The four-day week sounds tempting. But does it also work? Next year, 50 German companies will test the controversial model nationwide for six months for the first time. Co-initiator Carsten Meier reveals in an interview what potential and risks lie behind the project.
ntv.de: Last year, 61 British companies tested the four-day week. The result: Employees are more motivated, less stressed and days of absence are also reduced. Your company introduced the model back in 2016. What is your conclusion?
Carsten Meier: With twelve employees, our consulting company Intraprenör is one of the smaller companies. Our experiences are therefore not representative of the masses – but a subjective insight can also be informative. We have set Friday as a day off, so we only work as a team from Monday to Thursday. During this time we definitely get more project work done than we previously managed in five days.
Why is that?
Carsten Meier is managing partner and co-founder of Intraprenör, a boutique consulting company from Berlin.
An important factor is organization. Meetings must be structured more clearly, documentation better organized and tools used in a more disciplined manner. In the end, this helps you use your time wisely. We check the method every week and discuss the reasons together if we have not completed our workload. This also has a positive effect on our work as a consulting firm. Many of our customers are interested in further training in the area of New Work.
They want to bring the study to Germany. How come?
The study from Great Britain also caused a stir in Germany. Because: The results were almost entirely positive. We now want to repeat the project with German companies in order to be able to check where the model can also be usefully used here. Together with the non-profit organization 4 Day Week Global, which also carried out the project in Great Britain, we are relaunching the study.
Companies can apply until November 30th. What happens then?
From February 2024, participants can test the four-day week in their company over a period of six months. This doesn’t have to be the entire company, a single department, a team or a few branches can also take part. The model is also flexible. The companies themselves decide which day they should have off and how many hours their working hours should be reduced. They are then supported by experts both scientifically and in terms of content. At the end, we can evaluate in which industries the model works and what effects the concept has, for example on health, work-life balance or performance.
Which companies can participate?
This is where our study differs from other studies in which only companies with ten or more employees were admitted. Since many medium-sized and small companies in Germany have no more than ten employees, we have no limits. From hair salons to large corporations, everyone can take part.
Are there any other differences to the study from Great Britain?
There is a significant difference in the structure of the course: the four-day week was discussed in Germany in a very undifferentiated and emotional way. We want to counteract this with an advisory board. This unites both supporters and opponents and is intended to enable a differentiated, data-driven discourse.
Who sits on this advisory board?
Both the employers’ association and IG Metall as well as the Central Association of German Crafts are represented. We are also supported by a national science partner. In our case this is the University of Münster under the direction of Prof. Dr. Julia Backmann and her research team. They take care of the qualitative research. You conduct interviews and support exchanges with managers and employees. At this point, Ms. Backmann has the freedom to test more experimental research designs. This makes it possible to obtain data that has not yet been included in global studies. For example, by evaluating diary studies or personal physiological data.
Of course, such studies cost money. How is the project financed?
As co-initiators, we are not pursuing a financial goal with the project. Financing and coordination are in the hands of the NGO 4 Day Week Global. Each participating company pays a contribution based on company size. For fewer than ten employees, that’s 500 euros. If the number of employees is more than 1,000, the fee is just under 15,000 euros. These fees are primarily used to finance scientific work.
A four-day week sounds tempting. What are the specific advantages?
Test results so far show positive effects in both society and the economy. Employees rated their health and work-life balance significantly more positively after the studies were carried out. At the economic level, productivity could be maintained or even increased. Data also shows that companies’ sales have not worsened, but rather improved. In addition, positive changes in social areas were also recognized. For example, the introduction of a four-day week can influence the issue of equality. People who only work four days a week have more free time available, which they can spend with their family, for example. For example, care work can be distributed more fairly again.
Are there other areas?
The sustainability aspect also plays a major role. One less day of work may mean one less trip by car. Previous studies show a reduction in commuting time of around 36 minutes per week per person. That doesn’t sound like much at first, but as the number of participants increases, the effect naturally increases.
Is the model suitable for every industry?
In order to find out, you need as many participants as possible from different areas. In the end, it’s not feelings and opinions that count, but rather clear facts. Many companies have already tried out the model and have had good experiences. But how many companies can do that? What are the individual challenges that need to be overcome? Is it perhaps not the industry that is the key differentiator, but rather the management culture or structure of the company?
Your project tests the 100-80-100 model. So 100 percent of the performance with fewer hours and the same salary. What do you think of other models that, for example, split 40 hours over four days?
If companies can have good experiences with this, I think this is also a fair model. There are a variety of ways to make work more attractive and to better bind employees to the company. This also includes home office or the possibility of working from different locations.
You mentioned a number of advantages. Are there also downsides?
Critics repeatedly argue with economic effects. Our test will hardly provide any information about what they would look like. This needs to be looked at in the longer term. However, our study will shed light on another point of criticism, that of promoting stress. Current studies from abroad show a general decrease in stress. At the same time, I can understand that the idea of suddenly having less time for the same tasks could be stressful.
Germany is experiencing an enormous shortage of skilled workers. Wouldn’t a four-day week further exacerbate this problem?
Many companies fear a loss of work performance if the four-day week is introduced. But reality shows that there are numerous open positions that cannot be filled. So fewer team members are currently doing a higher amount of work. By introducing the four-day week, jobs could become more attractive and the number of applications could increase. Ultimately, more vacancies could be filled and the shortage of skilled workers could be counteracted. Our company is also experiencing success in this area: without actively promoting it, we receive around 150 applications per quarter.
Leah Nowak spoke to Carsten Meier