The Four-Day Work Week: A Fleeting Experiment or the Future of Work?

The End of the Weekend as We Know It?

For nearly a century, the rhythm of modern professional life has been dictated by a simple, unyielding structure: the five-day, 40-hour work week. It is a framework so deeply embedded in our culture that it has shaped everything from urban planning to family life. Yet, this long-standing convention was not the product of a scientific discovery about peak human performance; it was a socio-economic compromise born from the industrial age. Today, its foundations are being shaken by a confluence of technological advancement, a widespread crisis of employee burnout, and a profound societal re-evaluation of the relationship between work and life.

The catalyst for this disruption was the COVID-19 pandemic, an unplanned, global experiment in work flexibility that shattered long-held assumptions about the necessity of physical presence and rigid schedules.¹ This upheaval created a fertile ground for radical new ideas to take root, and none has captured the global imagination more powerfully than the four-day work week. Once dismissed as a utopian fantasy, it is now being tested, implemented, and analysed with unprecedented rigour in boardrooms and government offices around the world.

This report addresses the central question facing business leaders, policymakers, and employees today: Is the four-day work week a sustainable evolution toward a more productive and humane way of working, or is it a niche perk with limited scalability, destined to remain on the fringes of the mainstream economy? To answer this, the following analysis will embark on a data-driven journey, exploring the concept’s historical origins, the compelling and often startling evidence from global trials, the profound benefits for both businesses and their people, and the significant operational hurdles that stand in the way of widespread adoption. By examining this transformative trend from every angle, this report will provide a clear-eyed assessment of whether we are witnessing a fleeting experiment or the dawn of the future of work.

From Henry Ford to the Digital Age: A Brief History of the 9-to-5

To understand the revolutionary nature of the four-day work week, one must first recognise that the five-day standard is not an immutable law of productivity but a historical artifact. Its origins lie in the brutal conditions of the 19th-century Industrial Revolution, where 80- to 100-hour work weeks were commonplace.³ Throughout the late 1800s and early 1900s, labour movements and unions fought tirelessly for better conditions, gradually chipping away at the gruelling schedules that defined industrial labour.⁴

The five-day, 40-hour week as we know it was not a government mandate but a business decision, famously standardised by industrialist Henry Ford in 1926. Ford’s research revealed that working his factory employees more than 40 hours a week yielded only a small, short-lived increase in productivity before declining due to exhaustion.³ His implementation of a 40-hour work week for double the average auto worker’s pay was a strategic move that boosted productivity, loyalty, and, ultimately, his bottom line. This model proved so successful that it was widely adopted and later codified into U.S. law with the Fair Labour Standards Act of 1938, which mandated overtime pay for hours worked beyond 40.⁴

Even as the five-day work week became entrenched, prominent thinkers predicted it was merely a stepping stone toward greater leisure. In 1956, then-U.S. Vice President Richard Nixon declared that a four-day work week was in America’s “not-too-distant future”.⁶ This sentiment echoed predictions from figures as diverse as Benjamin Franklin and John Stuart Mill, who believed that economic progress should translate into more free time for society.⁷

However, this future failed to materialise. For over 80 years, despite staggering increases in productivity driven by technology and new management practices, the 40-hour standard has remained largely static.⁵ This has created a historical tension: the structure of work has not kept pace with the nature of work. The knowledge-based, digital economy of the 21st century operates under a framework designed for 20th-century assembly lines. The current surge of interest in the four-day work week is a direct response to this disconnect, fueled by a modern “workplace wellness crisis,” rising rates of burnout, and a post-pandemic workforce that is actively re-evaluating its priorities and demanding a new social contract with employers.¹ The movement can therefore be seen not as a radical new invention, but as the delayed fulfilment of a long-standing economic and social expectation.

Deconstructing the Models: The 100-80-100 Principle vs. the Compressed Week

The growing conversation around the “four-day work week” is often clouded by the conflation of two fundamentally different models. A clear distinction between them is essential, as they are built on opposing philosophies and yield vastly different results.

The first, and older, approach is the compressed work week, often referred to as the “4/10” model. This arrangement involves employees working the traditional 40 hours over four 10-hour days instead of five 8-hour days.⁷ While it delivers the coveted three-day weekend, it does not reduce the total number of hours worked. This model accepts the 40-hour quantum of labour as necessary and simply repackages it. Research and anecdotal reports suggest that longer workdays can lead to increased fatigue, stress, and a higher risk of burnout, potentially offsetting the wellness benefits of the extra day off.¹¹ A 1999 meta-analysis found that while this approach improved job satisfaction, it had no discernible effect on absenteeism or productivity.¹⁰

The second, and truly revolutionary, model is the reduced-hours approach, famously defined by the 100-80-100 principle. Trademarked by the non-profit advocacy group 4 Day Week Global, this model is built on a simple but powerful formula: employees receive 100% of their pay for working 80% of their time, in exchange for a commitment to maintaining 100% of their productivity.⁷ This framework, which typically translates to a 32-hour work week, is the one at the heart of the most successful and widely publicised global trials.¹⁴

The distinction between these two models is critical because it reveals a fundamental difference in philosophy. The compressed week is a logistical rearrangement; the 100-80-100 model is a paradigm shift. It challenges the necessity of the 40-hour standard itself, positing that a significant portion of the traditional work week is filled with low-value activities, such as inefficient meetings, unnecessary administrative tasks, and digital distractions.¹ The success of this model is therefore not about working faster or harder, but about working smarter by systematically eliminating wasted time. It forces a transition from measuring input (hours logged) to measuring output (results achieved). The most compelling data on improved well-being, sustained business performance, and enhanced company culture comes almost exclusively from trials of the 100-80-100 model. The “secret sauce” of the four-day work week is not the schedule itself, but the mandatory process re-engineering and intense focus on efficiency that the schedule compels companies to undertake.

The Global Verdict: Overwhelming Evidence from Landmark Trials

What was once a theoretical debate has, in recent years, been subjected to rigorous, real-world testing. Spearheaded by the non-profit 4 Day Week Global, a series of coordinated, large-scale pilot programs has been conducted across the globe, from the United Kingdom and the United States to Australia and Portugal. These trials, run in partnership with researchers from esteemed institutions like Cambridge University, Oxford University, and Boston College, represent the most robust body of evidence ever compiled on the efficacy of the 100-80-100 model.¹ The results are not just positive; they are remarkably consistent and compelling across diverse industries and cultures.

The world’s largest trial to date took place in the UK from June to December 2022, involving 61 companies and around 2,900 workers.¹⁵ The findings were a resounding success. From a business perspective, company revenue stayed broadly the same over the trial period, rising by 1.4% on average. When compared to a similar period from previous years, organisations reported a healthy average revenue increase of 35%.¹⁵ The impact on talent management was even more dramatic: the number of staff leaving participating companies dropped by a staggering 57%.¹⁵

The human benefits were equally profound. At the end of the trial, 39% of employees reported being less stressed, and 71% had reduced levels of burnout. Measures of anxiety, fatigue, and sleep issues all decreased, while both mental and physical health improved.¹⁵ The positive sentiment was nearly universal. At the conclusion of the six-month pilot, 92% of the participating companies announced they were continuing with the four-day work week, with 18 confirming the policy as a permanent change.¹⁵

These results were not an anomaly. Similar pilot programs across North America, Australasia, and Europe have mirrored these outcomes, demonstrating a consistent pattern of success. A trial involving companies in the US and Ireland found that none of the participants were planning to return to a five-day work week, with companies rating the trial an average of 9 out of 10 for its positive impact on productivity and performance.¹⁰ A long-term study tracking participants for a full year after their transition found that the benefits were sustained, with employee burnout remaining down by 69% and company revenue up by 15% over the trial period.¹⁹

The consistency of these findings across multiple continents and various industries—from local fish and chip shops and charities to software developers and legal firms—provides powerful validation for the 100-80-100 model.⁷ The data indicate that when implemented correctly, reducing work time does not harm business outcomes but can, in fact, strengthen them while dramatically improving the well-being of the workforce.

The Business Case: Why Companies Are Embracing a Shorter Week

Beyond the compelling trial data, a clear and multifaceted business case is emerging for the adoption of a four-day work week. Far from being just an employee-centric perk, companies are discovering that it can be a powerful strategic tool for driving efficiency, attracting top talent, and improving the bottom line.

The Productivity Paradox

The most counterintuitive—and powerful—argument for the four-day work week is that working less can lead to achieving more. This “productivity paradox” is not magic; it is the result of a forced optimisation of work processes. The constraint of having only four days to achieve five days’ worth of output compels organisations to ruthlessly identify and eliminate what Boston College researchers call “activities with questionable or low value”.¹ This includes culling unnecessary meetings, streamlining communication, automating repetitive tasks, and eradicating “busywork” that fills time but produces little value.²² The focus shifts from being present to being productive. The most famous early example of this phenomenon was Microsoft Japan’s 2019 trial, which resulted in a stunning 40% increase in productivity after the company implemented strict time-management mandates, such as capping meetings at 30 minutes.²³

A Magnet for Talent

In an increasingly competitive global labour market, the four-day work week has emerged as a formidable advantage in the war for talent. For many prospective employees, particularly among younger generations, flexibility and work-life balance are now as important as compensation.⁹ Offering a four-day work week is a clear and powerful signal that a company values its employees’ well-being and trusts them to manage their own time. The results are tangible: research shows that 63% of businesses with a four-day work week found it easier to attract and retain quality staff.¹¹ The value employees place on this benefit cannot be overstated. In the UK’s landmark trial, 15% of employees said that no amount of money would convince them to return to a five-day schedule at their next job.¹⁵ This creates a powerful dual advantage for adopting companies: they become a magnet for top external talent while simultaneously building a formidable barrier against their own employees being poached.

Bottom-Line Benefits

The financial advantages of a shorter work week extend beyond productivity gains and reduced recruitment costs. Companies report a range of tangible cost savings. With offices closed an extra day per week, operational overheads such as electricity, heating, and water can be significantly reduced.²⁶ Microsoft Japan, for instance, saw its electricity costs fall by 23% during its trial.²⁴ Furthermore, a healthier, less-stressed workforce translates into fewer sick days. The largest UK trial saw a 65% reduction in sick days taken by employees.²⁷ This, combined with the dramatic 57% drop in employee turnover, leads to substantial savings on absenteeism, temporary staffing, and the high costs associated with replacing and training new employees.¹⁵

Environmental and Societal Gains

The business case is increasingly bolstered by environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations. A four-day work week directly contributes to a company’s sustainability goals. By eliminating one day of commuting for the entire workforce, a company can significantly reduce its collective carbon footprint.²⁶ One UK report estimated that a nationwide four-day work week could shrink the country’s carbon footprint by 21.3%.²⁸ A study from the University of Massachusetts went even further, concluding that such a shift could cut humanity’s carbon footprint by nearly 30%.⁷ For companies looking to enhance their corporate social responsibility profile and appeal to an environmentally conscious talent pool and customer base, the four-day work week offers a clear and impactful initiative.

The Human Dividend: More Than Just a Long Weekend

While the business case for the four-day work week is robust, its most profound impact may be on the well-being of the workforce. The extra day off is not merely a “long weekend”; it is a fundamental restructuring of the work-life equation that pays a significant “human dividend” in the form of improved health, reduced stress, and reclaimed time for life outside of work.

Combating the Burnout Epidemic

The modern workplace is grappling with a crisis of burnout, an occupational phenomenon now officially recognised by the World Health Organisation.⁹ The four-day work week has proven to be a powerful antidote. Across every major global trial, the data on employee well-being is strikingly positive and consistent. The UK pilot, for example, saw 71% of employees report reduced levels of burnout, 39% feel less stressed, and significant decreases in anxiety and fatigue.¹⁵ Long-term data confirm these effects are not temporary; after 12 months, employees in a four-day work week schedule still reported a 69% reduction in burnout compared to their pre-trial baseline.¹⁹ This shift offers a direct counter-narrative to the pervasive “hustle culture” that has glorified overwork at the expense of mental and physical health.⁵

Reclaiming Time for Life

So, what do employees do with this newfound time? The evidence shows it is used for a wide range of life-enhancing activities that are often squeezed or neglected in a traditional five-day structure. Employees report using their third day off for practical personal errands, such as doctors’ or dentists’ appointments, which they would otherwise have to cram into a workday or take time off for, thus reducing workplace disruptions.¹ Beyond logistics, the extra day is devoted to hobbies, physical exercise, volunteering, and, most importantly, spending more time with family and friends.² This ability to fully engage with personal, family, and community life leads to a more rested, fulfilled, and energised workforce. Employees return to their four working days with greater focus and motivation, creating a virtuous cycle where improved work-life balance directly fuels workplace engagement and productivity.¹¹

Improved Health and Reduced Costs

The benefits to well-being translate into tangible health outcomes. Employees in four-day work week trials consistently report better physical and mental health, improved sleep quality, and an overall increase in life satisfaction.⁸ In one study, employees engaged in an average of 27 minutes of additional physical activity per week.¹⁸ For employers, this human dividend has a direct financial benefit. A healthier workforce means fewer sick days, with some trials reporting a 65% drop in absenteeism.³⁰ Over the long term, this can lead to lower employee healthcare costs and contribute to a more resilient and sustainable workforce, capable of navigating challenges without succumbing to stress and burnout.¹

A Dose of Reality: Navigating the Hurdles and Criticisms

Despite the overwhelmingly positive data from pilot programs, the transition to a four-day work week is neither simple nor universally applicable. A clear-eyed assessment requires acknowledging the significant hurdles, valid criticisms, and operational complexities that can lead to failure if not properly addressed. The success of the model is not guaranteed; it is contingent on a deep and often difficult organisational transformation.

The Pressure Cooker Effect

The most common and potent criticism is that a shorter week does not eliminate work, but merely compresses it. When companies fail to fundamentally redesign workflows and simply cut 20% of the available time, the result is a “pressure cooker” effect. Employees are forced to cram five days of tasks into four, leading to intensified workloads, increased stress, and higher rates of burnout—the very outcomes the policy is meant to prevent.⁸ This risk is particularly acute in the compressed 4/10 model but can also occur in the 100-80-100 model if the crucial element of process optimisation is neglected. Success hinges on eliminating low-value work, not just working faster.

One Size Does Not Fit All

The four-day work week is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Its implementation poses significant operational challenges for certain industries. Sectors that require 24/7 coverage or constant client-facing availability—such as healthcare, emergency services, retail, hospitality, and manufacturing—cannot simply shut down for an extra day.¹² While solutions like staggered schedules (e.g., half the team takes Monday off, the other half takes Friday) can ensure continuous coverage, they introduce their own complexities in communication, collaboration, and team cohesion.²⁸ The model is most easily adopted in knowledge-work sectors where tasks are often project-based and can be performed asynchronously.

The Sustainability Question

Sceptics also question the long-term sustainability of the reported benefits. There is a concern that the initial boosts in morale and productivity could be a temporary phenomenon known as the “Hawthorne effect,” where subjects of an experiment improve their behaviour simply because they are being studied.³³ Critics argue that once the novelty wears off, the four-day work week may become seen as an entitlement rather than a privilege. Over time, underlying issues within the workplace culture, such as poor management or a lack of clear goals, could resurface, diminishing the long-term effectiveness of the schedule change.¹² While long-term studies are beginning to counter this by showing sustained benefits after 12 months, it remains a valid area for further research.¹⁹

Economic and Feasibility Concerns

For many organisations, particularly small businesses and those operating on thin margins, the economic feasibility of a four-day work week is a primary concern.¹² If productivity cannot be increased by the required 25% per hour to offset the 20% reduction in time, the model could lead to a decline in output and revenue.¹³ In industries requiring constant coverage, the need to hire additional staff to fill the gaps created by the shorter week could lead to a prohibitive increase in operational costs.¹² The failure of a four-day work week is rarely due to the concept itself, but almost always due to poor implementation. Companies that treat it as a simple calendar change without committing to the hard work of cultural transformation and process re-engineering are setting themselves up for failure.

Lessons from the Trenches: Case Studies of Success and Failure

The theoretical benefits and challenges of the four-day work week come into sharp focus when examining the real-world experiences of companies that have attempted the transition. These case studies—both the successes and the failures—offer invaluable lessons on what it takes to make a shorter work week stick.

Pioneers of the New Norm

Several companies have become flagship examples of the four-day work week’s potential, demonstrating that with the right approach, the model is not only sustainable but transformative.

• Microsoft Japan: In 2019, the tech giant’s Japanese subsidiary ran a one-month trial that became a landmark case study. By mandating changes to work habits—such as limiting meetings to 30 minutes and encouraging online communication over face-to-face gatherings—the company achieved a remarkable 40% increase in productivity. This success was not just about output; it also yielded tangible cost savings in electricity and supplies, proving that a focus on efficiency can more than compensate for fewer hours.²⁴
• Buffer: As a fully remote social media management company, Buffer was uniquely positioned to test the model in a distributed workforce. After a successful pilot in 2020, the company made the four-day work week a permanent policy. They found that productivity remained steady while employee stress levels decreased significantly, demonstrating that in knowledge-based industries, results—not hours worked—are the most critical measure of success.²⁴
• Kickstarter: The crowdfunding platform transitioned to a four-day, 32-hour work week in 2022 as a core part of its strategy to combat burnout and enhance employee well-being. A year after implementation, the company reported that very few employees had chosen to depart, highlighting the model’s powerful impact on retention and job satisfaction.²⁴

Cautionary Tales

Equally instructive are the stories of companies that tried the four-day work week and reverted to the traditional model. Their experiences reveal the critical failure points that others must avoid.

• Morrisons: The UK supermarket chain trialled a four-day work week for its head-office staff but scrapped it after employee complaints. The catch was that staff were required to work one Saturday every four weeks to support their in-store teams. This requirement effectively negated the work-life balance benefits of a consistent three-day weekend, leading to frustration. The lesson: The model must be coherent and not introduce new, burdensome scheduling complexities that undermine its core purpose.³⁸
• Yarno: This Australian startup provides a classic example of how the model can fail in an early-stage company. The founders, facing intense pressure to establish the business and liaise with clients, found they could not afford to take Fridays off themselves. This created an inconsistency where junior staff had the day off but leadership did not, leading to operational friction and the potential for resentment. The lesson: Leadership must be able to fully commit to and model the new schedule. The four-day work week may be less suitable for fledgling startups where the demands are unpredictable and all-consuming.³⁸
• Treehouse: The online learning platform was an early pioneer of the four-day work week but reverted to a five-day schedule in 2016 after laying off 20% of its staff. The CEO felt it was unfair to maintain what was perceived as a luxury perk while the company was undergoing painful downsizing. The lesson: The four-day work week can be vulnerable during periods of financial distress or restructuring, where it may be viewed as an expendable benefit rather than a core operational strategy.³⁸
• Krystal: This London-based tech company cancelled its trial after four months because it led to heightened stress among staff. The founder admitted that while the team enjoyed the extra day off, the additional recovery time did not compensate for the 20% increase in output required. The lesson: The productivity gains needed to make the model work are not automatic. Without a deep and successful effort to re-engineer work processes and eliminate inefficiencies, simply cutting hours will inevitably increase stress.³⁸

The Path Forward: Is the Four-Day Work Week Inevitable?

As the body of evidence grows and more companies experiment with shorter work schedules, the question shifts from “Does it work?” to “How widespread can it become?” The future trajectory of the four-day work week will likely be shaped by two powerful, converging forces: the accelerating advancement of technology and a fundamental generational shift in workforce expectations.

The AI Catalyst

Perhaps the most significant enabler of a shorter work week is the rapid rise of artificial intelligence. Tech leaders like Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang and philanthropists like Bill Gates predict that AI will act as a massive productivity multiplier, capable of automating routine tasks, analysing vast datasets, and streamlining complex workflows.⁴⁰ By delegating time-consuming, repetitive processes to intelligent systems, human employees can be liberated to focus on higher-value activities such as strategic thinking, creative problem-solving, and building client relationships.⁴³ This technological leap could make the 25% hourly productivity gain required by the 100-80-100 model far more achievable for a much wider range of companies and industries. Indeed, research already shows that organisations that are heavy adopters of AI are more than three times as likely to be practising a four-day work week.⁴²

A Generational Shift

The second major driver is demographic. The priorities of Millennial and Gen Z workers, who now form the majority of the workforce, are fundamentally different from those of previous generations. Numerous studies show that these cohorts place a higher premium on flexibility, autonomy, mental health, and a healthy work-life balance—often valuing these attributes as much as or more than traditional metrics like salary and title.⁹ As these generations ascend into leadership positions, their preferences will increasingly shape corporate policy and culture. The pressure on employers to offer more flexible and humane work models will only intensify, making the four-day work week a powerful recruiting and retention tool in a labour market defined by new expectations.

Expert Outlook

Despite this momentum, experts caution against predicting a universal, imminent shift. Wharton management professor Peter Cappelli argues that the current evidence is skewed, as it comes primarily from companies that self-selected into trials because they were already predisposed to the model’s success.⁴⁶ He suggests that many employers may find simpler, less disruptive alternatives—such as offering remote work on Fridays—to be a more palatable way to meet employee demands for flexibility.⁴⁶ This pragmatic view is contrasted with the optimism of researchers like Boston College’s Juliet Schor, who, having overseen the global trials, sees the consistent positive results as a powerful and undeniable force for change.¹

The most likely future is not a binary outcome but a spectrum of adoption. The four-day work week will likely become a competitive standard in sectors where work is project-based and can be done asynchronously, such as technology, marketing, and professional services. Other industries will adopt hybrid models inspired by its principles, such as 9-day fortnights, flexible Fridays, or a greater focus on outcome-based work rather than rigid hours. The true legacy of the movement may not be the universal adoption of a specific schedule, but the widespread acceptance that the five-day, 40-hour week is no longer the only—or best—way to work.

Conclusion: From Time-Based to Trust-Based Work

The evidence is in, and the verdict is clear: the four-day work week, when structured around the 100-80-100 principle of reduced hours with no loss in pay, is a demonstrably effective model for the modern workplace. Robust global trials have validated it as a powerful driver of business performance, talent retention, and human well-being. Companies that successfully make the transition report sustained or increased revenue, dramatically lower employee turnover, and a workforce that is less stressed, more focused, and more engaged.

However, the journey to a shorter work week is not a simple, plug-and-play solution. It is a complex and demanding organisational transformation. The cautionary tales of companies that have tried and failed reveal that success is not achieved by merely changing the calendar; it is achieved by changing the culture. The model’s hurdles—workload compression, operational complexity, and industry-specific constraints—are significant. Overcoming them requires a deep commitment from leadership, a ruthless focus on process efficiency, and a fundamental shift in how productivity is measured.

Ultimately, the true significance of the four-day work week movement lies not in the number of days worked, but in its profound challenge to the industrial-era equation of “time equals value.” It signals a move away from a system based on presence and toward one based on performance; away from a culture of surveillance and toward one of trust. It empowers employees with greater autonomy over their lives and holds them accountable for their results, not their hours.

While it may not become the universal new norm for every job in every industry overnight, the four-day work week has irrevocably moved from a radical fantasy to a mainstream strategic option. It has proven its viability and, in doing so, has permanently altered the conversation about the future of work. Its principles are setting a new and higher standard for what constitutes a modern, attractive, and high-performing workplace, ensuring that its influence will be both profound and lasting.

Disclaimer

This report is based on an analysis of publicly available research, pilot study results, and media reports. The findings and conclusions presented are for informational purposes only and should not be construed as financial, legal, or business advice. Organisations considering a transition to a four-day work week should conduct their own comprehensive internal feasibility studies, assess the unique needs of their industry and workforce, and seek professional guidance to navigate the complexities of implementation.

Reference

1. A four-day work week? – Boston College, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.bc.edu/bc-web/bcnews/nation-world-society/sociology/-study-pilots-four-day-work-week.html
2. What Does the Four-Day Workweek Mean for the Future of Work?, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/what-does-the-four-day-workweek-mean-for-the-future-of-work/
3. The history & evolution of the 40-hour work week | Culture Amp, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.cultureamp.com/blog/40-hour-work-week
4. Worker Rights, Congress & the Movement for a Shorter Work Week – U.S. Capitol Historical Society, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://capitolhistory.org/capitol-history-blog/worker-rights-congress-movement-for-shorter-work-week/
5. The 4 Day Work Week Explained – iMercer.com, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.imercer.com/articleinsights/the-4-day-work-week
6. www.hnn.us, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.hnn.us/article/the-4-day-work-week-is-an-idea-whose-time-has-come#:~:text=In%201956%2C%20then%2DVice%20President,Lister%2C%20the%20president%20of%20Global
7. Four-day workweek – Wikipedia, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-day_workweek
8. Does a 4-day work week help or hinder? – Business School …, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://business.uq.edu.au/momentum/4-day-work-week
9. Is A 4-Day Workweek The Inevitable Future Of Work? – Work Design Magazine, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.workdesign.com/2025/07/is-a-4-day-workweek-the-inevitable-future-of-work/
10. The rise of the 4-day workweek – American Psychological Association, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.apa.org/monitor/2025/01/rise-of-4-day-workweek
11. A four-day work week: the pros and cons – Breathe HR, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.breathehr.com/en-gb/blog/topic/employee-performance/the-four-day-work-week-productive-or-pointless
12. Common Critiques of the 4-Day Workweek – HR Daily Advisor, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://hrdailyadvisor.com/2025/02/24/common-critiques-of-the-4-day-workweek/
13. Can we make the four-day week work? Productivity Puzzles blog, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.productivity.ac.uk/news/can-we-make-the-four-day-week-work-productivity-puzzles-blog/
14. What is the 100:80:100™ rule for the 4 day week?, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.4dayweek.com/news-posts/100-80-100-rule-mwmb7
15. The results are in: the UK’s four-day week pilot – The Autonomy …, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://autonomy.work/portfolio/uk4dwpilotresults/
16. The 4 Day Week UK Pilot Programme Results, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.4dayweek.com/uk-pilot-results
17. The world’s biggest four-day workweek trial has ended and the findings are overwhelmingly positive | SBS News, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/the-worlds-biggest-four-day-workweek-trial-has-ended-and-the-findings-are-overwhelmingly-positive/z4samz5h5
18. [Global] Findings from four-day work week pilot, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://gpa.net/blogs/global/global-findings-from-four-day-work-week-pilot
19. The 4 Day Week Long-Term Pilot Report, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://4dayweek.com/long-term-2023-pilot-results
20. 4 Day Week Portugal Pilot Program Results, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.4dayweek.com/portugal-2024-pilot-results
21. 4 Day Work Week USA (2025) – 4DayWeek.io, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://4dayweek.io/country/usa
22. The Mental Health Advantages of a Four-Day Workweek – IMA Financial Group, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://imacorp.com/insights/hr-insights-the-mental-health-advantages-of-a-four-day-workweek
23. Is a Four-Day Work Week Right for Your Business? | Poole Thought Leadership, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://poole.ncsu.edu/thought-leadership/article/is-a-four-day-work-week-right-for-your-business/
24. Which Companies Have Embraced the 4-Day Work Week? – HR …, accessed on September 3, 2025, http://hrdailyadvisor.com/2025/02/27/which-companies-have-embraced-the-4-day-work-week/
25. Pros and Cons of the Four-Day Workweek – insurica, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://insurica.com/blog/pros-and-cons-of-the-four-day-workweek/
26. Pros and cons of a four-day working week | British Business Bank, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.british-business-bank.co.uk/business-guidance/guidance-articles/staffing/four-day-working-week-pros-and-cons-for-your-business
27. Four Day Work Week Statistics 2024 By Benefits, Sacrifices and Demographics, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.enterpriseappstoday.com/stats/four-day-work-week-statistics.html
28. The Four-Day Work Week: Benefits, Challenges & How to Implement – Clockwise, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.getclockwise.com/blog/four-day-work-week-benefits
29. Biggest trial of four-day work week finds workers are happier and feel just as productive, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1mlu3xo/biggest_trial_of_fourday_work_week_finds_workers/
30. Why a Four-Day Workweek? – Digital Commons @ Shawnee State University, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://digitalcommons.shawnee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=business_ethics_3100
31. Why Four-Day Workweek Experiments Fail (and How to Make Yours Stick), accessed on September 3, 2025, https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/four-day-workweek-make-it-stick/
32. Drawbacks of a 4 Day Work Week: What to Consider – Zoe Talent Solutions, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://zoetalentsolutions.com/drawbacks-of-a-4-day-work-week/
33. Four-Day Workweek: A Dream Come True or a Potential Pitfall? | peopleHum, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.peoplehum.com/blog/cons-of-a-4-day-workweek
34. A Case Study of Reform of the Four Day Work Week System in the UK – ResearchGate, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380091211_A_Case_Study_of_Reform_of_the_Four_Day_Work_Week_System_in_the_UK
35. The 5-Day Workweek is Dead: How 100+ Companies Quietly Made 2024 the Year of the 4-Day Revolution – Medium, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://medium.com/@agrajalpha/four-day-work-week-pioneering-companies-and-their-success-stories-dd6e0d60902e
36. List of top 10 companies with 4-day workweeks – Preply, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://preply.com/en/blog/b2b-companies-with-4-day-work-week/
37. These 4 Companies Have Switched to the Four-Day Workweek – S2Verify, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://s2verify.com/resource/four-day-workweek-uaw/
38. Four Day Work Week: 5 Companies That Have Given Up Already, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://startups.co.uk/people/management/four-day-work-week-trials/
39. How our 4-day work week turned into a 2 year failed experiment – Yarno, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.yarno.com.au/blog/4-day-work-week-failure
40. Nvidia CEO predicts AI-driven four-day work week: Career boost or burnout for tomorrow’s professionals?, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/news/the-new-work-equation-ai-long-hours-and-gen-zs-fight-for-balance-in-indian-workplace/articleshow/123602358.cms
41. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang predicts ‘AI may bring four-day work week, but…’, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/nvidia-ceo-jensen-huang-predicts-ai-may-bring-four-day-work-week-but/articleshow/123595994.cms
42. AI’s Impact on Workweek | Worklytics, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.worklytics.co/blog/ais-impact-on-workweek
43. Could AI silence the four-day work week critics? – Henley Business School, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://www.henley.ac.uk/news/2025/could-ai-silence-the-four-day-work-week-critics
44. AI boosts career, not replace it: Real work lessons from engineer who uses AI as second brain, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/ai-boosts-career-not-replace-it-real-work-lessons-from-engineer-who-uses-ai-as-second-brain/articleshow/123658145.cms
45. 4-Day Workweek Statistics You Really Need to Know in 2025 – Tech.co, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://tech.co/hr-software/4-day-workweek-statistics
46. Is the Four-Day Work Week the Future? – Wharton, accessed on September 3, 2025, https://executiveeducation.wharton.upenn.edu/thought-leadership/wharton-at-work/2023/11/is-the-four-day-work-week-the-future/