The four-day working week has been proposed as a solution to mitigate stress, fatigue, and burnout among employees, particularly in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Recent studies have shown that a four-day work week can improve employee well-being while maintaining, or even increasing, productivity. These promising results have led to calls for widespread reform of the way the working week is organised. Despite many organisations, and in some cases, entire countries, heeding these calls, decisions about reorganising the working week have generally neglected relevant psychological research. Instead, they simply compare the status quo (the five-day working week) to an arbitrary alternative (the four-day week) based on various outcomes such as employee well-being and productivity. This talk advocates for a different approach that uses psychological theory and evidence to guide decision-making about the amount of time people should spend work. Using this approach, it is concluded that the ideal amount of time spent at work is likely less than four days for most people, suggesting that four-day work week interventions may fall short of maximizing employee well-being and productivity. The discussion focuses on the potential for a more comprehensive theory of these psychological processes that can make more specific recommendations.

1) Demonstrate an understanding of the evidence for a four-day working week.

2) Critique the conventional “top-down” approach to organising the working week.

3) Demonstrate an understanding of the “bottom-up” approach to organising the work week.