THE RESULTS
ARE IN:THE UK’S
FOUR-DAYWEEK PILOT
February 2023

Authors
Autonomy team
Kyle Lewis
Will Stronge
Jack Kellam
Lukas Kikuchi

Quantitative research teamProf. Juliet Schor, Boston College
Prof. Wen Fan, Boston College
Prof. Orla Kelly, University College Dublin
Guolin Gu, Boston College

Qualitative research teamDr. David Frayne - University of Cambridge
Prof. Brendan Burchell - University of Cambridge
Niamh Bridson Hubbard - University of Cambridge
Jon White - University of Cambridge
Dr. Daiga Kamarāde - University of Salford
Francisca Mullens - Vrije Universiteit Brussel

Autonomy is an independent research organisation which creates datadriven tools and research for sustainable economic planning.
Published 2023 by © Autonomy
Autonomy Research Ltd
Cranbourne
Pilcot Road
Crookham Village
Hampshire
GU51 5RU
This project was partially supported by the Barry Amiel & Norman Melburn
Foundation. The qualitative strand of this project was partly supported byfunding from the University of Cambridge, as well as the UK Economic
and Social Research Council [grant number ES/S012532/1], as part of theDigital Futures at Work Research Centre (Digit). This support is gratefully
acknowledged.

CONTENTS
4
Executive summary

8

14

Introduction

Trial format

26
Company data findings

31

49

Employee data findings

Perspective from the shopfloor

66
Conclusions

EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report details the full findings of the world’s largest
four-day working week trial to date, comprising 61
companies and around 2,900 workers, that took place in the
UK from June to December 2022.

» The design of the trial involved two months ofpreparation for participants, with workshops, coaching,mentoring and peer support, drawing on the experienceof companies who had already moved to a shorter
working week, as well as leading research andconsultancy organisations.

» Companies, which included a range of organisations

from diverse sectors and sizes, were not required torigidly deploy one particular type of working time
reduction or four-day week, so long as pay wasmaintained at 100% and employees had a 'meaningful'reduction in work time.

» Resisting the idea that the four-day week must be ‘onesize-fits-all’, each company designed a policy tailored
to its particular industry, organisational challenges,
departmental structures and work culture. A range offour-day weeks were therefore developed, from classic‘Friday off’ models, to ‘staggered’, ‘decentralised’,‘annualised’, and ‘conditional’ structures.

5Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot» The report results draw on administrative data fromcompanies, survey data from employees, alongside a
range of interviews conducted over the pilot period,
providing measurement points at the beginning, middle
and end of the trial.

» The trial was a resounding success. Of the 61 companies
that participated, 56 are continuing with the fourday week (92%), with 18 confirming the policy is apermanent change.

» Some of the most extensive benefits of shorter working
hours were found in employees’ well-being. ‘Before andafter’ data shows that 39% of employees were lessstressed, and 71% had reduced levels of burnout at
the end of the trial. Likewise, levels of anxiety, fatigue
and sleep issues decreased, while mental and physicalhealth both improved.

» Measures of work-life balance also improved across thetrial period. Employees also found it easier to balance
their work with both family and social commitments –for 54%, it was easier to balance work with householdjobs – and employees were also more satisfied with
their household finances, relationships and how theirtime was being managed.

» 60% of employees found an increased ability to

combine paid work with care responsibilities, and 62%
reported it easier to combine work with social life.

6

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot» However, other key business metrics also showedsigns of positive effects from shorter working hours.
Companies’ revenue, for instance, stayed broadly
the same over the trial period, rising by 1.4% on
average, weighted by company size, across respondent
organisations. When compared to a similar period
from previous years, organisations reported revenue
increases of 35% on average - which indicates healthy
growth during this period of working time reduction.

» The number of staff leaving participating companies

decreased significantly, dropping by 57% over the trial
period.

» For many, the positive effects of a four-day week

were worth more than their weight in money. 15% of
employees said that no amount of money would inducethem to accept a five-day schedule over the four-day
week to which they were now accustomed.

7

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

INTRODUCTION

8

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

INTRODUCTIONRESEARCH AND PRACTICE
Over the past five years, the four-day week has seen an incredible journey fromthe fringes to the mainstream, emerging as one of the most exciting workplacepolicies to be adopted by organisations worldwide. The central idea, shortening
working hours for no loss in pay, might once have clashed with the received
wisdom of dominant burnout culture – that working more = working better –but following the success of pilot schemes around the world, overwhelmingly
positive research, and societal shifts driven by Covid, working time reduction
appears an increasingly ‘common sense’ approach to the world of work.
Frustrated by poor work-life balance, and more accustomed to the flexible
working patterns brought about by the pandemic, for many the four-day week
has only become a more popular and enticing prospect.1
Just as significant a development, however, has been the four-day week’s shift
from a policy considered desirable, to one that appears eminently achievabletoo. As supportive voices, research programmes and on-the-ground practitioners
have expanded, a future in which we might all work less has begun to lookincreasingly credible. A number of interlinking factors are disarming scepticism
and moving the shorter working week from an attractive, if abstract, ideal, to aplausible, realisable alternative across the economy.

1 	
Suvation (2022) ‘Poll: Voters in ‘red wall’ seats back four day working week’ Available at:https://www.survation.com/poll-voters-in-red-wall-seats-back-four-day-working-week/9Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilotFirst, recent years have seen the research base on working time reduction
expand greatly. In the UK alone, think tanks such as the New Economics
Foundation, Women’s Budget Group and the Institute for Public Policy Research
have all produced research projects and policy briefings on the benefits andfeasibility of shorter hours policies.2 Henley Business School, meanwhile, havealso written a number of useful business-focused papers on productivity andassociated metrics.3 Autonomy, specialists on the topic, have supported regional
governments in devising four-day week policy;4 been commissioned by Wales’
Future Generations Commissioner to analyse the policy’s potential social andeconomic impacts;5 and published the results from Iceland’s public sector shorter
hours trial.6 The economic desirability and feasibility of the four-day week –from the affordability of ‘overnight’ transitions,7 to funding packages for public
sector implementation and beyond8 – now stands on a much surer footing.
Second, a growth in the number of public voices backing shorter working hours
has helped to breed confidence and visibility. From the press and social media
coverage garnered by groups such as the 4 Day Week Campaign – allowing
the policy’s success stories to speak out – to the international cooperation
facilitated by initiatives such as the European Work-Time Network andburgeoning national campaign groups – spreading from Wales to Ireland, theUSA and Germany – a broad ‘movement’ has cohered to lend the four-day weeksignificant momentum. Trade unions such as the Communication Workers Union(CWU) and PCS Scotland have begun shorter hours campaigns – in certain
cases successfully negotiating shorter hours for their members – while politiciansfrom across the UK’s party system have backed the policy in debating chambers
nationwide.

2 	
NEF (2020) ‘Making up for lost time’. Available at: https://neweconomics.org/2020/06/makingup-for-lost-time; WBG (2022) ‘A shorter working week could help to close the gender pay gap’. Available
at: https://wbg.org.uk/media/shorter-working-week-feminist-green-new-deal/; IPPR (2021) ‘Changing
times: The future of working time in Scotland’. Available at: https://www.ippr.org/research/publications/changing-times
3 	Henley Business School (2022) ‘The four-day week: The pandemic and the evolution of flexible
working’. Available at: https://www.henley.ac.uk/news/2022/the-pandemic-has-made-a-four-day-workingweek-more-attractive-to-workers-and-businesses-study-finds
4 	Autonomy (2019) ‘The Future of Work and Employment Policies in the Comunitat Valenciana’.
Available at: https://autonomy.work/portfolio/valencia/
5 	Autonomy (2022) ‘A Future Fit for Wales: a Shorter Working Week for All’. Available at: https://autonomy.work/portfolio/a-future-fit-for-wales-a-sww-for-all/
6 	Autonomy (2021) ‘Going Public: Iceland’s Journey to a Shorter Working Week’. Available at:https://autonomy.work/portfolio/icelandsww/
7 	
Autonomy (2020) ‘The Day After Tomorrow: stress tests, affordability and the roadmap to thefour-day week’. Available at: https://autonomy.work/portfolio/dat/
8 	Autonomy (2020) ‘Public Sector as Pioneer: shorter working weeks as the new gold standard’.
Available at: https://autonomy.work/portfolio/publicsectorpioneer/10Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

A Ten Minute Rule bill legislating for a four-day week was recently discussed in
the House of Commons,9 the Welsh Senedd’s Petitions Committee has backed
a public sector trial,10 while the Scottish Government has directly committed tosupport shorter hours pilot schemes in the country.11 Alongside further ambitious
working time reduction experimentation around Europe, one is never too far
from hearing a voice speaking up for the benefits of a shorter working week.12
Finally, the last few years have been most notable for the expansion of private
and third sector trials, which have helped to cement the ‘business case’ forshorter working hours. Following noteworthy pilots carried out by Microsoft inJapan and Unilever in New Zealand,13 as well as prominent public sector trials
in Iceland, more and more organisations have sought to test out a shorter
working week – whether individually, or as part of co-ordinated, supported
trials. In late 2022, 4 Day Week Global published the results from a large, coordinated 6-month pilot with 33 participating companies across the US and
Ireland, and found encouraging results across all of the metrics tracked.14
This year, the government of Valencia, Spain has also begun recruiting for aregion-wide pilot of shorter hours in the private sector – stemming from work
completed with Autonomy in 2019-20.15 Meanwhile, in the UK, larger employers
such as Awin and Atom Bank have successfully trialled and implemented a fourday week, acting as the more prominent members of a trend that saw the UK 4
Day Week Campaign accredit over 115 official four-day week employers by early2023.16

9 	
Peter Dowd MP (2022) ‘A four-day week is already changing British lives: my new bill could
make it open to all’. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/
oct/17/four-day-week-british-new-bill-workers-businesses
10
Senedd Cymru (2023) ‘Committee calls for a four-day working week pilot in Wales’. Available at:https://senedd.wales/senedd-now/news/petition-committee-calls-for-four-day-working-week-pilot-in-wales/
11
Xander Richards (2021) ‘Nicola Sturgeon says SNP will fund four-day working week pilot in
Scotland’. The National. Available at: https://www.thenational.scot/news/19236021.nicola-sturgeon-sayssnp-will-fund-four-day-working-week-pilot-scotland/
12
See Ashifa Kassam (2021) ‘Spain to launch trial of four-day working week’ The Guardian.
Available at: ​​https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/15/spain-to-launch-trial-of-four-day-workingweek ; James Badcock (2022) ‘Four-day week trial set for Portugal after ruling Left-wing party wins
snap election’, The Telegraph. Available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/01/31/portugalcould-bring-four-day-week-ruling-socialist-party-wins/
13
Kari Paul (2019) ‘Microsoft Japan tested a four-day work week and productivity jumped by
40%’, The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/nov/04/microsoftjapan-four-day-work-week-productivity; Ainsley Thomson (2022) ‘Unilever Expands Four-Day Work
Week Pilot to Australia After NZ Pilot’, Bloomberg. Available at: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/
articles/2022-11-01/unilever-expands-four-day-work-week-to-australia-after-nz-pilot
14
4 Day Week Global (2022) ‘Assessing global trials of reduced work time with no reduction inpay’. Available at: https://www.4dayweek.com/us-ireland-results
15
C. Aparicio (2022) ‘València probará en abril la jornada laboral de cuatro días a lasemana’, La Razón. Available at: https://www.larazon.es/comunidad-valenciana/valencia/20220914/
djt6zdfdlvdd7hslgnpppi7q5q.html
16
Jasper Jolly (2022) ‘A hundred UK companies sign up for four-day week with no loss in pay’, The
Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/nov/27/a-hundred-uk-companiessign-up-for-four-day-week-with-no-loss-of-pay

11Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

The present study looks to add to all three of these trends. It is a comprehensive
assessment of the world’s largest co-ordinated four-day week trial to date,involving over 60 companies and approximately 2,900 employees, organised
by a range of prominent actors and advocates, and delves into the details of
impact and implementation. Drawing on similar methods to the recent 4 Day
Week Global international trial – supplemented by staff interviews that givean even richer sense of the four-day week experience – the analysis contained
herein leaves us with stronger evidence than ever about how best to makeshorter working hours a reality. Endowed with a growing dataset of four-day
week organisations, from increasingly diverse sectors and sizes, it provides
advocates of working time reduction with a wealth of experience to confidently
answer questions of not only ‘why?’, but also ‘how?’
The following pages set out findings from the trial, and are the joint productof the research teams at Boston College, the University of Cambridge andAutonomy – with the section below detailing the trial’s collaborative team in
greater detail.
First, the report sets out the methodologies and forms of data collection
employed in the course of the trial research, introduces key components ofthe four-day week trial’s design, and offers a breakdown of the participatingorganisations. We then turn to an analysis of data collected over the courseof the trial: first, looking at the key metrics in company performance, such as
revenue and staff turnover, before turning to employee-focused data, including
health, well-being and work-life balance.
Finally – and as an important addition to much of the previous four-day week
trial research – we offer a range of ‘perspectives from the shopfloor’, drawing
on extensive interview data from trial participants, staff and managers alike.
We include focused case studies that highlight standout examples of differing
practice across the four-day week companies, showing how participants, in theirown words, tackled challenges, perceived the impacts, and reflected on the trial
experience.

12

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

THE COLLABORATIVE TEAM
The coordination of the world’s largest, multi-organisation four-day week
trial drew on the collaboration of a number of actors, each offering their own
expertise and experience.
Since 2018, Autonomy – a research organisation focused on the future of work
– has been working with firms, charities and public organisations to deliverworking time reduction pilots, evaluating performance and staff experiencefrom end to end. Alongside their consultancy practice, Autonomy have also
published wide-ranging research into shorter working hours: from businessaffordability, to public sector implementation and successful pilot schemes in
Iceland.
4 Day Week Global is a not-for-profit community established by Andrew
Barnes and Charlotte Lockhart to provide a platform for like-minded peopleinterested in supporting the idea of the four-day week as a part of the futureof work. Formed following the successful deployment of a four-day week within
their firm Perpetual Guardian, they have overseen pilots in North America,
Ireland, Australasia and following this study - alongside Autonomy and the 4
Day Week Campaign - the UK also. They have plans for similar initiatives inother parts of the globe in this ever-expanding space, with new pilots in Europe,
South Africa, Australasia and Brazil launching this year. In 2023 they formeda partnership with Alex Soojung-Kim Pang to further develop their global
consultancy and broaden their research.
The UK’s 4 Day Week Campaign is arguably the most active and successfulof its kind. In the last two years alone, they have accredited more than 115 UK
companies and organisations as four-day week employers, worked with South
Cambridgeshire District Council on the first ever Local Authority pilot, launcheda petition backing the policy signed by over 130,000 people, and regularly filled
the airwaves with stories about the benefits of a four-day week.
Prof. Juliet Schor is based at Boston College and has been researching andwriting on the topic of shorter hours and overwork for decades, where her
Overworked American (1991) remains a landmark text. More recently, her
2022 TED talk setting out the case for a four-day week has been viewed over2 million times. Her team at Boston college were responsible for collecting,processing and helping analyse the company and employee survey data.
Dr. David Frayne and Prof. Brendan Burchell - who led the trial’s qualitative
research team - are based at the University of Cambridge and both offer
extensive academic expertise on issues of working time. Prof. Burchell has
published widely on work intensification and the effects of labour market
experiences on psychological well-being, while Dr. Frayne has worked for overten years developing theoretical and policy perspectives on the future of work
and welfare. David and Brendan oversaw the interviews for the study.

13

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

TRIAL
FORMAT

14

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

TRIAL
FORMATAt the start of 2022, the 4 Day Week Campaign, 4 Day Week Global andAutonomy began recruiting companies and non-profit organisations toparticipate in a six-month trial.
The design of the trial involved two months of preparation, with workshops,
coaching, mentoring and peer support, drawing on the expertise of those
who had already implemented four-day weeks in their own companies
and individuals who had helped companies shift to shorter working hours.
Participating organisations were asked to provide a small donation to help
defray the costs of running the trials. In addition to support with preparation,
the trials offered research support, conducted by independent academic
researchers at Boston College, University of Cambridge and Autonomy.

DATA GATHERED
The research looked at data from two parties: administrative data fromcompanies and survey data from employees.17 For both types of data, we
employed a pre- and post- methodology. In the pre-trial phase, companies
completed an 'onboarding' survey with basic details about themselves, andprovided six months of data to be used as a comparison with corresponding
data collected during the six-month trial. Once the trial began, companies
provided monthly data on a small set of common metrics (revenue, absenteeism,
resignations, and new hires) plus two optional custom metrics of their choice.
The absence of productivity and other performance metrics in the common
set was because the organisations in the trial vary considerably in what kindsof data they collect in the normal course of business operation. Of the 61
organisations who participated in the trial, between 44-51 provided survey
data for the performance analysis in this report. The research team has also
contacted all 61 organisations to confirm their continuation, or otherwise, of the
four-day week policy.

17
All research protocols were approved by the relevant ethics boards at each university andorganisation.

15

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

16

The employee surveys were completed at three points: immediately before thetrial began (baseline), mid-way through the trial (midpoint) and at the close of
the trial (endpoint).
The survey was administered through Qualtrix, and the research team at Boston
College contacted employees directly via email using address lists supplied by
the participating organisations. This separation of survey administration fromthe employer is an important part of the research methodology: by assuring
employees that their answers are confidential and will be unavailable to theiremployers, we are better able to collect honest and accurate information. Only
companies with enough employees to ensure the confidentiality of answers arereceiving the survey results, and then, only in aggregated form.
The employee surveys at baseline and endpoint include questions covering work
experience, well-being, family and personal life. The mid-point survey is much
shorter and includes a small set of well-being questions, plus a time-diary whichasks respondents how they spent their most recent day off. Where available,
we used existing, academically-validated scales to measure well-being, work
situation, and other outcomes. In other cases, we created our own questions.
For the time diary we drew from the 25 harmonised activity codes laid out in theMultinational Time Use Study (MTUS) user guide. We adapted these activities
slightly to suit our research needs, for example, splitting the 'paid work' activity
into 'main paid work' and 'other paid work' and adding an activity for 'transit'
between other activities.

INTERVIEW DATA
Employee interviews were carried out by the research team at the Universityof Cambridge, in order to complement and provide context to the survey data.
Before the pilot began in June 2022, researchers created a selective sample that
included a spread of industries. A key contact in each of the selected companies
was then approached with an invitation to sign up to the interview strand of thepilot research. The companies that consented took part in one or more of thefollowing engagements, depending on their availability.

» Pre-pilot interview with a senior staff member (usually the CEO).
» Mid-pilot interviews with a selection of individual staff members.
» End-of-pilot interview with a senior staff member (usually the CEO).
18

19

18
In cases where a large number of staff from a particular company volunteered for an interview,the researchers prioritised including a mixture of roles and seniority levels.
19
Senior staff were invited to an endpoint interview if they had already taken part in a pre-pilot
interview.

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy

17

58 interviews were conducted over the pilot period, lasting approximately one
hour each. These covered a spread of 23 companies, including representationfrom manufacturing, hospitality, the creative industries, the third sector, finance,
education, marketing and professional care.
The UK pilot was the largest-scale pilot of its kind to include interview researchand can be seen as providing a map of topics that future pilots may wish toinvestigate further. With this in mind, the interviewers took a semi-structured
approach, combining a standard set of questions with opportunities forinterviewees to introduce their own topics and provide extended responses. Theinterview findings can be found in the ‘Perspectives from the shopfloor’ chapter.

PARTICIPANTS
ORGANISATIONSOf the 61 companies that took part, the largest group derives from themarketing/advertising sector, with eight firms (18%).20 The second largest
subset is professional services with seven (16%), with charities/nonprofits being
the third largest group (11%). Beyond that the companies are distributed
over a range of industries, including healthcare, arts & entertainment, retail,construction and manufacturing.
8

Number of companies

7

18%
16%

6
5
4

11%
9%

9%

9%

9%
7%

3

7%
4%

2

2%

1
0

e
s
t
ng
ent
nce
ices
sing
sing
ring
oms
roﬁ
anc
vice
eeri
erti
sura
sist
serv
Ser
Hou
ainm
elec
actu
on-p
ngin
l as
Adv
nal
&T
n/
d In
tert
nuf
nal
/N
/
E
a
o
o
n
n
i
a
o
i
i
T
g
i
y
c
t
a
t
I
E
s
t
n
M
c
o
i
/
ri
ca
in,
fes
nce
or s
stru
rket
Cha
Edu
Arts
Pro
Adm
Ma
Fina
are
Con
lthc
a
e
H

Number of companies

Figure 1: Participating companies by industry
20
Initially, 70 companies had signed up to take part in the pilot – however, 9 of these did
not begin the trial. A number of reasons were given for this. Most common was a sense that theorganisation was not sufficiently prepared, and therefore needed to postpone the start date. Other
reasons include difficulties measuring performance in some departments, struggles with the 'great
resignation', and two companies who decided shorter working hours were not right for them.

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy18

One characteristic which stands out among the cohort is the large numberof small companies. While the size distribution is wide – with one company ofaround 1,000 staff – 66% have 25 or fewer employees. 22% of firms have 50 ormore staff.
37%
17

Number of companies

15

29%

12
10
7

12%

5

10%

12%

2
0

1-10

11-25

26-50

51-100101+

Size (number of employees)

Figure 2: Size distribution of participating companies by number of employees

EMPLOYEES
Around 2,900 staff took part in the pilot overall. At baseline, 1967 out of the2548 employees who received the survey went on to complete it, resulting in a
response rate of 77%. The response rate is somewhat lower at midpoint (67%)
and endpoint (58%), which is typical in panel surveys.
Of those who completed the baseline survey, 70% participated in the endpoint
survey as well, making it possible for us to track changes from before to after
the trial. All findings reported below rely on this sample.
Regarding cohort demographics, a majority of the sample’s gender composition
is female, with 62% self-identifying as women, 37% as men, and 1% as the‘Other’ category.

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy

19

Other
1%

Male
37%

62%
FemaleFigure 3: Gender composition of participating employees

Almost nine-in-ten (88.8%) lived in the UK when surveyed, followed by someliving in Australia (3.7%), Canada (3.5%), US (2.0%) or Other (2.1%).
Most employees in the sample were White (90%); 4% Asian/Asian British; 2%Black, Black British, Caribbean or African; 3% ‘Mixed or multiple ethnic groups’
and 2% identify as ‘Other ethnic group’.
1000

90%

Number of employees

800

600

400

200
4%
0

ite

Wh

i

Brit

hite

rW
sh o

her

Ot

sian

Asia

A
n or

3%

itish

Br

ed
Mix

ul

or m

ck,

Bla

ups

ro

ic g

thn

ee
tipl

2%

ish,

Bla

rit
ck B

i

Car

Race

Figure 4: Racial composition of participating employees (sample)

, or

ean
bbr

2%

ican

Afr

O

p
rou

ic g

thn

re
the

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Age is fairly evenly distributed across the cohort. Just over one third (37%) of
respondents are below age 35; 30% are between 35 and 44, and around 33%
are 45 years of age or above.
68% of the sample have at least an undergraduate degree. 18% of the sample
are executives and managers and 49% are professionals of one kind or another,with the most commonly held occupations being ‘business and administration
professionals’ (16%) and ‘legal, social and cultural professionals’ (15%).
70% of employees in our sample are either married or living with a cohabitation
partner, and about half (52%) have at least one child.

WHAT KIND OF FOUR-DAY WEEK?
To participate in the pilot, companies were not required to rigidly deploy
one particular type of working time reduction or four-day week. They wereable to join so long as they maintained pay at 100% and gave employees a'meaningful' reduction in work time. Resisting the idea that a four-day week
policy must be ‘one-size-fits-all’, each company designed a policy tailored to its
particular industry, organisational challenges, departmental structures and work
culture.
We found the following types of four-day week being piloted.21

Fifth daystoppage

The company shuts down operations for one
additional day per week. This was a popular
choice in companies where staff collaboration ismore important than five-day coverage.
Example: A video game studio opted for a
fifth day stoppage, because it was importantfor staff to be present at the same time
for collaboration. After polling staff on
preferences, the studio decided they would
suspend work for everybody on Fridays.

21
There was sometimes overlap between these models. For example, a company could havean ‘annualised’ four-day week, on a ‘staggered’ pattern, or have a ‘decentralised’ model, involving a‘conditional’ element.

20

Autonomy

Staggered

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Staff take alternating days off: For example,
the staff may be divided into two teams, with
one team taking Mondays off, and the othertaking Fridays off. This was a popular choice
in companies where five-day coverage wasimportant.
Example: A digital marketing agency
organised its staggered days off using a‘buddy’ system. Staff members pair up with apartner who has similar knowledge and skills.
The partners alternate their day off, in order toensure a five-day coverage of key functions.

Decentralised

Different departments operate on different
work patterns, possibly resulting in a mixtureof the two models above. This may also
incorporate other arrangements, such as somestaff working a four-day equivalent over five
shorter working days. A decentralised model
was chosen in companies whose departments
had highly contrasting functions andchallenges.
Example: A housing association included
departments specialising in everything fromadministration, to community outreach, andbuilding repairs. Each department was asked
to take the lead in devising a four-day weekmodel fit for its own purposes.

Annualised

Staff work a 32 hour average working week,
calculated on the scale of a year.
Example: A restaurant whose business is highly
seasonal opted to pilot an annualised four-day
week, with longer opening times in summer
compensated by shorter opening times in
winter.

21

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy

Conditional

22

Staff entitlement to the four-day week istied to ongoing performance monitoring.
Seniors in the company may decide to
temporarily suspend the four-day week forcertain departments or individuals, if there isevidence that staff are failing to meet agreed
performance targets. This may lead to unevensituations where some staff/departments arecontinuing to work five days over periods oftime.
Example: A company adopting a decentralisedmodel required each department to agree on
a set of KPIs that would need to be met, inorder to retain a four-day week. This meantthat some departments and individuals entered
the pilot later than others, and some weresuspended from the four-day week during the 6month pilot period.

Of the 44 companies that responded, 32 switched to a four-day week for all
employees. In 12 companies, a subset of employees (usually part-time workers)
did not change their working hours. 14 of the companies (32%) gave everyone
Fridays off, while 11 of them (25%) did not have a common day off among staff.
A few companies chose other options, with Mondays or Wednesdays off or adifferent day off each week. 7% of respondent firms had staff who changed
their days off from week to week.

14

32%

Number of companies

12

25%

25%

10
8
6
9%

4

7%

2
0

2%

y

y

a
Frid

M

ay
ond

rida
or F

y or

Wed

da
nes

y

a
Frid

y oﬀ

e da

am
ot s

N

nge

Cha

Type of four-day week

Figure 5: Types of ‘four-day week’ chosen by participating companies

eek
mw

eek
to w

fro

tion

bina

om
Ac

of

alf

dh

an
full

s

day

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

In the context of a short term pilot study, it is undoubtedly good practice formanagers to brief their staff to understand that the four-day week might besubject to certain contingencies, as the company adapts to new arrangements.
In some companies, staff were also permitted to reclaim any hours worked asa result of emergencies and contingencies arising on their day off. Within thiscontext, our interviews uncovered different norms and regulations in place when
it came to protecting the fifth day as a non-working day. These can be roughly
grouped into three tiers.

HIGHLY PROTECTED
In companies where the four-day week was highly protected, the fifth day
had a similar status to a Saturday or Sunday, meaning that company
seniors made a special effort to ensure working would never be necessary.
Example: A consulting firm implementing a fifth day stoppage hired alegal expert to produce a temporary amendment to its staff contracts forthe pilot, guaranteeing a four-day week. The firm also ‘rehearsed’ taking
Fridays off during the build-up to the pilot, to make sure they could stick to
it when the time came.

WEAKLY PROTECTED
In a minority of companies we interviewed, the fifth day was weakly
protected, either because of the potential for staff to be called into work,for their scheduled day off to be altered at short notice, or because theywork within a more conditional four-day week model (described above).
Example: Staff in the small number of conditional companies we interviewed
were less able to make plans for their day off. A lack of predictability mightmean being unable to use the day for a regular leisure appointment, leaving
town, or earning a second, part-time income.

23

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

PROTECTED
In companies where the four-day week was protected, staff expected totake their day off. However, managers did require staff – through formal
or informal agreements – to pledge to be available for work in certain
exceptional situations.
Example: The manager of a small-scale manufacturer using a staggeredmodel recognised that the business could be vulnerable in an emergency,
on days with lower staff coverage. In the middle of the pilot, there was apower outage that stopped production. The four-day week was suspended
during that week, in order to make up for lost production time. The staff
interviewed all said they felt a sense of common purpose at work andaccepted this as a fair part of the company’s four-day week policy.

WEAKLY PROTECTED
In a minority of companies we interviewed, the fifth day was weakly
protected, either because of the potential for staff to be called into work,for their scheduled day off to be altered at short notice, or because theywork within a more conditional four-day week model (described above).
Example: Staff in the small number of conditional companies weinterviewed were less able to make plans for their day off. A lack ofpredictability might mean being unable to use the day for a regular leisureappointment, leaving town, or doing freelance work.

24

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

TERMS AND CONDITIONS
As pioneers of the four-day week, pilot companies were also responsible for
deciding how the policy ought to interact with certain terms and conditions.
A significant question concerned how the four-day week ought to impact annual
leave policy. Whereas some companies decided to keep annual leave allowances
the same, others implemented a pro rata reduction in bookable leave days
alongside their four-day week. It should be noted that in the cases of a pro rata
reduction in annual leave, staff still benefited from significantly more days off
than they would have had on a five-day week model.
A similar question arose in relation to bank holidays. Once again, whereas someof the companies we interviewed made sure staff would enjoy bank holidays inaddition to the usual day off associated with a four-day week, other companies
decided that a bank holiday would ‘count’ as the day off for that particularweek.
Finally, pilot companies also grappled with the question of what to do for theirpart-time workers. Those we interviewed chose one of a number of approaches.

» Part-time staff received a pro rata working-time reduction.
» Part-time staff continued on their existing hours, and received a pro rata
pay rise, to match the new pay rate of their full-time (four-day week)
colleagues.

» Part-time staff were permitted to choose between the two options above.
» Part-time staff received a small increase in bookable annual leave.
» Part-time staff were excluded from/opted-out of the pilot.
The most novel solution for part-time workers was observed in a non-profit
organisation. Senior members of the organisation decided that part-timeworkers would receive a pro rata reduction in working hours. However, after
speaking with a union representative, they were concerned this would create
an inequity among staff, if the reduction for part-timers did not result in an
increase in full non-working days (as it did for their full-time colleagues). It was
decided that the working time reduction for part-time staff would be calculatedon the scale of a month, as opposed to a week, enabling part-time staff to havea regular additional full day off.

25

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

COMPANYDATAFINDINGS

26

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy

27

COMPANY DATAFINDINGS

For the organisations, the trial has been a success. Of the 61 companies
that participated, 56 report that they are continuing with the four-day week
immediately following the pilot. 18 of these continuing companies have said thatthe policy is permanent.22
Of the 5 who are not continuing, 2 have opted to extend their trials of shorter
working hours (one started late and is still in the pilot phase and the other isexperimenting with a four-and-a-half day week). 3 others have paused the fourday week in their organisation for the time being.
On a scale of 0-10 where 0 is very negative and 10 is very positive, the cohort
rated their overall experience of the trial as 8.3 on average. The vast majority ofcompanies were also satisfied that business performance and productivity weremaintained. When asked about how their overall company performance wasaffected by the trial, the average score was 7.5. In response to a question about
how their company’s productivity has been affected by the trial, the averagescore was 7.5.
92%

Number of companies

50

40

30

30%

20

10

0

Continuing with thefour-day week

Four-day week policy
is permanent

5%

3%PausedStill in pilot phase of
one kind or anotherPlans following trial period

Figure 6: Participating companies were asked what their plans were subsequent to the trial.
22

These findings were confirmed by email and telephone in the case of each company.

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

COMPANY PERFORMANCE
Given how varied the pilot companies are in their size, industry, and datacollection practices, we confined the data collection to a small set of metrics
that it was expected every company would be able to provide. These wererevenue, the number of employees in the company, resignations, new hires, andsick and personal days taken.
We also asked about energy usage but because many companies were unable
to provide such data, this has not been included. Since not all companies
provided data on all of the metrics, there is a slight variation in the number ofcompanies included in our calculations across metrics.
We were also mindful that some of the data we were collecting may haveseasonal variation, over the six months of the trial. Before the trial started,
we therefore asked for data from the same six month period a year earlier –which was in most cases June to December 2021, but in others was a different,
comparable period. In the table below, we call this the 'comparison' period.
For a number of the metrics we compare trial performance to the comparison
period.
Of course, as is the case with other findings in the report, companies remained
susceptible to a range of exogenous factors during the trial period – includingchanges in the economic climate – which can also take effect on such metrics.
As such, we should be attentive first and foremost to broad tendencies.
The first metric is revenue, perhaps the most global measure of performance.
We compared revenue at the end of the trial to the beginning of the trial
for the 23 companies who supplied sufficient data across the six months. Fora separate 24 organisations, we compared revenue from a prior comparison
period to that of the trial period.
We weighted the data by company size, so that the very small (or big)companies would not have too much (or too little) impact on the results.

28

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

29

REVENUEThe first revenue measure is the simple change in revenue from the beginningto the end of the trial. As a headline figure, this stayed broadly the same, risingby 1.4% on average, weighted by company size, across those 23 organisations
who gave the data.
We then compared the change in revenue from a comparable, prior six month
period to the trial period. We did this by calculating the average revenue
during the comparison period, the average revenue during the trial period, andthe percentage change between the two periods for each company. We thencalculated a size weighted average percentage change across the 24 companies
that supplied sufficient data. Here we see a much larger increase of 35% on
average.
Across the period the number of employees in the participating companies
stayed effectively the same, dipping by just 1.3% (weighted average) in the 34
organisations that supplied this data.

COMPANY METRICS: REVENUE AND NUMBER OFEMPLOYEESMetricNumber ofcompanies

Weighted change%

Revenue: % change
from start of trial to
endpoint

23

1.4

Revenue: % change
from comparison totrial period

24

34.5

No. employees: %change from start oftrial to endpoint

34

-1.3

Table 1: Change in key company metrics over trial period for those companies that provided this data

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

RESIGNATIONS, NEW HIRES AND ABSENCES
We also asked about a number of other trends that we expected might beaffected by the four-day week schedule. The first was resignations. The trial
took place during a period popularly known as the 'Great Resignation,' where
workers have been quitting their jobs at record rates.
However, in the four-day week companies, there was a substantial decline in
the likelihood that an employee would quit between the comparison period andduring the trial. Measured as the number of resignations per 100 employees,
we found a decline from 2 to 0.8 from the comparison to the trial period(57%). This suggests that the four-day week helped reduce exits from theseorganisations.
We also found a downtick in new hiring, from 3.4 per hundred employees to 2.4(a 37%). There was a change in absenteeism, measured as sick and personaldays per employee per month. Those fell from a reported 2.0 in the comparison
period to just 0.7 during the trial (a 65% reduction). In part because of
the small numbers in the sample, and in part because of labour market
contingencies, we are unable to say that these three trends are statisticallysignificant.

30

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

EMPLOYEEDATAFINDINGS

31

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

EMPLOYEE DATAFINDINGSWORKING TIME REDUCTIONS
We turn now to the data we collected from employees. When we report a‘change’, this means the difference between the baseline and endpoint values isstatistically significant.
Our findings show that the trial changed the workplace in important ways. As
expected, work time declined, from 38 hours per week on average to 34. While
this isn’t a full reduction to 32 hours, this can be attributed to a few companies
executing less than an 8 hour reduction (and starting from above 40 hours on
average). In other organisations, people were still doing some work on the dayoff. Nevertheless, there was a significant average reduction of a full 4 hours ofwork across the week.
When measured by the number of people whose work time went down (or up),
we find that 71% of the sample reported a decline in working hours, while 15%
were working more and 13% experienced no change. Similarly, the average
number of days worked went from 4.86 to 4.52 (slicing off roughly a thirdof a day). It appears that many employees experienced four-day weeks, but
occasionally carried out modest amounts of work on the fifth day.23
In other positive findings, the frequency of overtime also fell, both on averageand in terms of individual experiences, with over a third (34%) of employees
reporting reductions in overtime. However, 49% reported no change in theirovertime hours. It is also notable that the amount of days spent remote working
declined slightly over the trial, from an average of 2.88 days per week to 2.66
(a 34% reduction), even though, at the end of the trial, more people reported
working remotely at least some of the time (with 9% increasing their level ofremote working, compared to 6% decreasing).

23This was corroborated by the interview component of the research. See ‘Perspectives from the
shopfloor’ chapter.

32

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy

33

Reported increase
15%
Reported no change

13%

71%
Reported decrease

Figure 7: Change in participating employees’ working time between baseline and endpoint surveys.
Employees were asked to report how many hours they worked a week.

Less than one day off per week
11%

89%
One day off per week
Figure 8: Participating employees were asked what their working time arrangement was during thetrial period.

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Reported increase
9%34

Reported decrease
6%85%
Reported no change

Figure 9: Change in participating employees’ remote working patterns between baseline and endpoint
surveys. Employees were asked to report their remote working status on a 3 point scale(from ‘never’ to ‘fully’ remote).

Reported increase
17%

34%

Reported decrease49%
Reported no change

Figure 10: Change in participating employees’ overtime between baseline and endpoint surveys.
Employees were asked to report how often they worked overtime on a 4 point scale (‘never’ to ‘daily’).

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot“You have no idea
what this will mean
to my family - theamount of money
we will be able tosave on childcare”(Staff member, non-profit organisation)

35

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

HEALTH & WELL-BEING
In view of the strong positive changes in employees’ work situations, it is
not surprising that health and well-being outcomes also show noticeable
improvements after the six month trial. Some well-being outcomes are
specifically related to work. Of course, as with the other findings in this report,
participants are subject to a great many personal life events outside of work, aswell as contingencies in work that are separable from working time. To this end,
we should be attentive, first and foremost, to broad tendencies.

STRESS, BURNOUT & JOB SATISFACTION
We found that work stress decreased over the trial period. On a 1-5 scalefrom ‘never’ to ‘all the time’, the frequency of reported work stress declined on
average from 3.07 before to 2.74 after the trial. While nearly 13% of employees
did experience an increase in stress, three times as many (39%) were lessstressed, with the remainder (48%) recording no change in stress levels.
Burnout also declined on average from a score of 2.8 to 2.34 (captured througha score amalgamated from 7 associated criteria ranked on a 1 to 5 frequency
scale, capturing experiences of tiredness, exhaustion, frustration, and more). A
significant 71% of employees reported lower levels of burnout, compared to only
22% who registered a higher burnout score.
Corresponding to the decreases in work stress and burnout, employees are moresatisfied with their job, registering a significant average increase from 7.12 to
7.69 on a 0 to 10 scale, and with 48% of employees more satisfied than when
they started.

36

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy

37

Reported increase
22%

Reported no change

7%71%
Reported decrease

Figure 11: Change in participating employees’ reported levels of ‘burnout’ between baseline andendpoint surveys. Employees were asked, using a 5 point frequency scale (‘never’ to ‘always’), to grade
how often they had experienced different markers of burnout (‘exhaustion’, ‘frustration’, etc.) in thepreceding 4 weeks, from which a combined score was calculated.

EMOTIONAL, MENTAL AND PHYSICAL WELL-BEING
Other well-being outcomes also improved by the end of the trial. The averagemental health score (ranging from 1 ‘poor’, to 5 ‘excellent’), for example,
increased from 2.95 at the beginning of the trial to 3.32 by the end (43%reporting an increase in mental health versus only 16% a decline). Anxiety
and negative emotions also both fell substantially. Experiences of anxiety(1-4, ‘never’ to ‘daily’), fell slightly from 2.26 to 1.96 on average, and 54% of
employees reported a reduction in negative emotions.
Positive emotions amongst employees (taking an average score from 5 different
categories, each measured on a scale of 1-5) increased from 3.13 to 3.58 (with
64% of employees reporting an increase). It is also encouraging to see thatparticipants reported slight improvements in their physical health. With 37% of
employees reporting improvements in physical health (versus 18% decreases),
the study suggests that a four-day work week has the potential to reduce costs
associated with health care.

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy38

FATIGUE AND SLEEP
These improvements in physical and mental health might dovetail withthe changes in fatigue and sleep that employees experienced. We foundimprovements in fatigue, with the average fatigue score falling from 2.56 to2.12 (on a scale of 1-4, from never to daily), and 46% of employees reported a
reduction in fatigue (with only 14% reporting an increase).
The prevalence of insomnia and general sleep problems declined significantly.
40% saw a reduction in sleep difficulties, whilst 45% saw no change and only
15% saw increases.
Reported increase
15%

40%

Reported decrease

45%
Reported no change

Figure 12: Change to participating employees’ sleep difficulties between baseline and endpoint
surveys. Employees were asked to report how often they experienced sleep difficulties or insomnia on
a 4 point scale (‘never’ to ‘daily’).

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

39

FAMILY AND HOUSEHOLD LIFE
Positive changes also occurred at the intersection of paid work and family/
other parts of life. When asked about the ease of combining paid work withcare responsibilities, the average score increased from 2.76 to 3.58 on a 1 (‘very
difficult’) to 5 (‘very easy’) scale. 60% of employees reported that balancing
care responsibilities had become easier.
Similarly, the experience of balancing employment with social life benefited,with an average reported increase from 2.9 to 3.78 (again with 1 as ‘very
difficult’, and 5 as ‘very easy’). In correspondence with these findings, conflicts
between work and family time decreased: over the course of the trial 54% of
employees found they were less likely to feel too tired to do household jobs
following the trial (compared to 10% who felt they were more likely).

Reported increase
10%

Reported no change

36%
54%

Reported decrease

Figure 13: Change to participating employees’ experience of ‘work-family conflict’ between baseline
and endpoint surveys. Employees were asked to report how often they were ‘too tired from work to dohousehold jobs’ on a 3 point scale (‘never’ to ‘several times a week’).

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy

40

More specifically, we can observe a general decline in the feeling of timeinadequacy when it comes to a number of activities outside of paid work.
Employees generally seemed more satisfied in this regard.

Baseline

Endpoint to participating employees’ perception of time inadequacy between baseline
Figure 14: Change
87%
Changeand endpoint
surveys. Employees were asked to report whether they ‘would like to spend more time’
80
pursuing a range of categories.
60

61%

59%

52%

54%

45%

% of employees

40

32%

20

30%

26%

23%

12%

15%

0
-14%

-20

-15%

-27%
Caring for/educating(grand-)children

-9%
-21%
-33%

Housework

Cooking

Caring for elderly
disabled inﬁrm

Volunteering

Own hobbies

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy41

In general, we can say that employees within the cohort experienced increases
in life satisfaction.
At the beginning of the trial, when asked how satisfied they are with their life
(from 0 ‘not satisfied at all’, to 10 ‘completely satisfied’), participants respondedwith an average of 6.69 out of 10. This measure had an almost full point
increase, to 7.56. Employees are also more satisfied with other domains of life,
including household finances (44% reported an increase) and relationships (45%reported an increase). Most notably, employees recorded an increase in overtwo points regarding satisfaction with time, from 5.28 before the trial to 7.51
after. 73% said that they had greater satisfaction in this regard.
Reported decrease
12%

15%

Reported no change

73%
Reported increase

Figure 15: Change to participating employees’ time satisfaction between baseline and endpoint
surveys. Employees were asked to report, on a 0-10 scale (‘not satisfied at all’ to ‘completely satisfied’)
how satisfied they were with the amount of time they have to do the things they like doing.

GENDER EQUALITY
How did a four-day week affect gender equality in the household division oflabour for our cohort? The rationale for many advocates is that with more freetime available, men may spend greater time in housework or childcare, thereby
narrowing the well-documented gender gap in unpaid domestic and care work.
In the trial, the time men spent looking after children increased by more thandouble that of women (27% to 13%), but the share of housework between these
two genders stayed almost exactly the same (68% reporting no change for men
and women).

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy

42

CHANGES
When we consider the quality and experiences of work during the trial, anumber of different metrics stand out. First, we asked employees how theircurrent work ability compared to their lifetime best. Before the trial began,average self-rated ability was 7.06 on a scale from 0-10. At the end of the trial,
it had risen significantly, to 7.88. In short, people felt that they were doing abetter job at work with the shift to a four-day week. Overall, 55% of employees
reported an increase in their ability at work.
Reported decrease
19%

Reported increase

55%

26%
Reported no change

Figure 16: Change to participating employees’ perception of their own work ability between baseline
and endpoint surveys. Employees were asked to report, on a 0-10 scale (‘worst’ to ‘best’) how theircurrent work ability compared with their lifetime best.

We found that employees were also able to exercise an increased level ofcontrol over their schedules. We assessed schedule control using a multi-item
scale (from 1 ‘very little’, to 5 ‘very much’) which includes control over days
worked, number of hours, time off work and when each workday begins andends. Before the trial began, the average value was 3.55, which increased
modestly, to 3.59, with 44% of employees reporting an increase in control, while
38% reported a decrease.
There was also a reported increase in the pace of work. 62% of employees
thought their pace of work increased, 36% thought it was the same (a verysmall group – 2% – felt it decreased). However, although the pace of work may
have increased, for most employees (78%) there was no significant increase inworkload (although 20% did perceive an increase).

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

43

Reported decrease2%

Reported increase
20%

78%
Reported no change
Figure 17: Change to participating employees’ workload over the course of the trial period. At theendpoint survey, employees were asked to report whether their workload had increased, decreased orremained the same.

Interestingly, 52% of employees reported an increase in leisure travel, while 44%
reported no change in this regard. 21% of employees reported a reduction inchildcare costs (versus 1% who reported an increase).
Reported increase
1%
Reported decrease
21%

78%
Reported no change

Figure 18: Change to participating employees’ workload over the course of the trial period. At theendpoint survey, employees were asked to report whether their workload had increased, decreased orremained the same.

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

CONTINUITIESIn addition to the changes reported above, our surveys found that many things
did not change, which is a welcome finding in various cases. Perhaps mostimportantly, while there was a small, weakly statistically significant increasein ‘average’ work intensity over the course of the trial (from 3.64 to 3.69 on a
‘1 to 5’ scale), across individual respondents perceived changes were roughly
evenly split. While just over a third (36%) of employees did register an increase,nearly as many (31%) believed it had declined, and the remainder (33%) saw nochange in their work intensity.
We also found that the perception of complexity within people’s work another kind of intensification - did not rise on average. 42% of employees did
have some increase in complexity, but another 42% had a decrease and theremainder (16%) had no change. Another reassuring finding is that employees’
perception of job security remained very similar over the course of the trial(measuring a slight reduction on average of 3.59 at startpoint to 3.54 at theend, taken from a 4 point scale from 1, ‘very likely’ to 4, ‘not at all likely’).
Likewise, there was a significant decrease in the employees being likely to leave
their jobs, with 30% less likely to change jobs at the end of the trial than the
beginning.

44

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy45

EXPECTATIONS GOING FORWARD
In general, cohort employees had an excellent experience of the four-day week
trial. From 0 (very bad) to 10 (very good), the average score was 9.04. When
asked whether they would want to continue with the four-day week trial, 90%
replied ‘Yes/Definitely want to continue’. Only five people (0.43%) said that they‘somewhat do not want to continue’, and no one reported that they ‘definitely
do not want to continue’.

90%

Respondents (employees)

1000

800

600

400

200
6%
1%

0

itely

eﬁn

/D
Yes

ue

ntin

o co

tt
wan

t

a
ewh

Som

ue

ntin

o co

tt
wan

No

0%

ce

n
fere

pre

t do

wha
ome

S

not

ue

ntin

o co

tt
wan

t

o no

ly d

ite
eﬁn

D

No/

3%

0%

ue

ntin

o co

tt
wan

er

Oth

Preference for continuing a four-day week trial

Figure 19: Participating employees’ preference for continuing a four-day week trial in theirorganisation at endpoint survey.

We also asked employees about their preferences for working schedule, between
four or five day weeks (or ‘no preference’). 96% had a preference for four-day
working weeks.

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy46

96%

Respondents (employees)

1000

800

600

400

200
3%
0
No

2%
ce

n
fere

pre

ays

4d

ys

5 da

Employees' preferred working days going forward

Figure 20: Participating employees’ preference for different lengths of working week at endpoint
survey.

Finally, we were curious about the monetary value of the four-day week - orrather, what sort of hypothetical trade-off between money and time people
would make, having experienced the four-day week. While the ‘four-day week’
policy strictly requires that employees maintain the same level of pay – and thisis not to suggest employees ought to ‘pay’ for shorter hours – this provides away of quantifying value placed on reduced working time.
For those who noted that they preferred four days (96% of the sample), we
asked them how much money they would expect at their next job in order togo back to a five-day schedule. 46% (the first two categories) reported they’dtake a five-day job with a pay increase of 0-25%. 29% would require a 26-50%
increase. 8% said they’d only go back to 5 days if their pay were more than 50%
higher. And, interestingly, another 15% said that no amount of money would
induce them to accept a five-day schedule.

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy

47

40%

Respondents (employees)

400
29%
300

200

15%

8%

100

6%

0

an
s th

Les

10%

pay

5%

10-2

0%

26-5

% of pay

50%
No

am

y

one

fm

to
oun

Figure 21: How much do participating employees value a four-day week in financial terms? At theendpoint survey, employees were asked how much money they would expect at their next job in order
to go back to a five-day schedule.

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot“I don’t want toretire and go 'what
the hell do I do
now?'... I need tostart doing things
now that are goingto sustain me when
I finish working”(CEO, care organisation)48

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

PERSPECTIVESFROM THE
SHOPFLOOR

49

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

PERSPECTIVES FROM THE
SHOPFLOOR
In addition to company and employee surveys, the UK pilot included a series ofresearch interviews with the pilot companies. These were co-ordinated by social
researchers at the University of Cambridge, assisted by Autonomy. From these
we can glean richer testimonies about the day-to-day practice of the pilots,
from staff at various levels.
These interviews sought to understand why companies took part in the pilot,
how exactly they implemented the four-day week, how staff were experiencing
the pilot, and thoughts on the future of the four-day week in the company.

MOTIVATIONS
The pre-pilot interviews with company seniors gave insight into what attracted
companies to the pilot. Almost all of the senior managers interviewed told usthat they had been aware of the four-day week for some time, citing news
stories and examples of pre-existing four-day week experiments. The public
sector trial in Iceland was a common source of inspiration.24
A 2022 employer survey by the CIPD found that 34% of respondent
organisations thought the four-day week will be a reality for most UK workers
during the next ten years.25 This is consistent with the feeling among senior
managers we interviewed, who saw the pilot as an opportunity to be at theforefront of historical change. We were also commonly told that putting oneself
forward as a pioneer maximises the competitive advantages of having a fourday week, such as its benefits for reputation, recruitment and retention.

24
Autonomy (2021) ‘Going Public: Iceland’s Journey to a Shorter Working Week’. https://autonomy.
work/portfolio/icelandsww/
25
CIPD (2022) ‘The Four Day Week: Employer Perspectives on Moving to a Shorter Working
Week’. https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/fundamentals/relations/flexible-working/four-day-week#gref

50

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

That should give us a competitive advantage(Senior manager, Insurance firm)
Other companies focused on their aspirations as employee-focusedorganisations, describing the four-day week as a logical next step in their
existing commitment to staff well-being. Often the four-day week was
introduced on the back of existing policies such as the option of flexible working
patterns or a policy of no evening working.
In some cases, the four-day week was an attempt to improve over previous
initiatives. The senior manager of a financial firm, for example, grew to see its
previous policy of quarterly monetary prizes as divisive. The four-day week was
an opportunity to provide a benefit that included everybody. In other cases, thefour-day week was described as preferential to happiness 'gimmicks' such asstaff game rooms or chillout zones, common in the creative and craft industries.
By contrast, the four-day week was represented as a substantial materialchange for staff – 'more concrete and grown up', as one interviewee put it.

THE FOUR-DAY WEEK POST-COVID

In some cases, the four-day week was described by senior managers as arational business response to the Covid pandemic. Several cited the idea ofthe ‘Great Resignation’, or described significant difficulties in recruiting andretaining staff since Covid. In these cases, the four-day week was seen as a way
to attract talent and give the company a competitive edge in the post-Covid
labour market.

I think we have come out of the pandemic with a new outlook onlife… There’s a greater expectation around flexible working, hybrid
working - people are taking that opportunity to think 'I want to dosomething completely different.'(Senior Manager, Manufacturing Company)
The CEO of a creative company, for example, recognised the growing
popularity of homeworking in the industry since Covid, but felt that a policyof unlimited homeworking could damage the company’s working culture. The
four-day week was seen as an alternative way of attracting and retaining staff.
Several smaller companies also said the four-day week was a compelling option
in a period of business recovery post-Covid, which had left them unable toattract staff through significant salary increases.

51

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

On top of these practical reasons for introducing a four-day week postCovid, it was common for companies to associate the pandemic with a kindof moral insight. Company seniors explained how the pandemic had shone alight on their staff’s personal lives. They had seen their staff suffer throughmental health difficulties and bereavements. Video-conferencing had allowed
staff to see one another’s homes and children. Several company seniors said
these experiences had increased their sense of moral responsibility towards
employees, as well as sensitised them to the business need for a healthy
workforce.

In any organisation people are the key. You need to look out for
them.
(CEO, distribution company)
We want to give people the gift of time - if that doesn’t soundtoo chocolate box-y – because [remote working means] we’ve all
got to know so much more about our colleagues’ lives, their livingrooms and their pets and their kids... I hated the pandemic, but it’smade us all see each other much more in the round, and it’s madeus all realise the importance of having a healthy head, and thatfamily matters.
(CEO, non-profit organisation)

52

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

It is important, however, not to overstate the influence of the pandemic onpilot companies’ decision to take part. Many told us a shorter working week
had been tabled before the pandemic (and in some cases that Covid had only
delayed plans). This was often the case in companies with emotionally involving
or demanding work. In organisations supporting brain injury patients, teaching
pupils with special educational needs, or advising citizens experiencing poverty,
for example, senior managers stressed the emotional pressures on their staff,
along with a hope that the four-day week would give staff some necessary
distance from work.

I don’t want to retire and go 'what the hell do I do now?'... I need tostart doing things now that are going to sustain me when I finish
working.
(CEO, care organisation)
In other cases, the four-day week was described as a response to industry-wide
problems of overwork. A video game studio, for example, pointed to several
high-profile industry cases of crunch and burnout. The company was started
with the express purpose of differentiating from an industry that can 'treat
people like economic units', and the four-day week was seen as consistent withthis goal. The CEO’s belief was that long-hours culture is not only bad for staff
health - it also fails to produce results.

If you know you’re going to be there until 10 o’clock at night, you
think - 'I’m going to be here all night, so I’ll just do the work I needto do'.
(CEO, creative company)

53

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Autonomy

PREPARATIONS
You’re looking at giving people 40, 50 extra days a year, which isincredible really… If we can make it work, it’s very precious.
(CEO, non-profit organisation)
All of the companies we interviewed described a preparatory period prior to thepilot start date. The nature of preparations varied between companies, both interms of their thoroughness and the level of staff involvement.
In general, methods of preparation tended to mirror the pre-existing culture of
the organisation, i.e. those with a more democratic governance structure tended
to implement their four-day week in a more democratic way, whereas thoseaccustomed to top-down ways of working tended to make key decisions andconduct preparations from above.
The lead-in period typically involved the following kinds of activities:» Asking staff to submit questions about the policy and creating an FAQs
document to share within the organisation.

» Seeking legal advice on terms and conditions during the pilot.
» Consulting/surveying staff about their preferred model for implementing
the four-day week.

» Creating an ‘opt-in’ agreement for staff including ground rules for thepilot, such as the protocol for what happens if there is a work emergency
on someone’s day off.

» Auditing work processes and devising new productivity initiatives using
staff consultations and workshops.

» Introducing software to help staff see when others are working.
» Polling clients for their opinions on the four-day week and informing
them of any changes.
» Developing a set of metrics to track the impact of the pilot (in addition
to those being tracked as part of the official pilot evaluation).

54

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot‘It has got to work for everybody’

PREPARING FOR THE FOUR-DAY WEEK IN A HOUSINGASSOCIATION
A housing association with approximately 250 employees has many functions, including building
maintenance, running a community youth service, operating several community centres andkeeping the neighbourhood tidy. The CEO describes the organisation as an anchor in thecommunity.
The association is run as a mutual, guided by a democratic body made up of employees andtenants. The democratic body is responsible for electing a board, whose CEO compares theorganisation to a fan-owned football club: ‘it’s power sharing’.
In line with these governance principles, the organisation was firm about the fact that any fourday week policy would have to be shaped in a democratic fashion, and also be flexible enoughto include all staff. This meant that the daily challenges of office teams, community-facing
teams, and trades teams all had to be considered.
To incorporate this diversity, the organisation opted for a decentralised four-day week,with different working patterns in different departments. The CEO believed that staff withexperience on the ground are the best equipped to make key decisions. Each department wastherefore supported to design its own four-day week model.
We took the decision that everyone knows their own job better than anyone else (CEO).
In the buildup to the pilot, all staff members took part in pre-trial workshops with their teams,
envisioning how the four-day work week might change their lives and debating the best
implementation model to fit the nature of their work. Each team then produced a two minutevideo explaining their chosen four-day week model, and these videos were shared across theorganisation.
Staff we interviewed about the preparation process described a need to find a sweet spot
between coverage needs and staff preferences. Some teams had opted to use a rolling four-day
week rota system, in which staff book their days off at the start of each month. This allowed staff
to fit work around their personal priorities on a shifting basis.
Reflecting on the pilot preparation period, staff always praised the pilot as a catalyst for
innovating around work processes. The CEO repeatedly described the pilot process as ‘refreshing’.
The conversations people were having, they would not have had if not for the shared incentiveof making this work… It has been like flicking on a switch for some folks. (CEO)We heard a lot of stories about the time-saving ideas generated in the preparatory workshops.
The trades staff have reduced their travel time to and from the building supplier by having
more foresight about what materials are needed and finding better ways to organise their van.
They also now feel comfortable going home early when there is less to do. Office teams areautomating certain processes and redesigning others to involve fewer personnel, and communityfacing teams have taken lessons forward from remote working, having realised that some smaller
issues can be dealt with adequately over the phone.
The staff and CEO were all clearly proud of the collective approach taken to the pilot
preparations, describing it as a positive experience. Staff knowledge and involvement were seen
as key to making the four-day week a sincere and realistic policy, rather than an empty gesture.
What we don’t want is this underground of people who are notionally working a four-day week
but secretly working at the weekend to catch up. (CEO)55

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

FINDING EFFICIENCIESThe pilot interviews gave insight into how organisations planned to reduce theirworking hours without significantly compromising their business or, in the caseof non-profit organisations, their civic mission.
While one obvious way to do this might be by growing the workforce, it isnotable that only two organisations we interviewed used additional recruitment
as part of their strategy to achieve a four-day week. Separate from theseorganisations, senior managers of two further companies also told us that theirplans for a permanent move to a four-day week may involve increasing theirreliance on subcontractors, who would not be working a four-day week.
Comparably, only a small handful of companies considered reducing output
as part of their strategy. One company, for example, decided to save time byletting go of a small number of minor clients, whereas another cancelled a small
number of projects that were not seen as core to the organisation’s purpose. A
third company also believed so much in the benefits of the four-day week forstaff, its CEO said he would be prepared to tolerate a small loss in profit tokeep the policy in place.
In all other cases, the companies we interviewed aspired to maintain 100% of
their output on a four-day week, without additional recruitment. The policy was
implemented with an attempt to increase productivity.
Some interviewees suggested that the required increase might, to some extent,
be an automatic effect of the four-day week, which provides staff with a strong
incentive to finish their work, and sees people returning to work feeling moreenergised than they would on a five-day week.
No company we interviewed, however, relied on this faith; all took practicalmeasures to reform certain work processes and increase productivity. Indeed,over the course of the pilot, managers and staff alike repeatedly praised
the value of the four-day week as a catalyst for organisational change, andexplained how the promise of the policy had energised staff to think in freshways about what they did and how they did it.

You can’t change things without things changing(Staff member, Sales and operations)56

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Several organisations asked staff to sign an ‘efficiency charter’ or ‘productivity
agreement’, in order to cement an understanding that the four-day week
included a commitment to increase productivity. Other companies required
departments to submit plans about the changes they would be making toaccommodate a four-day week.
The most common ways of improving productivity we heard about included:» Reforming the norms around meetings, making them shorter, lessfrequent, and with clearer agendas and objectives.

» Reforming email etiquette, encouraging staff to be more attentive to the
purpose of their messages and who needs to be involved.

» Asking staff to analyse and time each step of the manufacturing
process, to identify ways to save time and develop a new set of
production targets.

» Introducing a ‘heads down’ or ‘focus’ period – a designated time of day
for staff to conduct independent work uninterrupted.

» Automating aspects of work (for example, introducing auto-filling

reports, email templates or automating certain aspects of customer
service).

» Adopting new project management software, or consolidating internal
communications and documents into a single piece of software.

» Reorganising calendars to promote ‘monotasking’, eliminating the time
wasted on switching between tasks.

» Creating a task-list before leaving work, in order to hand over tocolleagues or hit the ground running on the following day.

» Reducing the number of staff involved in a particular process.

57

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

HOW A SMALL MANUFACTURER FOUND NEW
EFFICIENCIES
A craft brewery has been in business for around ten years. We spoke to one of its
founders, who started the business with hopes of differentiating it from bigger, more
growth-focused operations. A founding principle of the company was to ‘create jobs that
fit around our lives.’
We’re a bit more mellow-paced. When we started the business we wanted to change
the way we worked.
The current manager became interested in the four-day week because he hoped thebrewery ‘could become a leader in something positive’. He also saw the policy as
consistent with their broader ambition to reduce the carbon footprint of the business,through investments in green energy. Being in manufacturing, he feels he has a point toprove.
If you can do this in a small production environment, it demonstrates that the five-day
week is a construct and something that could have been gotten rid of a long time ago.
How were they going to make it work? The brewery adopted a staggered four-day weekmodel in order to maintain production over 5 days. The plan was to split the production
team into two groups, with one taking Mondays off and the others taking Fridays(swapping each month).
Staff also told us about the significant preparation period before the pilot. As part ofthe lead-in, the brewers studied their brewing process closely, breaking down the tasks
involved, running their phone timers in their pockets, searching for new efficiencies, anddeveloping a new set of production targets. One brewer describes an atmosphere of
excitement, solidarity and challenge around finding ways to reduce working time.
It’s like cooking a huge Sunday roast, trying to get everything to finish at the sametime.
A phrase we heard a lot in our conversations with staff was ‘mucking in’. On days where
not everyone is present, staff could be required to jump in on tasks that may havepreviously been outside their remit, helping with brewing, packaging, or picking up thephone. The staff we interviewed celebrated the sharing of skills and sense of collective
effort this involved. The manager said ‘the whole team now does what the manager
does’, by forecasting busy periods and identifying what needs attention. When we asked
him whether he was worried about work becoming more intense, he said they werebusier, but less stressed.
Being busy doesn’t make you stressed, being out of control is what makes you stressed…
We want to be more busy, less stressed. I don’t like being bored at work, I like it when
there’s an atmosphere of things happening… If we’re busy it means there is a lot ofbeer going out of the door and things are going well.

58

The UK’s four-day week pilot

AutonomyPERSONAL IMPACTS
A temporary pilot of six months can never reveal the full impacts of a four-day
week policy. Reducing the working week is a significant change, and it takes
time for individual experiences, behaviours and priorities to shift. However, it isnotable that our mid-point interviews with staff – 3 to 4 months into the pilot –already indicated the policy’s significant impacts on people's lives, both insideand outside of work.
THE DAY OFF

When we asked staff what they had been doing on their additional day off
work, the most common answer by far was 'life admin' – a term used to describe
essential tasks such as food shopping, attending medical appointments, doinghousehold repairs or cleaning. Many people explained that being able tocomplete these tasks on their fifth day enabled the weekend to become free forgenuine leisure and self-initiated activities, as opposed to chores.

It feels like you’re easing yourself into the weekend... By the time
Saturday and Sunday comes, it feels like I’ve done my life admin,washed the car, tidied the garden, whatever it is(Senior manager, Care services provider)
For parents with young children, an additional day off mid-week was highly
valued, either because it enabled savings on childcare expenses, or in one
case, because it allowed a partner to work an extra salaried day instead of
performing childcare.

You have no idea what this will mean to my family – the amountof money we will be able to save on childcare(Staff member, Housing association)

59

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

For parents with older children, we also heard how a day-off mid week meantthat they could take some rare and valuable time for themselves. Being off
work when family were still busy was sometimes described as a personal bonus,
rather than a drawback.
At the time of interview, few staff members had taken up entirely new activities
as a result of the four-day week. We heard of one staff member using his day
off to take a recently bereaved grandparent on regular day trips. However,most reported being able to spend more time on the activities they alreadyenjoyed. This involved everything from playing music, to spending time withfriends, playing sport, exercising, painting, cooking, dog-walking, watching
television, visiting family out of town and volunteering at an animal shelter.
A small number of participants were also using their fifth day to undertake
professional qualifications.

60

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot'I 100% want the four-day week to continue'

A WORKING PARENT’S PERSPECTIVE
Owen works as a surveyor in a non-profit organisation, where his wife
is also employed. He has been with the organisation for 10+ years in a
number of different roles. In our interview, we discussed his experiences ofthe four-day week in relation to being a parent of two school-age children.
Owen finds that his children’s activities occupy a large portion of theweekend; he is ‘taking them here, there and everywhere’. While he supports
his children, he often feels wildly busy and that his household chores end
up unfinished. In the context of this time pressure, Owen described feelingsof guilt associated with taking leisure time for himself, and a concern that
he was unable to balance his responsibilities.
Owen associated the four-day week with a tremendous relief ofpressure. On his days off, he did the school runs and took care of home
maintenance tasks that would otherwise creep into the weekend. He
initially found it hard to break the habit of checking his work phone andemails on his day off, but said that he was getting better at it. Now thephone and tablet go off and in the drawer.
Owen said a major advantage of the four-day week is that he feels lessguilty when he takes some time for himself – something we heard several
times from working parents. He will play golf with a friend, when theweather allows, and watch a football match at the weekend, comfortablein the knowledge that key household chores have been done.
Owen also raised how helpful the four-day week was in managing school
holidays. He is one of two pilot participants we interviewed, whose partner
was also involved in the four-day week pilot. Both interviewees described
how indispensable the four-day week had become for covering childcare inschool holidays, without eating into annual leave.

61Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Reflecting on their health and mood during the pilot, interviewees
overwhelmingly described the four-day week in positive terms, especially if they
worked in emotionally taxing roles. It was common for interviewees to describe
a reduction in stress, or a greater ability to 'switch off' or 'breathe' at home.
One interviewee described a disappearance of the 'Sunday dread' – the anxiety
commonly felt in anticipation of a new working week.
Only one staff member interviewed had significant concerns about the personal
impacts of the four-day week. This interviewee said she thrived on the mental
challenge of her work. Her personal preference was for a 'soft four-day week',
where the fifth day is used to pursue personal projects in the office
Our interviews also pinpointed some negative feelings among staff incompanies adopting a conditional four-day week model. An administrator weinterviewed complained about a perceived lack of staff involvement in shaping
the policy at her company, and said that the rules of conditionality in her
workplace were opaque. Her team had been prevented from beginning the pilot
alongside other teams in the company, having been told by a senior manager
that their performance statistics were too low. The interviewee said that suchconditions had not been applied to others, and felt frustrated by the lack oftransparency behind this decision.

62

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot'What are my staff doing with their time?'

DISINTEREST, INTEREST AND CONTROLAs well as giving insight into what staff were doing with their additionaldays off, pilot interviews also allowed us to ask company seniors about
their hopes for staff time-use outside of work.
Responses were split between disinterest, interest and direction. In
disinterested companies, senior management were pleased that theirstaff would be gaining additional free-time, but did not make any active
enquiries into what staff were doing with their time off. In interested
companies, by contrast, senior management hoped to create a sense ofcollective purpose around the pilot by encouraging staff to share stories
and pictures of their days off, either in meetings or on message boards.
The third category, direction, refers to a small selection of pilot companies
that tried to actively shape how staff used their time off. The CEOs of
two organisations, for example, were disappointed with the low uptake ofvoluntary work among staff during the pilot, and were exploring ways tonudge staff toward spending their free-time on prosocial contributions.
The question of direction also arose in relation to an interview prompt
about senior managers’ tolerance for staff using the fifth day to work asecond job. Several managers in the disinterested/interested companies
saw the fifth day as a potentially attractive opportunity for staff to top up
income (especially in the context of a cost of living crisis). The CEO of anon-profit organisation imagined that plumbers in the organisation might
use the fifth day for contracting: ‘they can bring in a bit more money for
their family’. We indeed interviewed several staff who told us they had
been doing freelance work on their fifth day.
In the more directive companies, by contrast, earning additional income
was prohibited, either through a written agreement or less formally,
through internal communications. Managers in these companies believedthat staff who used their day off to earn further income would be
breaching their side of a bargain, i.e. to use the time off to rest, in order tocome back to work refreshed.
The idea behind the four-day week is that they rest, they have moreleisure time, family time, battery recharging time. So no, they cannot get
a second job.
(Senior manager, insurance firm)

63

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

WORK CULTURE

In line with the very high satisfaction ratings recorded for overall staff
experience of the pilot, most of the staff we interviewed described positivechanges to work culture, tied to the introduction of a four-day week. Some staff
talked about the sense of energy and shared purpose arising from the collective
effort of making the four-day week work. Others talked about feeling valued bytheir employers or being proud of their organisation, due to its willingness to try
something novel. Others still described colleagues as having a 'bounce in theirstep', or said they enjoyed having conversations with colleagues about what
they were doing on their days off.
We know from the pilot surveys that roughly two thirds of staff did not registeran overall increase in work intensity, but we did interview a small number ofstaff who were concerned about this problem. In one larger company (thatdid not appear to benefit from a significant period of pilot preparation)
several staff had clear concerns about their workload. Some described theirwork as intensifying, or a battle to work through lengthy to-do lists in the time
available. We also heard several second-hand accounts about colleagues who
were regularly working into the evenings since starting the pilot, in order to getthings done.
Some managers and staff also expressed concerns that the focus on efficiency
may be making the workplace less convivial. One staff member felt it had
become taboo to interrupt colleagues, and said there was now notably lesssocialising in communal spaces like the kitchen. The decline in conviviality
appeared to be a particular concern in the creative companies we spoke to, who
told us that unstructured encounters at work can be important for generating
new ideas. Several managers said they were giving special attention to theseconcerns. Managers with concerns about their culture were considering, forexample, pairing the four-day week with initiatives such as designated teamdays or a requirement to attend the office for a certain proportion of the week.
Their responses underline the importance of focusing on job quality, in theprocess of implementing reduced working time.

64

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot“When you realisethat day has
allowed you tobe relaxed andrested, and readyto absolutely go for
it on those otherfour days, you start
to realise that togo back to working
on a Friday would
feel really wrong stupid actually”(CEO, consultancy company)

65

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

CONCLUSIONS

66

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

CONCLUSIONSAs the four-day week has continued to spread around the world, a wide-rangeof benefits have been touted by those making the shift to shorter hours: from
improved well-being and productivity in the organisations and employees
undertaking the change, to improved recruitment and retention among staff,
and even improved revenue.
To assess these claims, this report studied a wide range of UK companies andemployees piloting a four-day work week with no reduction in pay in 2022, aspart of one of the largest coordinated trials to date.
As the report makes clear, the results of these trials have been resoundingly
positive. While companies, through their leaders, have expressed that they are
extremely pleased with performance, productivity and their overall experience, it
has been a similar case for employees themselves too. The four-day week, simply
put, is a popular policy for those who work it.
However, the results captured throughout the trial – owing to the specificresearch design that has informed it – allow us to capture the positive impactof reduced working hours on a range of variables far beyond these headline
figures.
With ‘before-and-after’ data for a wide range of metrics, we have been able tomeasure the beneficial impact of a four-day week ‘across the board’. Focusing
on the narrow, ‘business case’, for instance, we found that revenue stayed
approximately the same (rising slightly by 1.4% over the trial), and was up 35%
in comparison to the same period in 2021, while there were also improvements
in hiring, absenteeism and resignations.

67

Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilot

Looking more broadly however, it is also clear that employees found themselvesin a much improved position at the close of the trial than they did when it
commenced. Shorter working hours left them less stressed and burned out, with
their feedback also suggesting improved mental and physical health – perhaps
not surprising given their increased time exercising and lower levels of fatigue.
As a result of the four-day week many employees therefore reported that theirlife satisfaction had improved.
While self-assessments of work performance increased significantly, the datashows that this was not due to any increase in work intensity. Through carefulplanning, and the input of staff, companies’ efforts to revise working practices
successfully improved productivity without any knock-on ill effects. We shouldn’t
be too surprised, then, that employees’ job satisfaction therefore improved by
the end of the trial.
For many, there was little desire to return to old ways of working. Asked to makea hypothetical trade-off between working time and pay, 70% of employees
noted that they would require a higher salary of between 10-50% to go back toa full, five-day schedule. A further 8% claimed that they would need more than
50% extra pay or more. For 15%, there was no amount of money that could takethem back from the four-day week.
Taken as a whole, results from the UK trial therefore make clear that the
four-day week is ready to take the next step from experimentation to
implementation. Those looking to move to shorter working hours now haveaccess to a growing base of organisations already ‘ironing out’ the four-day
week in practice, by adapting different models and structures to the demandsof their own size and sector, and building up a toolkit of tips and tactics to be
drawn upon by others. The benefits of a shorter working week for no reduction
in pay are now both well-known and well-evidenced: employees are happier andhealthier, and the organisations they work for are often more productive, more
efficient, and retain their staff more readily. To this, the UK trial adds a wealthof ‘on-the-ground’ knowledge for the next wave of adopters to make the fourday week a reality.

68Autonomy

The UK’s four-day week pilotautonomy.work

Published 2023 by:© Autonomy
Autonomy Research Ltd
Cranbourne
Pilcot Road
Crookham Village
Hampshire
GU51 5RU

69