The traditional five-day workweek is increasingly being called into question as companies and employees seek better work-life balance and sustainable productivity. From Iceland (1) to the United Kingdom (2), and to Belgium (3), organizations have been testing a bold idea: a four-day workweek at full pay. Early results are promising: higher job satisfaction, reduced burnout, and, crucially, equal or even greater productivity. But is this model scalable, or does it remain for a selected few companies?

A global movement

This intrigue has spread across the globeIn New Zealand, financial services firm, Perpetual Guardian, implemented a four-day workweek as part of a trial, adjusting workloads and ensuring employees could complete their tasks in fewer hours without sacrificing quality. They saw a 38% drop in stress and a 78% improvement in work-life balance, prompting a permanent switch (4). Similarly, US companies like Kickstarter and Buffer experimented with reducing work hours, while maintaining clear expectations for performance and output. The focus was on ensuring that teams had adequate time for rest, personal activities, and family, fostering a healthier work environment. At Kickstarter, employee burnout decreased while job satisfaction and productivity rose, with teams reporting they could maintain output while enjoying greater personal time (5). Buffer noted similar outcomes —91% of its employees said they were happier and more productive, and the company maintained its performance metrics despite reducing work hours (6). In the Netherlands, the trade union FNV has prioritized the four-day week in collective bargaining negotiations, framing it as essential to employee well-being. Dutch software company AFAS introduced a four-day workweek in January 2025, closing its offices every Friday without reducing pay. The goal: personal development and a more focused, efficient work culture (7).

A future-proof strategy for a healthier, fairer workforce

Although work itself has evolved, the structure of the workweek remains largely unchanged since the 19th century. Many arguments against a shorter week—labor shortages, economic risks, operational challenges—mirror those made when moving from a six- to a five-day workweek. Those fears ultimately proved unfounded. Could history repeat itself?

Today, the data suggests the same could happen with the four-day model in the Netherlands. According to the Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research (TNO), stress-related illness accounts for over 11 million days of work, which equates to 48,246 full-time jobs lost each year (8). Fatigue increases the risk of workplace and commuting accidents (9). A shorter week could break this cycle.

Additionally, the shorter workweek may help older employees remain in the workforce longer. With the Dutch retirement age expected to surpass 70 in the coming decades (10), reducing psychological and physical strain becomes imperative. The so-called 80-90-100 model—where employees work 80% of their hours, receive 90% of their salary, and retain 100% of their pension accrual—is one existing approach to ease workload toward retirement. However, it is typically reserved for older workers and often subject to employer approval, limiting its reach. The four-day week, by contrast, could offer broader and more inclusive relief across the workforce (11).

Interestingly, the four-day workweek holds particular promise for advancing gender equality. In the Netherlands, women are disproportionately represented in part-time roles, often due to caregiving responsibilities. On average, Dutch women work 25 hours per week compared to 35 hours for men (12). Many women already informally adhere to a four-day schedule to maintain work-life balance. Formalizing this structure could reduce the stigma surrounding part-time work, support women's career progression, and increase their overall participation in the labor market. Global studies indicate that women benefit significantly from four-day workweek policies, experiencing reductions in burnout and stress (13). Furthermore, such policies encourage a more equitable distribution of unpaid care work, with men increasing their contributions to household and childcare responsibilities (14). Thus, the four-day workweek emerges not only as a labor innovation but also as a powerful lever for social progress.

Even in sectors with many part-time workers, smarter scheduling could make a four-day week feasible. CBS data shows that 11% of part-time employees would like to work more—on average 8.7 additional hours per week. Combined, this adds up to the equivalent of around 118,000 full-time jobs (15). By redesigning how work is organized, offering flexibility in how hours are distributed, and improving control over work schedules, it becomes possible to make full-time work (32 or 30 hours) more attractive and feasible for employees.

In an era of demographic shifts, rising stress, and persistent gender gaps, the four-day workweek offers not just a new schedule—but a new social contract for the future of work.

From five to four: work smarter not harder

Building on the idea that a four-day workweek can improve both well-being and productivity, it's clear that simply asking fewer people to do more isn't a sustainable solution. As labor shortages persist and productivity plateaus (16), the core issue is not necessarily the number of hours worked, but how work is structured. Too often, we extend hours without rethinking the underlying processes that contribute to inefficiency. The behavior of self-employed workers offers a valuable clue: those with more control over when and how they work report higher job satisfaction, better work-life balance, and, crucially, greater productivity—not from working longer, but from working smarter (17). This insight supports the shift to a four-day workweek. By giving employees more autonomy, companies can reduce burnout, boost engagement, and unlock performance gains. This aligns with a growing body of research linking employee happiness to better performance (18), and strengthens the case for rethinking traditional schedules as a way to enhance both well-being and productivity.

Importantly, this culture shift encourages proactive behavior. With less time, employees are more likely to question outdated processes and propose smarter solutions. Even part-time workers benefit when autonomy and efficiency are prioritized (19). In fact, shorter workweeks are associated with lower absenteeism, and better mental and physical health (19).

The challenges

Despite the momentum, hurdles remain. One major hurdle is uniform scheduling—giving everyone the same day off may seem fair, but it can disrupt continuity and reduce service quality, especially in client-facing roles. This approach can backfire, affecting customer satisfaction and responsiveness (20).

Sector-specific limitations also present a hurdle. In industries such as healthcare and retail, continuous service is often essential. A BBC report highlighted how companies within these sectors with a strong reliance on client interaction struggled to maintain their level of service across a shortened week without hiring extra staff or creating complex scheduling systems (21).

Another critical concern is work intensification. Compressing five days into four can actually increase stress, undercutting the well-being benefits that shorter workweeks aim to provide. Without a thoughtful redesign of how work is done, employees may face unrealistic expectations and less time to manage tasks effectively (22).

Moreover, even in sectors open to innovation, the transition requires careful planning to avoid unintentionally limiting time for collaboration, learning, and long-term projects (23). These aspects are vital for both employee development and organizational success.

These challenges suggest that while the four-day workweek holds promise, it’s success will depend on careful, sector-specific implementation rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.

Rethinking the four-day week in labor-intensive sectors

To make the four-day workweek feasible in labor-intensive sectors, the focus must shift from merely reducing hours to rethinking the way work is structured. Particularly in fields like healthcare, education, and social services, where productivity gains aren’t easily achieved through automation or scaling, the solution lies not in working faster, but in working smarter. Many workdays are filled with "pseudo-work"—unproductive emails, redundant meetings, and excessive admin. Research shows over two hours per day are lost to email alone (24). Additionally, nearly half (42%) of employees spend much of their day in Teams meetings and chats, with only one in three believing their presence is necessary (25). In labor-intensive sectors, reducing this low-value work is especially critical, because time savings must come from within—not by simply hiring more staff or expecting people to do more in less time. In sectors like healthcare, workflow redesign and smart scheduling are essential (19, 26).

Even public sector entities have shown that improvement is possible. An ICU in Nijmegen saved 30 minutes per nurse per day by simplifying documentation requirements (26). These kinds of interventions don’t just boost efficiency—they protect the quality of care and make work more purposeful. For sectors that can’t easily scale output or profit, redesigning processes and cutting waste may be the most sustainable path to a shorter, more humane workweek.

Looking ahead in the Netherlands and beyond

The four-day workweek is no longer just a theory—it’s a reality in some forward-thinking organizations. From Iceland to the UK and right here in the Netherlands, real-world experiments show that less can truly be more when work is reimagined with intention.

While challenges remain, the evidence consistently shows that reducing work hours — when paired with thoughtful restructuring — can lead to greater employee well-being, higher job satisfaction, and even improved productivity. Rather than simply compressing five days of work into four, successful models rethink how work is done, cutting inefficiencies and empowering employees with greater autonomy.

The Dutch government has signaled openness to the idea, but wisely emphasizes flexibility over mandates—offering support while acknowledging sector-specific challenges. This could involve providing guidelines, offering tax incentives, and encouraging public discussion. A phased, voluntary approach would allow businesses to experiment and tailor the model to their needs while giving the government the flexibility to adjust policies based on results.

So, is the four-day workweek feasible for the Netherlands? Yes—with a carefully thought out strategy, creativity, and cooperation, it is.

It’s time to rethink, redesign, and rebuild the way we work—for the better. Shall we?

This article is part of The Outside World, ftrprf’s very own research center.

For organizations, it’s pivotal to thoroughly understand what is happening in society. We help companies generate comprehensive insights into societal change and its potential effects on their strategy and operations, both negative and positive. With actionable societal insights, courageous plans, and a can-do mentality, we connect the outside world to your company's strategy. For these outside-world insights, we use a rigorous methodology that includes data processing, quantitative and qualitative analysis, and a thorough review process to ensure the accuracy and consistency of our findings.

For more information, please contact theoutsideworld@ftrprf.com.

At The Outside World, our very own research center, we keep a pulse on global developments through a societal lens. As part of this mission, we’ve created The Outside World Journal—a weekly digest delivering a curated selection of the most compelling news insights with our interpretation of why this matters and what the consequences for society might be. Read the journal here.

Sources: