| Mexico has the worst productivity of the listed countries and the longest workweek: https://time.com/4621185/worker-productivity-countries/ For a large population working longer gives no obvious benefit. It might work for you and your family! But globally, for any general population, you can't squeeze out more than the 7-8 hours of productive work per day and for even some fields this is a stretch. So, even if there is the cultural need to appear ultra dedicated, there is very little evidence of any benefits to that behaviour pattern. Lots of cultures have their way of doing things, but if it does not make sense, cultures can change. I don't see how a cultural homogeinity is necessary to respond to cross cultural economic facts. But the article was not about working longer! It was about being flexible when and how you want your employees to perform the added value function you've hired them to do. I fail to see even less how cultural homogeinity would be a major factor in this. You are quite right of course that cultural norms affect lots of things. But I don't know why they would block employers from being flexible (flexible does not mean less demanding). |
First, productivity is heavily influenced by technology and financialization of the economy. A programmer working 8 hours per day creates a much larger GDP than a factory worker working 8 hours per day. So you can't compare the productivity of workers in a place like Mexico, where there is a lot of manufacturing and agricultural work, to a place like the USA, where a lot of the work is in fields like finance, software development, media, etc. (In your article, that's why Luxembourg has 50% higher GDP per hour worked as compared to Germany or the US--it's a heavily financialized economy.)
Second, there is a difference between productivity per hour worked and total productivity. Working more hours can lead to diminished productivity per hour, but still lead to overall higher GDP. The chart in the article actually proves that. Each American worker is responsible for $119,000 in GDP per year. Each Danish worker is responsible for $96,500 per year. Americans work about 23% more hours and produce about 23% more overall.
Third, even if there are diminishing returns to working more hours, they're not huge. Americans work a full quarter more than Germans, while maintaining higher productivity per hour. Part of that is due to America being more of a high-tech/financial economy, but in any event it doesn't seem like the extra work is tanking productivity.
As to the point about cultural homogeneity: the success of flexible work arrangements are predicated on social consensus, and building social consensus requires homogeneous values and attitudes. If you want to build a work culture where people feel comfortable taking 4-5 weeks of vacation, having a bunch of Americans who think it's better to work 25% more for 25% more money is going to undermine that. If you want people to feel comfortable working from home, having people who are culturally pre-disposed to associating face time with commitment to the job is going to undermine that.