"Workers were much less inclined to kill time, and actively sought out technologies that improved their productivity," said Burchell.
Dr David Frayne, a Research Associate at the University of Cambridge, said: “We feel really encouraged by the results, which showed the many ways companies were turning the four-day week from a dream into realistic policy, with multiple benefits.”
David Frayne and Brendan Burchell will be discussing the findings at this year's Cambridge Festival. Read a speaker spotlight with David Frayne here.
The design of the trial involved two months of preparation for participants, with workshops and mentoring based on the experience of companies already on a shorter working week.
In addition to the survey work, designed in collaboration with colleagues including Prof Juliet Schor from Boston College, the Cambridge team conducted a large number of extensive interviews with employees and company CEOs before, during and after the six-month trial.
Other pilots run by 4 Day Week Global in the US and Ireland – with research conducted by many of the same academics – have already reported their findings. However, the UK trial is not only the largest to date but also the first to include in-depth interview research.
“The method of this pilot allowed our researchers to go beyond surveys and look in detail at how the companies were making it work on the ground,” said Frayne, from Cambridge’s Department of Sociology.
In terms of motivations, several senior managers told researchers they saw the four-day week as a rational response to the pandemic – and believed it would give them an edge when it came to attracting talent in the post-Covid job market.
Some saw it as an appealing alternative to unlimited home working, which they felt risked company culture. Others had seen staff suffer through health problems and bereavement during the pandemic, and felt an increased “moral responsibility” towards employees.
“I hated the pandemic, but it’s made us see each other much more in the round, and it’s made us all realise the importance of having a healthy head, and that family matters,” said the CEO of a non-profit organisation that took part in the trial.
However, many said shorter hours were being discussed long before Covid as a response to demanding or emotionally draining work. The CEO of a video game studio pointed to high-profile examples of “crunch and burnout” in their industry as a reason for involvement in the trial.
Perhaps surprisingly, however, no organisation interviewed was taking part in the trials simply because technology had reduced their need for human labour.
Some companies stopped work completely for a three-day weekend, while others staggered a reduced workforce over a week.
One restaurant calculated their 32-hour week over an entire year to have long opening times in the summer, but much shorter in winter.
A few companies in the trial attached strings to the reduced hours, including fewer holiday days, agreement that staff could be called in at short notice, or a “conditional” four-day week: one that only continued while performance targets were met.
Interviews documented how companies reduced working hours without compromising on targets. Common methods included:
- shorter meetings with clearer agendas
- introduction of interruption-free ‘focus periods’
- reforming email etiquette to reduce long chains and inbox churn
- new analyses of production processes
- end-of-day task lists for effective handovers or next-day head starts.
