If long working hours are your only idea, you’re unfit to be a leader.

 

Read the original article (in Japanese):

Working 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., Six Days a Week

Originating in China and now spreading to some U.S. AI startups, the “996” schedule means working from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., six days a week—a 72-hour workweek.
Executives promote it under the belief that “more hours yield more results.” But unlike executives, employees do not enjoy large stock holdings or massive payouts; the return on their time is limited. Ignoring this asymmetry of reward makes such demands unsustainable.

Comparing Working Hours in Japan, Germany, and the U.S.

According to OECD data (2023), annual working hours are:

CountryAnnual Hours
Germany~1,343
Japan~1,607
U.S.~1,705

Germany is famous for short working hours, the U.S. for longer hours, and Japan sits in the middle—neither “overworked” nor “underworked.”

When Hours Differ but Productivity Matches

Measured by GDP per hour worked (PPP), the U.S. stands at about USD 97.7, Germany at USD 95.0, while Japan lags at USD 56.8.
Despite a 360-hour annual difference in working time, U.S. and German productivity is nearly identical. This proves that results depend on efficiency, not sheer hours.

Japan’s middling hours but low productivity point to structural problems, not a lack of time.

Structural Causes of Japan’s Low Productivity

  • Meeting and paperwork culture: Slow decision-making due to excessive layers and procedures.

  • Time-biased evaluations: Rewarding presence over results.

  • Vague job design: Blurred lines of authority cause duplication and rework.

  • Slow IT and automation uptake: RPA and AI stall at exception handling.

  • Shortage of specialists: Weak cross-functional improvement capability.

Such issues cannot be solved by simply adding more hours, as the 996 model suggests.

The Risks of Long Hours

WHO and ILO research links long working hours to higher risks of heart disease and stroke.
Japan’s labor laws cap overtime at 720 hours annually, making the 996 schedule nearly impossible under current regulations.

Japan Needs “Quality of Hours,” Not “Quantity”

Japan must raise value per hour worked. Key directions:

A. Work Design

  • Reduce decision layers; make meetings decision-making venues only.

  • Shift to OKRs and other results metrics over time-based evaluation.

  • Permanent cross-functional teams to cut rework.

B. Technology

  • Focus automation on the “last mile”: eliminate repetitive checks and formatting.

  • Use generative AI for semi-finished drafts: 80% AI output, 20% human refinement.

C. People

  • Reward problem-solving value, not hours.

  • Institutionalize rest: no-meeting blocks, monthly self-learning half-days.

  • Protect deep-focus time with notification and chat restrictions.

Models from the U.S. and Germany

  • German model: Short hours, high efficiency via process management and supportive policies.

  • U.S. model: High rewards for high performance, driving high-value output.

Japan can combine both to boost productivity.

Conclusion — The 996 Schedule Is Not Effort, but an Illusion

The 996 schedule may appear to be a shortcut to results, but in reality, it risks lowering efficiency, harming health, and driving away talent.
For Japan, the path to competitiveness lies not in increasing hours, but in improving the quality of those hours to raise value per hour worked.


Read in Japanese↓

長時間勤務を求めるのは無能の証明｜データが示す「時間より効率」（2025.8.13）

Read more articles (in Japanese)↓

生産性向上とイノベ実現は社員のストロングポイント活用しかない（2025.8.8）

コメント

コメントを投稿

このブログの人気の投稿

Why Aren’t Wages Rising in Japan?

イメージ
  Why Aren’t Wages Rising in Japan? — How the Labor Share Ratio and Retained Earnings Are Stalling Economic Growth Read the original article (in Japanese): 生産性3割アップも「増えない給料」　原因は「貯めこむ大企業」にあった | TBS NEWS DIG Chapter 1: The Illusion of Wage Growth Despite government announcements of a “historic wage increase,” most workers in Japan feel no real difference in their paychecks. The reality is that real wages have barely moved in 25 years , even though labor productivity has risen by roughly 30% during the same period. This growth rate exceeds that of major European economies like France and Germany. The popular narrative — “wages haven’t increased because productivity is low” — is no longer credible. The real question is this: Why are companies making more money, yet not paying workers more? Chapter 2: Record Corporate Profits, Yet No Pay Raises The most glaring figure is Japan’s retained earnings , also known as corporate savings or internal reserves. In 1998: approximately...
続きを読む

Proposing the Radical Idea of a “Tenure-Based Retirement System”

イメージ
Read the original article (in Japanese): 「もう長すぎた…」宇宙飛行士・野口聡一氏が57歳でJAXAを辞めた納得のワケ( ダイヤモンド・オンライン ) The Reality Behind the 45-Year Retirement Debate The ongoing public debate around the “45-year retirement” and early retirement plans in Japan was initially intended to encourage self-directed career development. Yet, many workers interpret these initiatives as thinly veiled attempts to push them out. As astronaut Soichi Noguchi has noted, Japan’s work culture tends to reward compliance over skill-building or career ownership. If we want to change that, we need structural reform—not just slogans. The Proposal: A Tenure-Based Retirement System A better alternative is the Tenure-Based Retirement System . Rather than setting a fixed age for retirement, the idea is to define an employee’s career cycle within a company by tenure—say, a 20-year maximum. Such a system allows for natural career reflection without age-based discrimination. More importantly, it promotes a mindset where workers are exp...
続きを読む

How “Incompetent Seniors” Drive Young Employees Away Through Broken OJT Structures

イメージ
 Read the original article (in Japanese): なぜ「OJT」ばかりの企業に若者は定着しないのか？　上司が部下育成を勘違いする理由 「うちはOJTで育てる」と胸を張る企業がある。OJTとはOn-the-Job Trainingの略で、現場で実務を通じて部 www.itmedia.co.jp Introduction: Is “We Train Through OJT” a Cop-Out? “We develop people through OJT”—how many times have we heard this in Japanese workplaces? On-the-Job Training (OJT) is originally meant to be a practical learning method where skills are honed through real work. Yet in practice, many companies abuse this term as a way to justify throwing new employees into unfamiliar tasks without guidance. This leads to frustration, underperformance, and ultimately, resignation. This article explores why such “OJT in name only” is problematic and what structural improvements companies must make—drawing comparisons to the foundational training methods found in sports and the arts. 1. Without Form, Growth Can’t Begin Karate, Baseball, and Art: Why Mastery Begins with Form Karate has kata. Baseball has standard stances and pitching mechani...
続きを読む