Tell me more ×
Skeptics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for scientific skepticism. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 7 down vote favorite
2

I've read in some news articles that after putting in 40 hours a week, productivity drops off dramatically, to the point where it is suggested that it's not worth doing at all. Is this true?

I've heard the claim before but most recently I saw it here: http://www.inc.com/jessica-stillman/why-working-more-than-40-hours-a-week-is-useless.html

And here: http://business.time.com/2012/04/26/stop-working-more-than-40-hours-a-week/

share|improve this question
Could you add a link to this news article? We link to have links to make sure it is a noteworthy claim. – Martin Scharrer Mar 23 '12 at 21:40
7  
Anecdotally - this is obviously false: I have regularly delivered 100 hour weeks of deliverables to clients above their expectations. Some of those quite possibly powered by caffeine, but value nonetheless. – Rory Alsop Mar 23 '12 at 22:42
5  
I think the broadly-made claim is that 40 hours maximizes productivity over a long period of time, i.e., that longer hours, if done over weeks or months, reduce per-hour production to the point where the added salary costs are not worthwhile. Of course, for exempt information workers... – Larry OBrien Mar 23 '12 at 23:24
1  
Broad claims like this are silly, even ridiculous. It certainly applies to some and not to others, as there are many individuals who clearly work long hours without a problem. To some extent it may also require the proper support structure. Given enough financial assets, one can have a maid, a gardener, etc., to do all of your other tasks, leaving you more time to work. In turn, this might require someone who has the talent to have a well enough paid job, and for whom work is not as much a job as their life. – woodchips Mar 24 '12 at 10:39
1  
Without a clear definition I think the terms are too vague to provide a real question for this site. – Christian Mar 24 '12 at 17:47
show 5 more comments

closed as not a real question by Christian, Sklivvz♦ Mar 24 '12 at 22:34

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, see the FAQ.

1 Answer

up vote 4 down vote

I expect it depends on the type of work.

It's been studied for software developers, e.g. in books like Peopleware.

Fire And Motion

I feel a little bit guilty when I see how hard everybody else seems to be working, and I get about two or three quality hours in a day, and still I've always been one of the most productive members of the team. That's probably why when Peopleware and XP insist on eliminating overtime and working strictly 40 hour weeks, they do so secure in the knowledge that this won't reduce a team's output.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.