How Do you Measure the Effects of a Shorter Workweek? Insights from a National Public Sector Evaluation

The Working Time Reduction Initiative in Israel

In 2023–2024, Israel implemented a major reform in the public sector, gradually reducing the workweek from 42 to 40 hours while maintaining employee salaries. The initiative was designed to improve employee well-being, strengthen work–life balance, and increase productivity without compromising organizational performance. Given the scale of the reform and the diversity of public sector workplaces involved, evaluating its effects required a rigorous approach.

Evaluation Design

The evaluation covered seven public sector organizations, including government ministries, a municipality, a public utility company, and the National Social Insurance Institution. Rather than relying on a single source of evidence, the evaluation adopted a mixed-methods design that combined administrative data analysis, surveys, interviews, and focus groups. This approach allowed the evaluation team to assess not only whether change occurred, but also how and why it occurred.

Evaluation Methodology: Leveraging Large-Scale Longitudinal Administrative Data

At the core of the methodology was the analysis of longitudinal administrative data from more than 16,000 public sector employees. The dataset covered a period of approximately three years and included information on working hours, overtime, salaries, demographic characteristics, and employment patterns. By examining the same employees before and after the implementation of the reform, the evaluation was able to identify actual behavioral changes rather than relying solely on perceptions or self-reported information. This longitudinal design substantially strengthened the findings.

To complement the administrative records, the evaluation collected survey data from more than 500 employees and managers across participating organizations. The surveys explored perceptions of productivity, work quality, organizational commitment, job satisfaction, burnout, and work–life balance. Targeting both employees and managers made it possible to compare perspectives across organizational levels.

The qualitative component added another layer of analysis. Through focus groups and in-depth interviews with employees, managers, and senior leaders, the evaluation explored how the reform was experienced in practice. These discussions provided context for the quantitative findings, helping explain why some groups benefited more than others and how organizations adapted to the new working arrangements.

Building a Strong Evidence Base for Policy Decisions

A key strength of the evaluation was the systematic triangulation of evidence. Administrative data showed what changed, surveys revealed how employees and managers perceived those changes, and qualitative interviews explained the mechanisms behind them. By integrating large-scale longitudinal data with survey and qualitative evidence, our evaluation generated a nuanced understanding of the reform’s impact.