The psychological benefits of working less

Summary: Working fewer hours isn’t only associated with improved health and psychological benefits; it can also help us to become more productive.

Source: The Conversation

The daughter of a friend of mine recently left university and entered the world of work, taking on a temporary office job. At the end of her first week, she phoned home in tears. “It’s horrible,” she complained to her mother, adding:

There’s no time to do anything else. I’m so tired when I get home in the evenings that all I can do is watch TV. And then I have to get up early the next morning and do it all again. If this is what work is like, I don’t want to spend my whole life doing it.

Many of us might sympathise with her feelings of dismay. The daily grind of modern employment can make weekends, holidays and the prospect of retirement highly treasured prospects.

So is the equivalent of a four-day working week, as proposed by the UK’s Labour party, really such a bizarre idea? Aside from the fact that working shorter hours might actually make us more productive, there is no doubt that it would enhance our well-being.

If you’re lucky, you might have a job that is stimulating and fulfilling. But I would argue that even then, work should not be the main aspect of your life, or its defining feature. Working 40 hours a week makes our lives narrow and constricted, meaning we lose sight of whole vistas of possibility and adventure.

There’s so much to learn in life, so many different ways to develop, so many experiences to absorb, so many activities to enjoy (including doing nothing). When we spend so much time working, it’s difficult to find time and energy for anything else.

A working history

After all, work as we know it is a relatively modern activity. For the whole history of the human race up until a few thousand years ago, human beings lived as hunter-gatherers. Their main job was to find food, and perhaps surprisingly, they didn’t have to work particularly hard to do this.

Some anthropologists have estimated that contemporary hunter-gatherers who follow the same simple lifestyle as our prehistoric ancestors only spend around four hours a day searching for food. The rest of the time is leisure time.

Life only really became difficult once our ancestors started farming. Grinding food out of the soil was a lot more labour intensive than hunting or picking fruit from trees.

Then came the industrial revolution, when human beings were imprisoned in factories and mills for almost all of their waking hours, treated as nothing more than objects of labour, working in appalling conditions for appalling wages, and usually dying at a young age.

Working conditions are far better now, at least in more economically developed parts of the world. But I think we still haven’t gone far enough in a positive direction.

We’re still living with the legacy of the industrial revolution, in thrall to a mistaken idea that work defines us and should be the primary pursuit of our lives. We’re still living as economic objects whose main value is what we can produce.

What’s the alternative, you might ask. If we didn’t work so hard, our economies would fail, and we would all be living in poverty. But this isn’t necessarily the case.

Less work, more sleep, better life

In continental Europe, working hours are significantly shorter than in the US and the UK, and productivity is actually higher. Countries like Holland and Denmark are more economically successful than the US or the UK. And not uncoincidentally, they also have higher levels of well-being.

Working less does not mean economic failure. In fact, the opposite may be true. It may be that longer working hours just make people tired and resentful, and therefore less productive. There is also evidence that too much work impairs our health, leading to poor sleep and an increased risk of conditions such as heart disease and type 2 diabetes.

Crucially, working less has many psychological benefits. It means less stress and anxiety. It means better relationships, because we spend time with our loved ones, and have more energy to give them.

This shows a woman sitting at a computer
Working less also enables us to experience the joys of doing nothing in particular. Image is in the public domain.

It also gives us more opportunity to live authentically through following our own innate interests, so that we spend more time in the positive state that psychologists call “flow” (when we are intensely absorbed in enjoyable activities). We have more time and energy to nurture our creativity, which also leads to a more meaningful and purposeful life.

Working less also enables us to experience the joys of doing nothing in particular. In my research, one of my areas of interest is individuals who undergo a life transformation following periods of intense turmoil or stress, or a close encounter with death. I call this “post-traumatic transformation”.

People who experience this often report that they feel more grateful for life, more connected to nature; that they have more authentic relationships and become more creative and spiritual.

Another change is that they are no longer so interested in work. They love to spend their time doing nothing in particular, just enjoying being in the moment and being alive in the world.

And perhaps we are at a point when we need to rethink our whole relationship with economics. It’s clear that the world’s population cannot keep producing and consuming material goods at the present rate.

The environmental effects are simply too severe. Our planet is already suffering the strain, and won’t be able to withstand much more damage. A recent report by a think tank suggested that working less should be one of the tools we utilise to avert climate catastrophe.

The modern emphasis on work is completely out of proportion, and harmful to our well-being. One thing is for sure: if you spend nearly all your waking hours working, then it doesn’t matter whether you’re a millionaire businessman or a successful financial analyst. You’re not really so different from a factory worker in a 19th-century industrial town.

You are an economic object, whose life only has value in terms of the labour you perform. The only difference is that you have the freedom to change – and to make your life more meaningful and fulfilling.

[divider]About this neuroscience research article[/divider]

Source:
The Conversation
Media Contacts:
Steve Taylor – The Conversation
Image Source:
The image is in the public domain.

[divider]Feel free to share this Psychology News.[/divider]

Join our Newsletter
I agree to have my personal information transferred to AWeber for Neuroscience Newsletter ( more information )
Sign up to receive the latest neuroscience headlines and summaries sent to your email daily from NeuroscienceNews.com
We hate spam and only use your email to contact you about newsletters. We do not sell email addresses. You can cancel your subscription any time.
  1. I completely agree that we should be working fewer hours. I’d also point out that we’ve actually been regressing in this regard over the last half century. People are now working 2 or 3 jobs just to make ends meet. But something that gets overlooked is the increasing number of two-income families. The total working hours per household is a better metric than that of the individual worker. When you take that into account, the total number of hours worked is regressing to levels probably closer to a full century ago.

    In most cases, it is women entering the workplace that add to the total household hours, which is progress unto itself. However, there should not be a need for families to have more than one full-time income in the first place. There’s nothing wrong with married mothers working, so long as their spouse can stay home to care for the children. When both parents need to work outside the home, families suffer.

    The real problem, which wasn’t fully addressed in this article, is that pricing of essential goods and services in our economy is based on a competitive marketplace. Housing in particular has a limited supply, although this supply is intentionally constrained here to maintain artificially high property values. Because of this competitive process, once some households choose to work more hours, prices are driven up in the housing and other markets. So choosing to maintain a reasonable number of working hours for your own family puts you at a competitive disadvantage, and you will get priced out of your own neighborhood unless you follow suit.

    As a result, the solution is not as simple as choosing to work less, as this article suggests. Instead, for us to be able to live comfortable lives while working much fewer hours, we need to make the choice as a society not to encourage the concentration of wealth and to move away from free-market pricing of basic necessities of human life. The average person can never fully realize the fruits of this excess labor because their standard of living is not increased significantly as a result. The excess productivity goes instead into the hands of capitalists, further exacerbating the wealth and income gap.

    If everyone agreed to just work half the hours we all do now, I can guarantee that our standard of living would be relativity unchanged. This is because the prices of nearly everything would drop in accordance with the drop in household incomes. There is a limit of course, because we do rely on a certain amount of overall productivity to maintain our standard of living. But due to our ever increasing technology and automation, the minimum number of hours that we need to work should be decreasing if anything, and certainly not increasing!

  2. In just a few paragraphs you have managed to capture what has gone so terribly wrong for humans and at the same time explain solutions that all the worlds governments should adopt. Basically we are needy and greedy and we will probably known in history as the consumerists. Well done for telling it as it is I hope one day someone listens.

Comments are closed.