The 4 Day Week by Andrew Barnes with Stephanie Jones Summary

The 4 Day Week advocates for a flexible work model where employees work 80% of traditional hours for 100% pay while maintaining productivity. Andrew Barnes details his 2018 Perpetual Guardian trial in New Zealand, which showed improved employee well-being, focus, and retention. The book provides a blueprint for businesses to adopt this model, addressing economic inequities and environmental sustainability.

Business leaders seeking sustainable productivity gains, HR professionals exploring workplace flexibility, and employees advocating for better work-life balance. The book is particularly relevant for industries prioritizing output over hours logged, with actionable steps for implementation.

Yes. Barnes combines data-driven insights (e.g., a 20% productivity boost in trials) with practical advice, though some critics note repetitive sections. It’s a critical resource for rethinking modern work structures, especially post-pandemic.

This core framework proposes employees receive 100% pay for 80% time if they deliver 100% productivity. Barnes developed it after realizing a four-day week required just 40 extra minutes of daily focused work to offset reduced hours. The principle challenges traditional hourly metrics.

Barnes’ company trial (2018) showed a 20% rise in productivity, 24% better work-life balance, and 27% reduced burnout. Employees used their extra day for errands, hobbies, and family, returning refreshed and more engaged. The study, validated by Auckland University, became a global benchmark.

• Productivity: Fewer distractions and sharper focus during shorter hours.
• Well-being: Reduced stress and burnout from extended recovery time.
• Sustainability: Lower carbon emissions from commuting and office use.
• Equity: Potential to close gender pay gaps by redefining performance metrics.

Barnes outlines a 5-step process:

1. Audit current productivity metrics.
2. Redesign workflows to eliminate inefficiencies.
3. Pilot the model with clear KPIs.
4. Train managers to lead by outcomes, not hours.
5. Iterate based on employee feedback.

Critics argue the model may not scale for client-facing roles or manufacturing. Barnes counters that flexibility (e.g., staggered shifts) and technology (automation tools) can adapt it to most sectors. He also acknowledges legislative hurdles like overtime laws.

While both advocate shorter workweeks, Barnes focuses on business-led implementation via case studies and productivity frameworks. Schor emphasizes policy changes and systemic shifts to address burnout and climate change. The books are complementary.

• “The five-day week is a 20th-century anachronism.”
• “Output, not hours, is the metric of the future.”

These lines underscore Barnes’ argument that inflexible schedules hinder progress.

With AI and hybrid work reshaping jobs, Barnes’ model offers a template to address rising automation and employee demands for flexibility. Post-pandemic, 63% of firms now pilot similar programs, making the book a timely guide.

Fewer commutes and office energy use cut carbon footprints. Barnes cites trials showing a 10-15% drop in emissions. The book positions work-hour reduction as part of broader climate strategies.