I cut back my work hours for 2 weeks and discovered some surprising benefits - and drawbacks
Around 5:15 p.m. every workday, I lose steam. As in, I try to write a story and can't think of a synonym for "manager." I try to respond to emails, and I learn it takes way too much energy to check my calendar and let someone's PR person know when I'm available for a phone call.
After a few minutes of forcing myself to buckle down, I give up. I walk to the office kitchen and back. I log onto The New York Times website and half-skim an article about the presidential elections. At 5:50 p.m., I try again to write a few paragraphs, to no avail.
At some point, it's 6 p.m., and I've acknowledged the uselessness of the struggle. I pack up my bags and leave.
To be sure, there are exceptions to this rule. If I'm really engrossed in a story or I've got a ton of research left to do before the following day, I stick it out - sometimes until 7 p.m. or so.
But generally, I can count on my brain turning against me at a quarter past 5. Resistance is futile.
But the prospect of freedom - of not having to wage a battle against mental exhaustion on a daily basis - was too tantalizing to refuse. I agreed to take on the assignment.
Typically, I get to work around 9 a.m. and spend my lunch break reading a work-related book. According to the "rules" of this experiment, each day for two weeks, I'd work a 9-5 schedule, including a half-hour lunch break. That meant I'd be cutting my work hours by about 17%, from 45 hours a week to 37.5 hours. Whenever I wasn't working, I wasn't supposed to be thinking about work, either.
Over the course of the past two weeks, there have been some surprises about working fewer hours (I felt lonely) and some more predictable outcomes (I felt rushed). I've learned a lot about myself and about how I work best.
Below I've described some of the key takeaways of this experiment, and how I hope to draw on them going forward.