Compressed work schedules, such as a 4-day workweek, are intended to improve employee work-life balance and allow more women who shoulder family responsibilities to work full-time. A Ghent University study reveals that compressed work schedules are more often used to manage unpaid overtime rather than facilitate a transition to full-time work.
Compressed work schedules, such as full-time, 4-day weeks, are viewed as solutions for enhancing work-life balance and increasing full-time female labour participation. A Ghent University study shows that many employees can find the compressed schedules appealing but not for the expected reasons. These findings emerged from the study’s focus on how autonomy, career, and personal considerations might impact the decision to use these policies, taking into consideration factors such as gender, prior work hours, and children.
The context of the study was Belgium’s 2022 labour reform that legally allowed employees to work in full-time compressed work schedules. The researchers first surveyed before the reform had passed more than 1000 Belgian workers, exploring their intention to consider switching to compressed work schedules should they become available (Study 1). The second phase of the research (Study 2) moved from intent to actual use of the policies. This second phase involved both a quantitative survey of more than 400 employees in a single organization and qualitative in-depth interviews with a dozen of the surveyed policy users as well as several managers.
Quantitative results from both studies consistently showed that employees with longer prior daily working hours were significantly more inclined to use compressed work schedules. Study 1 found a positive association between daily working hours and intended policy use: employees who were working very long hours believed that switching to a compressed schedule would increase their autonomy. Study 2 confirmed this, showing each additional hour worked daily before adopting the policy was associated with a 9.1 percentage point increased probability of choosing a compressed schedule.
The qualitative interviews in Study 2 provided deepened the understanding of employee motivations in making the switch. The overwhelming majority of interviewed policy users pointed to prior regular overtime work as an incentive to adopt the new schedule. The compressed schedule allowed them to compensate for their unpaid extra hours via an additional day off, effectively using it to regulate their chronic overtime. This suggests the policy functions not just for work-life balance or recovery but also as a tool to gain control over schedules and address existing imbalances from overwork. Managers in the studied organization acknowledged the prevalence of unpaid extra hours and persistent staff shortages, recognizing the unsustainability of current workload expectations, which influenced their decision to implement the policy despite concerns about reduced unpaid extra hours.
Contrary to policy expectations that compressed schedules would encourage female labour participation by offering an alternative to part-time work, the findings showed limited policy use among female part-time workers. Many respondents to the study believed moving from part time to compressed schedules would help their careers and improve personal relationships outside of work, but women working part-time and employees with school-age children were less likely to be among them. Instead, these employees found compressed schedules challenging, experiencing decreased schedule flexibility and increased work-family conflict due to the longer workdays. Interestingly, while the quantitative surveys didn’t find that having children increased the likelihood of using the new schedules, the qualitative interviews revealed that not having school-age children was perceived as an advantage for managing the longer days.
Overall, the studies suggest that compressed work schedules are not a one-size-fits-all solution. While appealing to overworked employees seeking to formalize or gain control over their extra hours, they may not be suitable, and can even be detrimental, for those with significant caregiving responsibilities, who may still prefer part-time arrangements.
The study’s findings suggest that compressed work schedules should not be treated as a universal solution for work-life balance. Instead, organizations should consider offering a menu of feasible flexibility policies, allowing workers to choose the most suitable option for their personal and professional needs. Employees with caregiving responsibilities, for example, may find that alternative policies, such as traditional part-time work or flexible hours, would be better suited for them. HR practitioners play a pivotal role in guiding employees towards the best fit while ensuring organizational continuity.
The study reveals that requests for compressed schedules might signal excessive job demands or chronic overtime issues. If employees are primarily seeking the policy to formalize or gain compensation (via time off) for existing overtime, organizations and HR should consider more fundamental solutions. Strategic workload reduction or providing financial compensation for overtime might be more effective in improving employee well-being and could potentially be more beneficial for the organization than compressed schedules.
Finally, the study can help policymakers recognize that compressed schedules may not universally improve outcomes for women, especially those currently working part-time due to family responsibilities, contrary to the popular sales pitch often used to promote such policies.
Kristen du Bois’ profile at University of Ghent
https://research.ugent.be/web/person/kristen-du-bois-0/en
Stijn Baert’s profile at the University of Ghent
https://users.ugent.be/~sbaert/index_en.html
Philippe Sterkens’ profile at the University of Ghent
https://research.ugent.be/web/person/philippe-sterkens-0/en
Eva Derous’ profile at the University of Ghent
https://www.ugent.be/pp/pao/en/about-us/eva-derous.htm
From Policy to Practice: Unraveling Individual Uptake of Compressed Work Schedules. Kristen du Bois, Stijn Baert, Philippe Sterkens, and Eva Derous. Human Resource Management (April 21, 2025).
Ideas for Leaders is a free-to-access site. If you enjoy our content and find it valuable, please consider subscribing to our Developing Leaders Quarterly publication, this presents academic, business and consultant perspectives on leadership issues in a beautifully produced, small volume delivered to your desk four times a year.
For the less than the price of a coffee a week you can read over 650 summaries of research that cost universities over $1 billion to produce.
Use our Ideas to:
Speak to us on how else you can leverage this content to benefit your organization. info@ideasforleaders.com
