Just as we viewed the possibility of working remotely and integrating it into daily, not exceptional, practice with apprehension, today we find ourselves in a scenario with a certain analogy regarding the question that the possibility and viability of shortening the workweek and, therefore, the workload in the workplace generates for us.
Neuroscience has taken a relevant place in the field of work. The study of the brain, articulated with its functions, and how these impact human beings or workers, are today material for continuous, interdisciplinary, and constantly updated study. Taking the preceding as a starting point, several studies have shown that it is practically unfeasible to maintain our active and focused attention and concentration on a task for eight hours. However, we are part of cultures rooted in the eight-hour workday.
In an approach that could seem anachronistic today, we still believe that longer working hours equate to greater productivity and fail to perceive the cost-benefit relationship of “less is more.” Several countries are conducting pilot programs related to reducing the five-day workweek to four. Iceland, Spain, the United Arab Emirates, New Zealand, among others, have been successfully implementing this model.
One of the benefits that arises from the survey conducted among the workers themselves is that they stated they felt less stressed. Absenteeism and turnover rates decreased, and they indicated that the balance between their personal and work life had improved. Likewise, from the organizations' point of view, incorporating these changes makes them a talent attraction factor, as employees today seek to join companies whose working conditions are in fair balance with their personal lives.
Various studies have shown that it is practically unfeasible to maintain our active and focused attention and concentration on a task for eight hours.
The concept of “workplace wellness,” which we are trying to integrate into Human Resources management practices, gains more traction when linked to a reduction in working hours. However, as experience has shown, this type of measure can be more complex to implement in some sectors than in others. We must not lose sight of how the measure impacts the labor relations and contractual agreements of each organization, whether public or private. Currently, countries that have implemented this have not reduced worker salaries, an aspect that has added to the motivation of the involved workforces.
The pandemic put the global labor market in check. Remote work became a constant, and most organizations adapted to the remote work model (almost without prior preparation). Resistance, doubts, and massive training sessions related to “how to manage remote teams” unleashed a dynamic that, in record time, turned into a habit. And the world kept spinning.
However, in parallel, there were layoffs, restructurings, and furloughs that led to an increased workload for those workers who remained in the companies, fulfilling their roles and tasks, to which were added those of the “gaps” that the pandemic crisis was leaving behind.
The countries that have implemented it did not reduce workers' salaries, an aspect that added to the motivation of the involved staff.
Today we have an exhausted workforce, suffering from what is called “pandemic fatigue,” and in this context, it becomes even more difficult to demand that an employee perform their eight hours of daily work with the same energy as two years ago. The foregoing is relevant to some aspects that arise from the conceptual analysis inherent in the trilogy “work-performance-occupational and personal health”:
- The reduction of the work week grants workers more rest hours.
- Allows people to balance their work and personal lives according to their specific needs.
- Generates a sense of belonging to the organization: the employee feels that the company cares about their well-being.
- Increase productivity.
- It positively impacts workers' cognitive load by regulating attention and focus on their tasks.
Despite its benefits, reducing the workweek or the number of work hours should be part of a change management process. This would allow for the planned and contextualized implementation of the measure, even within a “pilot project” framework. For example, if this is not done, it could have the opposite effect: increasing stress levels, as workers would try to accomplish eight hours of work in six. Regardless, organizations want to achieve results, so if necessary, analyzing each specific context and labor sector is essential under the premise that standardizing models or procedures is unfeasible in a work environment where the dynamics of change are extremely rapid.
The future is today, the trend already exists and has promising results. Perhaps it's time to start thinking and analyzing how utopian (or not) this model might be.
Article by Laura Di Carlo
