An executive at a state-owned enterprise, who requested anonymity, agreed that while the four-day work week has potential benefits, its success depends on the industry.
“In flexible sectors like tech or creative industries, it might work. But in manufacturing, energy, or public services, operational demands are 24/7, making it challenging,” he opined.
Similarly, industries like healthcare, tourism, and logistics face significant hurdles.
Reno Rafly, vice president of people experience at Paxel Indonesia, a logistics technology company, said that it has to run delivery services daily and cannot afford to reduce workdays abruptly.
Instead, Paxel has adopted a flexible approach, allowing non-operational teams to work remotely four days a week while requiring only one day in the office.
Reno said this hybrid model has proven effective in maintaining productivity.
DIVERGING PERSPECTIVES: PRIVATE SECTOR VS GOVERNMENT
Public sector entities such as government ministries do not have to worry about the threat of direct business competition when it comes to implementing a four-day work week.
However, private companies, according to Abbie, must consider their competitive edge.
Abbie warned that reducing workdays could put businesses at a disadvantage if competitors maintain longer work weeks.
“If competitors work five or six days a week while we work only four, we risk losing customers, falling behind in innovation, or even ceding market share,” she said.
She added that private companies must not only ensure employee well-being but also maintain business sustainability amid fierce competition.
Abbie also emphasised that the key question is how government institutions, whose primary stakeholders are the Indonesian people, can effectively serve public needs if they operate only four days a week.
