The Four-Day Workweek Trials Are Over—Here's What Actually Happened (And Which Companies Are Keeping It)

In November 2024, 61 companies across the U.S. and UK started year-long four-day workweek trials. The goal: test whether reducing work to four days (32 hours) with no pay cut would maintain productivity and improve employee wellbeing.

One year later, the results are in.

42 of the 61 companies (69%) are making the four-day workweek permanent. 15 companies are returning to five days. 4 companies are still undecided.

Here's what actually happened during the trials—and why some companies succeeded while others failed.

What The Four-Day Workweek Trials Tested

The trials followed a "100-80-100" model:

100% pay: Employees keep full salaries
80% time: Work four days instead of five (32 hours instead of 40)
100% productivity: Expected output remains the same

Participating companies ranged from tech startups to professional services firms to manufacturers. All committed to a full year, with data collection throughout.

Participating industries:

Technology and software (23 companies)
Professional services (consulting, accounting, legal) (18 companies)
Marketing and creative agencies (12 companies)
Manufacturing and logistics (5 companies)
Healthcare and wellness (3 companies)

Each company worked with researchers from MIT, Stanford, and Oxford to track productivity, revenue, employee retention, and wellbeing metrics.

The Companies That Made It Permanent (And Why)

42 companies are keeping the four-day workweek after their trials ended.

What these companies have in common:

1. Knowledge Work, Not Time-Based Work

Companies where work is measured by output (software development, marketing, consulting) succeeded.

Example: Bolt Marketing (Atlanta, GA)

Industry: Digital marketing agency, 45 employees

Results after one year:

Revenue increased by 12% (clients billed on project basis, not hours)
Employee retention: 100% (zero voluntary turnover during trial year)
Client satisfaction scores unchanged
78% of employees reported better work-life balance

Why it worked: Marketing deliverables are project-based, not hour-based. Clients care about campaign results, not how many hours the team worked.

CEO quote: "We cut meetings by 50%, eliminated low-value tasks, and focused on high-impact work. Productivity didn't drop—it increased because people had time to think strategically instead of just reacting."

2. Redesigned Work Processes

Companies that succeeded didn't just remove Fridays—they redesigned how work happened.

Example: Codebase (software company, San Francisco, CA)

Changes they made:

Meeting caps: Maximum 2 hours of meetings per day
Async communication default: Slack messages expected to be answered within 24 hours, not immediately
Focus time blocks: 2-hour blocks of uninterrupted work time daily
Eliminated status meetings: Replaced with written updates

Results:

Productivity (measured by features shipped per quarter) increased by 8%
Engineer satisfaction increased by 42%
Recruiting improved: 3x more applicants per role

Why it worked: They removed inefficiencies that filled five-day workweeks. Forced prioritization led to better outcomes.

3. Strong Leadership Commitment

Companies where leadership championed the policy and modeled the behavior succeeded.

Example: Thrive Counseling (mental health services, Seattle, WA)

What leadership did:

CEO and executives also worked four days (no exceptions)
No emails or Slack messages sent on Fridays (even from leadership)
Clients informed upfront about four-day schedule
Staff coverage model designed so no one worked five days

Results:

Therapist burnout decreased by 40%
Client retention stayed at 94% (unchanged from five-day schedule)
Recruiting for therapists (historically difficult) became dramatically easier

Why it worked: Leadership modeled the behavior, making it culturally acceptable. Employees didn't feel guilty for taking Fridays off.

The Companies That Abandoned The Four-Day Workweek (And Why)

15 companies returned to five-day workweeks after the trial.

Why they failed:

1. Customer Service Requirements

Companies that need to provide real-time customer support struggled.

Example: TechSupport Pro (IT support company, Austin, TX)

What went wrong:

Clients expected Monday-Friday coverage
Rotating Friday shifts created scheduling complexity
Some employees worked Fridays while others didn't, causing resentment
Response time SLAs were harder to meet with reduced hours

Why they abandoned it: Client contracts required five-day coverage, and rotating schedules created more problems than they solved.

CEO quote: "We tried rotating who worked Fridays, but that defeated the purpose. The team that worked Friday felt like they were missing out. We couldn't make the math work."

2. Didn't Redesign Work Processes

Companies that just removed Fridays without changing how work happened failed.

Example: Apex Consulting (management consulting, New York, NY)

What went wrong:

Kept the same meeting schedule (compressed into four days)
Clients still expected availability five days a week
Consultants worked the same hours, just squeezed into fewer days
Burnout increased instead of decreased

Why they abandoned it: They treated it like a compressed workweek (40 hours in 4 days) instead of a reduced workweek (32 hours in 4 days).

Partner quote: "We didn't change anything except removing Friday. People just worked longer Monday-Thursday and felt more exhausted. It was a failed experiment."

3. Manufacturing and Time-Dependent Operations

Companies where physical presence is required struggled more than knowledge workers.

Example: Precision Parts Manufacturing (Texas)

What went wrong:

Production lines need staffing five days to meet customer demand
Can't compress 40 hours of machine operation into 32 hours
Rotating schedules meant inconsistent team collaboration
Clients placing orders expected consistent fulfillment times

Why they abandoned it: Manufacturing output is directly tied to hours worked. Unlike knowledge work, you can't "work smarter" to maintain output in fewer hours.