[markokocic]

In that case, if it indeed works like that, sounds like a nice place to work.

I would go even a step further, if all work is result driven, why having work hours anyways? Why not just agree on what has to be done in some future time period, and forget about hours completely?

That way, employees will feel more relaxed, and accomplish more.

I'm sure I can do more in 20 "high hours" than in 40 "forced hours", but if you don't let me work only 20 "high hours" a week, and assign me 20 more "forced hours", it would inevitable lead back to 40 "forced hours" with much more work and less done.

That's why I never bid based on hourly rate, but based on some agreed amount of work, when doing contracts.

[MattRogish]

Correct, in a ROWE (for us; obviously if you're a 7/11 you have open hours, etc.), there's no such thing as "work hours". But, for the same reasons that we have short iterations in scrum, we time-box results to a week so feedback is early and often, and we can continually course-correct.

With our implementation of ROWE, there's no such thing as an "annual performance review" because you essentially get one every week. We have periodic salary review (quarterly) to see if you need adjusted (salary is based on a semi-objective tech ladder we've devised) but otherwise there's no "Let's meet every 12 months so I can check off 'meets expectations' and give you your cost-of-living adjustment"