In today’s fast-paced and hyper-competitive world, the idea of “work-life balance” has become a rallying cry for employees and a pressing challenge for employers. However, the debate about what constitutes balance—and how to achieve it—has been reignited by recent calls from business leaders advocating extended workweeks. L&T Chairman S.N. Subrahmanyan proposed a grueling 90-hour workweek for employees, while Infosys founder Narayana Murthy declared that a 70-hour workweek is essential for India's economic competitiveness.

While their intentions to foster discipline and productivity are evident, these suggestions have sparked widespread concerns about the impact on employees’ mental and physical health, social lives, and long-term workplace sustainability. This article delves into the risks of such work cultures, lessons from these proposals, and how modern employees and organizations can redefine work-life balance for a more sustainable future.

The Risks of Long Working Hours

Extensive research has underscored the dangers of working long hours. A 2021 study conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) revealed that working 55 or more hours per week increases the risk of stroke by 35% and heart disease by 17%. The risks are not just physical; mental health deteriorates with long hours, leading to chronic stress, burnout, and even depression.

For example, Japan's infamous culture of "karoshi" (death due to overwork) highlights the tragic consequences of unrelenting work schedules. Cases of karoshi often involve young professionals succumbing to heart attacks or suicides caused by stress. Similar patterns have been observed in South Korea, which has one of the highest rates of overwork-related deaths globally.

Closer to home, in India, the growing emphasis on longer workweeks threatens to exacerbate similar issues. Studies by Deloitte India reveal that 83% of Indian employees experience workplace burnout, with over 47% citing long hours as a key reason. This data raises critical questions about whether longer hours truly yield better results or if they simply push employees to the brink of collapse.

S.N. Subrahmanyan’s Advocacy for a 90-Hour Workweek

When S.N. Subrahmanyan advocated for a 90-hour workweek, he positioned it as a solution to intensify focus and productivity in India’s competitive sectors. While his statement may resonate with those who see hard work as a cornerstone of success, it raises important concerns.

A 90-hour workweek translates to working nearly 13 hours a day, seven days a week. Such a schedule leaves little room for basic human needs—rest, recreation, and relationships. It also risks fostering a culture of presenteeism, where employees feel compelled to stay at work longer, regardless of their actual output.

Experts warn that such work cultures create a short-term spike in productivity but are ultimately unsustainable. Dr. Jeffrey Pfeffer, a professor at Stanford University and author of Dying for a Paycheck, notes, “Long work hours contribute to employee disengagement and lower productivity over time. They are not a sustainable way to build a high-performing workforce.”

Moreover, younger generations entering the workforce—millennials and Gen Z—are pushing back against such ideas. A survey by Glassdoor found that 70% of employees now prioritize work-life balance over salary. This cultural shift makes it increasingly difficult for organizations to retain top talent under extreme work conditions.

Narayana Murthy’s Perspective on a 70-Hour Workweek

Narayana Murthy, a respected figure in Indian business, stirred further debate with his proposal for a 70-hour workweek. Murthy believes that longer hours are essential to improve India’s global competitiveness. He pointed out that countries like China and South Korea often work harder and longer, giving them an edge in productivity.

However, critics argue that the solution is not merely increasing work hours but improving efficiency and skill development. For instance, Nordic countries like Denmark and Sweden consistently rank high in productivity and innovation while maintaining a 37-hour workweek. Their focus on work-life balance, coupled with investments in education and workplace efficiency, has allowed them to thrive without overburdening employees.

Murthy’s proposal also clashes with the values of the modern workforce. For instance, the Great Resignation movement saw millions of employees worldwide quitting jobs due to burnout and a desire for better balance. India was no exception—LinkedIn’s 2022 Workforce Confidence Index showed that 63% of professionals in India prioritize flexible working arrangements over higher pay.

Lessons from the Debate: Quality Over Quantity

The debate around 90-hour and 70-hour workweeks offers critical lessons:

1. Productivity Peaks Before Declining: Research by John Pencavel at Stanford University shows that productivity sharply declines after 50 hours of work per week. Beyond 60 hours, the output is negligible, highlighting the diminishing returns of excessive hours.
2. Healthier Employees Are More Productive: Companies like Google and Microsoft invest heavily in wellness programs, recognizing that healthy employees are not only happier but also more innovative and efficient.
3. Flexibility Drives Engagement: Employees who can balance their personal and professional lives report higher job satisfaction and are more likely to stay with their organizations.

Achieving Better Work-Life Balance

Achieving work-life balance requires a collective effort from both organizations and employees. Companies must foster cultures that value efficiency over long hours. Policies such as flexible schedules, four-day workweeks, and remote work options can significantly enhance balance without compromising output.

For individuals, achieving balance starts with setting boundaries. Limiting after-hours emails, prioritizing personal time, and delegating tasks are effective strategies. Tools like the Pomodoro Technique and time-blocking can also help employees manage workloads efficiently.

One inspiring example comes from Iceland, where a nationwide trial of a four-day workweek demonstrated remarkable results. Employees reported lower stress levels, better health, and improved work-life balance, while employers noted sustained or even increased productivity.

Modern Workforce Perspectives

Today’s workforce, especially younger generations, sees work-life balance not as a luxury but as a necessity. They value purpose-driven work and seek employers who prioritize well-being. The rise of flexible work policies, mental health support, and employee wellness programs reflects this shift.

For example, companies like Atlassian and Shopify have adopted remote-first work models, enabling employees to manage their schedules better. A 2022 survey by PwC revealed that 77% of employees believe flexible work arrangements lead to greater productivity and job satisfaction.

What Defines a Good Work-Life Balance?

While there’s no universal answer to how many hours define a good balance, most studies suggest that 40 to 45 hours per week allow sufficient time for both professional and personal growth. However, the key lies in autonomy—letting individuals tailor their schedules to suit their lives.

Conclusion

The work-life balance debate is more than a discussion about hours; it reflects evolving attitudes toward work, productivity, and well-being. While leaders like S.N. Subrahmanyan and Narayana Murthy advocate longer workweeks to drive economic growth, it is essential to consider the profound impact on employees' mental and physical health.

The future of work lies in fostering balance—prioritizing quality over quantity, embracing flexibility, and promoting a culture where employees can thrive both professionally and personally. The lesson is clear: it’s not about working more; it’s about working smarter. Only then can individuals, organizations, and economies achieve sustainable success.

.    .    .

Disclaimer:

"The views and opinions expressed in this article are based on publicly available statements made by industry leaders and are intended for discussion and analysis. This article does not make any allegations against individuals or organizations but aims to explore different perspectives on work-life balance and workplace productivity."