Why Four-Day Workweek Experiments Fail (and How to Make Yours Stick)

The four-day workweek is no longer just a fringe experiment — it’s a reality for a growing number of organizations. The conversation has shifted from whether it works to how to make it sustainable. While some organizations adopting this shift have achieved significant productivity gains, stronger engagement, and a competitive edge in hiring, others have struggled with workload compression, leadership resistance, and operational complexity.

The difference between success and failure often comes down to execution. Leaders who simply cut a day without making structural adjustments frequently find themselves battling inefficiencies, burnout, and unintended consequences. Those who succeed tend to take a strategic approach, redesigning work and aligning expectations at every level.

A well-executed four-day workweek isn’t just about offering an extra day off — it’s a strategic lever for improving performance, retention, and engagement. One of the strongest success stories comes from Atom Bank, which introduced a 34-hour, four-day work schedule in 2021 without reducing salaries. The result? Lower employee attrition, fewer sick days, and a significant boost in engagement. Atom has also found it easier to attract top talent as job seekers have increasingly prioritized flexible work structures. But success isn’t automatic. Leaders must proactively design the transition to prevent burnout, maintain operational efficiency, and ensure long-term viability.

If you’re considering this shift, here’s what you need to know based on research we’ve conducted and observations we’ve made since 2019.

Avoid Common Pitfalls

Many organizations struggle to sustain a four-day model because they fail to anticipate key challenges. Here are three factors leaders need to address up front.

Workload compression and burnout. The biggest failure point is assuming that employees can achieve the same output in less time without making fundamental changes to how work gets done. If tasks, meetings, and processes remain unchanged, the result will be stress, rushed work, and disengagement.

To mitigate this dynamic, shift the focus from hours to outcomes. Before reducing hours, eliminate inefficiencies by auditing your organization’s workflows. Cut unnecessary meetings, streamline approval processes, and automate repetitive tasks. Evaluate employees’ performance based on deliverables and impact, not the hours they put in. And train managers to prioritize ruthlessly. Leaders must help their teams identify high-value work and eliminate distractions. A four-day model forces discipline in time management — and managers who embrace this change will see stronger results.

Leadership resistance and old-school mindsets. Many executives equate productivity with time spent working rather than actual results. If senior leaders aren’t fully committed to the four-day workweek, employees may feel pressured to log extra hours — which would undermine the entire initiative.

Instead, senior leaders must lead by example. If executives continue working five days a week, employees will follow suit. The leadership team needs to model the behavior they expect to see. Managers can reinforce cultural change by publicly recognizing teams that improve their efficiency and work smarter — not those that revert to overworking.

It’s also critical to make success measurable. Define clear metrics to track whether the four-day week is working and monitor productivity levels, client satisfaction, and employee engagement scores.

Client and operational challenges. For organizations with customer-facing roles, a four-day model can feel impossible — but it doesn’t have to be.

While some companies need to operate five days a week, it doesn’t mean that every employee must. Consider staggering schedules: Some teams can adopt overlapping four-day schedules that ensure continuous coverage without requiring everyone to be available at the same time. In certain industries, a “4.5-day” model or flexible schedule may be more sustainable, allowing organizations to balance efficiency with customer needs.

Be sure to set clear client expectations. If response times or service models need to shift, proactive communication is key. Customers are often more willing to adapt than leaders assume — as long as they aren’t surprised.

How to Make It Work

Leaders who want to implement a four-day workweek successfully need to go beyond policy change and focus on structural redesign, performance expectations, and cultural alignment. Unless leaders take the following actions, the shift risks becoming an unsustainable experiment rather than a lasting competitive advantage.

Redesign work — don’t just reduce work hours. The most effective organizations rethink how work happens — not just when it happens. Simply cutting a day without addressing inefficiencies leads to stress, rushed output, and declining performance. Instead of assuming that existing workflows will fit into a shorter week, leaders should audit work habits, eliminate time drains, and create systems that support deep, focused work.

Perpetual Guardian, a New Zealand financial services firm that made the four-day shift permanent, didn’t just reduce hours — it restructured meetings, introduced uninterrupted deep-work periods, and increased employee autonomy. This approach ensured that productivity wasn’t compromised. To follow a similar path, leaders should consider whether every standing meeting is necessary and eliminate those that don’t add value. Protecting blocks of time for uninterrupted focus is essential, given that constant interruptions erode efficiency. Investing in automation tools and asynchronous collaboration can also free up employees’ time, allowing them to complete meaningful work without unnecessary distractions.

Train and support middle managers. The biggest challenges in implementing a four-day workweek often fall on middle managers. Many are unprepared for leading teams under a system that emphasizes outcomes over hours worked, and some may resist shifting away from traditional supervision methods. Without adequate support, managers may default to old habits of tracking employee presence rather than actual results.

To make the transition work, organizations must train managers in results-driven leadership, shifting their focus from micromanagement to trust-based performance oversight. Providing them with clear frameworks for prioritizing workloads can help prevent bottlenecks and ensure that expectations are aligned across teams. Some managers may fear losing control or visibility over their teams, so addressing their concerns early on is crucial. Helping them navigate those concerns with clear role expectations will increase their confidence in managing a more flexible workforce.

Pilot, measure, and adapt. A full-scale shift to a four-day workweek is risky without first testing the waters. Many organizations that have successfully adopted the model began with a pilot program to evaluate impact, identify challenges, and refine their approach before making permanent changes. A structured pilot, typically lasting around six months, gives teams time to adjust and allows leadership to track the effects of reduced hours without committing to a long-term policy upfront. Looking beyond anecdotal feedback, organizations should collect concrete data on key performance indicators such as productivity, customer satisfaction, and employee well-being. Flexibility is critical: What works in one organization may need adjustments in another.

For leaders, the real question isn’t whether a four-day model can work — it’s whether they’re ready to lead the transformation. Those who approach the shift strategically will gain more than just a competitive hiring advantage. They will build a workplace where performance and well-being reinforce each other, creating an organization that is not only more productive but also more resilient in the evolving world of work.