Germany’s 2024 pilot deserves attention precisely because it was not a coronation. Forty-five organisations, six months, academic evaluation from the University of Münster with Intraprenör and 4 Day Week Global — and at the end, most firms continued, some returned, and two large firms left early. Those exits are not a weakness in the study. They are evidence we can learn from.
The headline results
About 73 percent of participating organisations continued or extended the shorter week after the pilot. Around 20 percent returned to their previous pattern. Productivity and revenue were broadly stable rather than dramatically higher — a finding we consider more credible, not less. More than 90 percent of employees reported better wellbeing, and, in one of the pilot’s most quoted figures, staff slept an average of thirty-eight minutes more per week.
Firms redesigned work to get there. Sixty percent cut the frequency or length of meetings. A quarter adopted new digital tools during the pilot. Around 60 percent applied the model across the whole firm, while 40 percent piloted in specific teams — a normal pattern in larger employers.
Germany also tested the recruitment argument. Researchers and participating employers linked the shorter week to being more attractive in a tight labour market, in a country openly worried about demographic shrinkage. That may prove to be the pilot’s most consequential theme: shorter time as a labour-supply strategy, not a perk.
The honest limits
Germany did not find strong evidence of lower absenteeism compared with its more rigorous comparison approach. We cite that often, because it disciplines the sales pitch. In the UK 2022 pilot, sick and personal days fell sharply; in South Africa, absenteeism fell more modestly. Germany’s tougher design did not reproduce a clear effect. Different measures, different contexts — but a responsible consultant does not quote only the convenient studies.
The sample was also voluntary and, like every major pilot, disproportionately made up of organisations already motivated to change. Stable revenue in firms that chose to try this is not a promise of stable revenue everywhere. It is evidence that collapse is not inevitable — that the fear of an automatic twenty percent output loss is not borne out when work is redesigned.
What the two honest exits teach
Two large firms exited early, and larger manufacturers were over-represented among organisations that struggled, citing economic pressure and coverage constraints. That pattern fits everything else we know. Production environments cannot delete a day and hope. They need staggered crews, maintenance windows moved deliberately, and honest fatigue measures — and even then, a downturn can change the economics mid-pilot.
An early exit with stated reasons is better than a slow, silent failure. It tells the next manufacturer what to solve first. It also tells employees that the pilot was real: the decision rules had teeth. Firms that continue regardless of evidence teach staff that consultation is theatre.
We would add one more lesson. About a fifth returning is not a scandal. A pilot that ends in “no, with reasons” has done its job. The scandal would be a firm that kept the day, kept the workload, and let staff pay for the difference in exhaustion and secret overtime.
Why Germany matters alongside the UK and Portugal
Set the three European pilots side by side and a consistent picture emerges. The UK 2022 pilot, reported in February 2023, found burnout down, sick days down, revenue slightly up, and most firms continuing. Portugal, reported in December 2023, found firms that changed two or more processes were the ones that kept going. Germany added three things: a more sceptical absenteeism result, an unusually concrete recovery measure in sleep, and documented exits in larger firms.
Together they point to a mature claim. A shorter week, with pay held, tends to improve wellbeing and can hold output steady when work is redesigned. It is not automatic, it is not free in coverage settings, and the firms that thrive are the ones that treat the day as a redesign programme with a benefit attached — not a benefit with a diary change attached.
Sources
- University of Münster / Intraprenör / 4 Day Week Global, Germany pilot, via Phys.org, October 2024 — https://phys.org/news/2024-10-hours-germany-wide.amp
- HR Brew, 24 October 2024 — https://www.hr-brew.com/stories/2024/10/24/world-of-hr-73-of-german-companies-that-tried-a-four-day-workweek-will-keep-the-schedule
- Gomes & Fontinha, Portugal pilot, via Personnel Today, 14 December 2023 — https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/portugals-four-day-week-reduces-anxiety-and-fatigue/
- Autonomy / University of Cambridge / Boston College, UK pilot, reported 21 February 2023 — https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/02/230221113132.htm
Day5Group is a consultancy that assists in the transition to a 4 day work week. More about Day5Group · All blog articles