When 40 Hours Isn’t Enough

First, we wanted employees returning to the office a few days a week, then came the push for full-time office presence. Now, we’re witnessing something even more dramatic: some business leaders are advocating for workweeks well beyond 40 hours. 

As someone who’s been in the recruitment industry for over two decades, I’ve observed a particularly interesting development in recent weeks. A prominent tech founder publicly advocated for not just full-time office presence but suggested 60 hours as the “sweet spot” for productivity. Similarly, a major investment bank CEO bluntly told employees who weren’t willing to return full-time to seek employment elsewhere. This isn’t just about controlling where people work – it’s about reclaiming corporate culture, particularly in certain industries. Throughout my career placing executives, I’ve seen firsthand how these sectors often wear long hours as a badge of honour.

However, this push for extended hours feels like a step backward. Many of my clients have successfully embraced work-life balance, recognising that well-rested employees are more productive employees. The science backs this up: research consistently shows that productivity decreases after 50-55 hours of work per week.

That said, we can’t ignore industry-specific expectations. However, in my experience, working with both companies and candidates, maximum productivity isn’t about clock-watching – it’s about engagement. Leaders who want to get the most from their teams should focus on creating environments that foster intrinsic motivation and shared purpose. When people feel genuinely connected to their work and colleagues, productivity naturally follows.

As a leader, it’s important to recognise, it’s not about how many hours you can keep people at their desks – it’s about creating an environment where people want to give their best, whether that’s for 40 hours or more.