Last year, Infosys founder Narayana Murthy suggested that youngsters should work 70 hours a week for “national progress”. In the US, Tesla founder Elon Musk advocates working 100 hours a week to succeed. But such rhetoric glorifying long hours of work is actually counterproductive: it ignores academic research showing that a healthy work-life balance is far more effective for long-term efficiency.
In recent weeks, the debate about workers struggling with long working hours at the cost of their health has been revived with the death of 26-year-old accountant Anna Sebastian Perayil. She had joined Ernst & Young only four months ago. In a letter addressed to the India chairman of Ernst & Young, Perayil’s mother claimed that her daughter was overburdened at work, skipping sleep and meals to meet deadlines.
Firms in which such oppressive work cultures thrive are actually limiting their own potential. There is ample evidence to show that when employees have greater control over their schedules and adequate rest, they are more engaged in their work and also more efficient. Balancing work and life reduces burnout, says Jennifer Moss, author of The Burnout Epidemic. The resulting improvement in quality of life is better job performance and overall productivity, researchers and scholars have found.
Many employees in India work far beyond Murthy’s recommended 70 hours, but still barely make enough to survive. For instance, ASHAs, or the accredited social health activists, who are grassroots workers employed by the government, put in 10 hours-14 hours every day through the year with no break, earning just Rs 3,000 a month. Similarly, studies by a nonprofit found that gig workers often work more than eight hours per day to earn enough to sustain themselves.
A 2022 report by the International Labour Organization shows that South Asia had the highest average weekly working hours: 49. It was followed by Eastern Asia at 48.8.
Murthy’s call for employees to work 70 hours a week so that the national can advance is a distortion of patriotism and reduces dedication to a numbers game. It also diminishes the idea that less work can, in fact, be better for workers and organisations.
Among those who have shown that productivity is maximised when individuals work fewer hours is business scholar Jeffrey Pfeffer. In his 2018 book Dying For a Paycheck, Pfeffer referred to research by Emma Luxton which examined the relationship between hours worked per person and the gross domestic product generated per hour in 38 countries that make up the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development between 1990 and 2012.
Luxton’s research found that increasing work hours beyond 48 per week results in reduced productivity.
In 2012, the International Labour Organization’s review of the impact of working hours on productivity and firm performance also pointed out that extended hours often decreased performance.
Instead, work-life balance is increasingly recognised as a key driver of employee engagement and productivity.
Similarly, giving employees more control of their schedules could have numerous benefits. For instance, in a research paper co-authored in 2005, management scholar Frederick Morgeson identified job autonomy, or the degree of control employees have over their tasks, as a significant predictor of satisfaction and motivation.
Pfeffer, too, noted that increased autonomy improved health and enhanced job performance, which, in turn, fosters a more engaged and productive workforce.
Flexible arrangements, such as remote working and adjustable hours, allow employees to better manage personal and professional responsibilities, which reduces stress and improves mental well-being. Greater employee autonomy can even reduce illness and contribute to mental and physical well being, show studies of hospital workers in Western Europe and white-collar employees in Sweden.
By reducing rigid working conditions, companies can foster a motivated and productive workforce with higher retention and lower absenteeism rates. In contrast, a lack of control for employees and excessive hours can lead to disengagement, depression and diminished output.
Other studies have pointed to a paradox: shorter workweeks can actually increase efficiency. A promising example is Iceland’s four-day workweek trial conducted between 2015 and 2019, involving about 2,500 workers. The results showed that shorter hours not only maintained but even improved productivity. Workers experienced significant improvements in well-being, reduced stress and better work-life balance.
Inspired by Iceland’s findings, countries like Belgium, Germany and Portugal launched similar experiments, which demonstrated that reduced working hours can enhance employee well-being and organisational outcomes. These findings challenge the conventional wisdom that long work hours are the key to success.
As a consequence of this research, conversations about the future of work are increasingly focused on limiting working hours and mandatory rest periods. International Labour Organization reports and global comparisons show that countries like Belgium and Germany, which regulate working hours, experience improved employee well-being and sustained productivity.
India could benefit from similar legislation.
The success of these measures also relies on addressing workload, as author Moss points out in her book on burnout. When workload is unchanged, employees continue working during off-hours, perpetuating burnout, notes Moss. The solution lies in reassessing deliverables to ensure they are manageable within the standard workday.
Measures such as France’s 2017 Loi Travail, or labour legislation, which introduced the right to disconnect, can also go a long way in protecting employees from being constantly connected to work. Employees have the right to ignore digital communications, such as calls, emails, and texts, from employers that are outside their designated work hours. Violations may lead to penalties and even imprisonment for senior company management.
At the same time, mental health discussions in corporations should be normalised to help reduce stigma that prevents employees from seeking support.
It is also important to recognise that these protections should extend to informal and gig workers as well. Efforts to regulate the gig economy, such as the Rajasthan and Karnataka gig workers’ bills, aim to provide essential protections such as fair wages, healthcare benefits and job security. These reforms address the immediate stress and anxiety experienced by gig workers and set a precedent.
Abhilasha Chattopadhyay is a freelance researcher with a PhD in Sociology.