Compete With Hunger, Not Hours

The importance of competitiveness seems to have reemerged in the lexicon of global corporate culture.  I don’t know if that’s because of all the recent visibility into tariffs and international competition, or because the effects of “Long Corporate Covid” have finally worn off.  For whatever reason, I’m seeing more and more people talking about the challenge of reestablishing a competitive work ethic in order to fully participate in new economic opportunities around the world.  Unfortunately, those conversations too often revolve around work hours.

A venture capitalist in Europe recently speculated that perhaps start-ups on the Continent need to adopt the 9-9-6 model that Chinese companies promote, calling for people to work from nine a.m. to nine p.m., six days per week.  Yes, that’s seventy-two hours for those who haven’t done the math.  During my career I’ve consulted with a number of companies who promoted that kind of schedule.  When I graduated from college in the late ’80s I worked those hours myself for a couple of years, something I acknowledge here not to brag or complain but merely to establish my credibility when it comes to understanding the benefits and costs of driving employees that hard.

And so it is with confidence I can say that it’s not a good idea. 

Now, let me be clear that I am not one of those “soft” people advocating for a fuzzy definition of work-life balance.  For instance, I do not believe that people were just as productive working from home in the aftermath of Covid.  People who claimed that to be the case had no real data to support their hypotheses, and were usually motivated by their own desire to avoid commuting and the need to wear pants.

I’m also not a proponent of the mindset that employees need to be protected from evil employers by government regulation.  Over the past thirty years, I’ve witnessed the cost of European laws which made it next to impossible for leaders to push their people harder, and for that matter, to fire employees who didn’t want to work hard at all.  It was a massive competitive disadvantage for them, one that crept into the U.S. in recent years and which executives and wise legislators are trying to untangle today.  

As an example of the absurdity that has pervaded company culture around the world, I was recently told by Australian leaders that there is a law which allow employees to prohibit their managers from contacting them outside of work hours.  I think it’s called the Right To Disconnect legislation.  I would recommend that Australia consider enacting a different law that allows employers the Right To Disconnect from employees who sign up for it.

Again, I don’t want to pick on Australia or Europe, because plenty of misguided people in the U.S. and other parts of the world are promoting the same things in their countries. The point I want to make is that focusing on work hours, whether you’re a company or a legislature, is missing the point of true competitiveness. 

What we should be promoting and encouraging is not how much time people work, but how much hunger and passion they have for what they are doing.  And while there are times when people certainly have to be willing to work long hours when the situation calls for it, it is not a good measure of real commitment.  Ultimately, what we should want more than a person’s time is their sense of personal ownership and responsibility.  We want them to choose to do heroic things for customers and colleagues not because they are forced to, but because they see their work, and the reputation of their company, as a reflection of themselves. 

Hungry employees can make decisions for themselves about when they need to leave work early or work from home to attend a child’s school activity or take care of a spouse with the flu.  They find creative ways to make up for any lost time, and they volunteer to help their teammates do the same during unpredictable or special circumstances.  Perhaps most important of all, they are so grateful for the trust and flexibility granted to them that they become more loyal and committed to their manager and employer. Rather than count the number of hours they work and finding ways to game the system, they go above and beyond.

When leaders create this kind of reality, the right people get rewarded.  The others either adapt to fit in, quit their jobs to find an easier place to work, or are given the “opportunity” to work elsewhere by management.  Whatever the case, they are certainly not protected.  And ultimately, the companies that embrace hunger and passion over work hours create a climate where reasonable and sustainable work-life balance coincides with competitiveness and economic vibrancy.