It sounds great: Employees get a longer weekend and, some argue, save money on commuting costs, while companies save money on electricity. But there are serious drawbacks. Packing 40 hours into four days isn't necessarily an efficient way to work. Many people find that eight hours are tough enough; requiring them to stay for an extra two could cause morale and productivity to decrease. As for saving on the cost of commuting, it likely isn't true.
Forbes misses the point of the 4-day work week – Signal v. Noise
An experiment at Microsoft's Japan headquarters over the summer has given new proof to advocates of the shorter work week. If Microsoft is finding success with a 4-day workweek, could it work for other companies? And would it work for working parents? In , a company that does will and trust management in New Zealand conducted a similar experiment, paying employees for 40 hours while requiring them to work only
At Mobile Jazz 7 years old now and Bugfender years old now we always had the rule, that people could choose to work as much as they want and when they went. As long as the output and quality was there. Obviously to achieve high quality output you need to be there at certain times overlap with other team members and you need to do a certain amount of hours. The problems we had because of this are almost no-existent specific people that then ended up not staying very long in the company and the advantages by far outweigh the "loss of control". In the end myself as a business owner and managers have far less stress by trusting people and empowering them to do great work.