Struggling with a High-Stakes Divorce, Indian Software Tycoon’s Estranged Wife Alleges Ownership Transfer Without Notification

In a trial involving over 60 companies from various sectors, including marketing agencies, financial firms, education services, and fish and chip shops, 92% of employers indicated they would continue with a shorter workweek following the program. Of these, 30% plan to permanently adopt the new schedule. Among the nearly 3,000 employees, 71% reported reduced levels of burnout, as well as improvements in physical health and wellbeing. Many firms reported that their workers were able to spend more time with their families, engage in hobbies, and prioritize self-care.

According to Alison Dunn, CEO of consumer-advice helpline Citizens Advice in Gateshead, “Burnout has been an issue, so the four-day week has given them space to decompress: we’ve had people spend their extra day off with their children, take forest walks and monetise their hobbies.” In addition, employers on the trial observed that the truncated workweek has boosted productivity and output. “When people enjoy having an extra day off, that creates better work-life balance which, in turn, makes people happier and less stressed,” explains Claire Daniels, CEO of Leeds-based digital marketing agency Trio Media. “And happier people perform better at work.”

However, some firms abandoned the experiment, while others have yet to make the move to adopt the format full-time. Even firms continuing with reduced hours are navigating new challenges arising from shortened workweeks. While the four-day workweek has proven to be effective for many participants in the trial, it is not a universal solution for all businesses.

Indeed, as found by Allcap, a typical trade-off for a three-day weekend is a more intense four-day workweek. “Without having a fifth day to catch up on work, there’s generally more stress during the week in order to have a longer weekend,” says Laura White, Projects and Research Manager at London-based charity Waterwise.

For businesses maintaining regular opening hours, a third day off for staff usually requires workers covering shifts, which leads to increased workloads. “We found that when it was someone’s turn for their day off, the workload was passed to a colleague, and they were left under pressure,” says Roderick. “Someone’s absence would come up to management, so we’d effectively have to just do daily tasks – our longer-term projects and strategic work went out the window.”

Where it can fall short

For some firms, particularly customer-facing businesses, creating enough slack in the schedule for a four-day week means extra hiring costs, making it prohibitive to move forward with a new model. Dunn says that Citizens Advice in Gateshead invested in the equivalent of three additional full-time employees so 45 contact centre staff could join the trial. “We didn’t want a situation where someone would be excluded from the opportunity,” she adds.

These customer-facing firms often face greater challenges in maintaining four-day workweeks. “Some employees can work extended hours during the week to catch up to have that extra day off,” says Dunn. “But that’s not available to our contact centre team, who have clearly defined opening hours. Their work is heavily monitored with specific KPIs set by our funder that need to be delivered – currently, they can only make marginal gains.”

Likewise, the demands of the job mean these workers have less flexibility in their third day off, says Dunn. “The busiest days at the contact centre are usually Mondays and Fridays, meaning it’s not possible for them to take time off either side of the weekend. The knock-on effect is that it leaves only three days left for staff to take their extra day off.”

Conversely, Dunn says employees outside the contact centre, who can work flexibly, have surpassed targets. “In those areas of the business, employees have knocked it out of the park, exceeding KPIs and income projections. We’re left with a picture that’s not evenly spread.”

Rather than fully embracing or rejecting the four-day workweek model, Citizens Advice is extending its trial until May. According to Dunn, unless the contact centre team meets its targets, the shorter workweek will not become a permanent fixture in any part of the business. She notes that difficulties with the four-day week do not necessarily stem from the size of the organization, but from its complexity, particularly when different services and modes of operation are involved.

Waterwise and Trio Media are also extending their trials, with the latter opting for a year-long period to assess the impact on productivity. Other businesses in the scheme have chosen to offer more flexibility instead of a fixed four-day week. For example, Amplitude, a creative agency in Northampton, has made the four-day week optional, allowing employees to work a flexible, reduced 35-hour week that can be split across four or five days. Similarly, Abigail Marks, professor of the future of work at Newcastle University Business School, believes that a six-hour workday may be more effective than a four-day week for certain organizations, without overburdening workers.

The trial’s general success, according to Marks, points to more employers recognizing that the traditional nine-to-five model is not always effective. While a four-day week may be feasible for some businesses, it may not be feasible for all. Roderick of Allcap notes that his firm would reintroduce the four-day week if possible, as over-stretched workers valued their extra day off, but the shortage of staff made it difficult to implement the model.