maximizing performance.
• Identify the best times for different types of tasks: analytical, creative, or relational. Demanding tasks should be performed during energy peaks, while more collaborative activities can be adjusted according to each person’s cycle.

2. Energy, not presence

The obsession with measuring physical presence is one of the greatest mistakes of traditional management. In today’s world, productivity is no longer tied to office hours, but to cognitive impact — the quality of the work produced.
• Evaluate impact, not screen time. The true performance indicator is the cognitive value delivered by the employee, not the time spent in front of a computer or in meetings.
• Reward the delivery of cognitive value, not physical presence. This not only improves engagement but also prevents the exhaustion of long hours that disregard natural energy rhythms.

3. Radical responsibility

Neurocompatible management requires a different view of responsibility at work. Instead of a rigid hierarchical model, the organization must promote self-management and radical responsibility, where employees have clear goals and the autonomy to decide how and when to carry out their tasks within healthy limits.

• Self-management requires clarity of goals, psychological safety, and continuous feedback. This doesn’t mean working without direction, but having a safe environment where mistakes are learning opportunities.
• Micromanaging is a sign of institutional insecurity. The neurocompatible leader understands that the true role of leadership is to create an environment based on trust and autonomy. Micromanaging undermines trust and creativity, reflecting a lack of clarity about what is expected from the team.

These principles are not just trends — they represent the foundation for healthier, more productive, and innovative work environments. By adopting an approach that respects the natural rhythms of the brain, organizations increase not only performance but also create a legacy of well-being, engagement, and sustainable success.

WHAT IF THE FUTURE OF WORK IS NOT ABOUT MORE TIME, BUT ABOUT BETTER TIME?

The reflection that remains after everything we’ve explored is simple, yet profound: the future of work is no longer in minutes and hours. It’s in the quality of time, in the ability to align work with the natural rhythms of the human being, so that the maximum potential of each employee can be achieved in a sustainable and innovative way.

The real question, which demands more than just a logical answer, is: Do you want exceptional talent or obedient robots? Presentism — the outdated idea of measuring productivity by physical presence and hours worked — is already becoming a relic of the past, a legacy of a model that no longer serves the needs of the current world.

Those who still lead based on industrial clocks will lose the talents who think, create, and transform. They are already moving away from what doesn’t respect their biological essence, their creativity, their time, and their cognitive needs. What new generations of leaders and professionals seek is much more than fixed hours and soul-less shifts. They want to be treated as human beings, not as cogs in a machine. They want to contribute their intelligence and creativity at moments of greatest energy and inspiration, without the overload imposed by presentism.

Chronoworking is not a passing trend. It is a silent revolution happening now, and it goes beyond mere adaptation to flexibility. It is about reconnecting productivity with human dignity, science with management, and the human being with their own nature. Companies that adapt to this model are not just positioning themselves at the forefront of innovation. They are creating spaces where excellence and well-being coexist, something that once seemed impossible to reconcile.

And then, the final question: Has your management model already understood this?

The choice is yours. Continue dictating schedules and following outdated practices or lead the revolution that puts the human being and their potential first, in a way that not only generates extraordinary results but also cares for mental health, creativity, and satisfaction of all involved. The future of work is not about more hours, but about better time. And that future has already begun — and it is neurocompatible.

Would you like to dive deeper into this topic with your leadership or team?

Bring Chronoworking into your organization.

Let’s redesign time together — with science, intelligence, and, above all, humanity. Because the future of work is not measured in hours, but in cognitive presence, real impact, and lasting well-being.

It’s time to make time an ally — not an enemy.

Some References if you wish to research more about the topic:

• Roenneberg, T., Allebrandt, K. V., Merrow, M., & Vetter, C. (2012). Social jetlag and obesity. Current Biology.
• Rossi, E. (1991). The 20-Minute Break: Reduce Stress, Maximize Performance, and Improve Health and Emotional Well-Being Using the New Science of Ultradian Rhythms.
• Rock, D. (2009). Your Brain at Work. HarperBusiness.
• Harvard Business Review. (2023). “Chronotypes and Cognitive Performance: The Emerging Role of Neuroadaptive Scheduling.”
• Science Magazine. (2011). “Brief and rare mental breaks keep you focused: Deactivation and reactivation of task goals preempt vigilance decrements.”
• Stanford Neuroperformance Lab (2022). “Cognitive Load and Performance Cycles in Organizational Settings.”

#marcellodesouza #marcellodesouzaoficial #coachingevoce
#Chronoworking #Neurogestão #FuturoDoTrabalho #AltaPerformanceHumana #GestãoConsciente #LiderançaAdaptativa