Four day work week jobs Australia: what the trial data actually shows

Four day work week jobs in Australia are no longer a curiosity you read about once and forget. There are now named, currently hiring employers running the model, two separate completed trials with real numbers behind them, and a specific way employers are screening for whether a candidate can actually deliver in an output based role rather than just show up for the hours. If you're applying to one of these roles with a resume written for a standard 9 to 5, you're leaving the strongest part of your pitch unsaid.

The position worth stating early: a four day week job doesn't want to hear that you're willing to work fewer hours. It wants evidence you already think in outputs delivered rather than hours logged, because that's the entire premise the arrangement runs on. A resume that leads with attendance and effort is answering a question this employer isn't asking.

The trial data, not just the vibe

Two separate, real pieces of research back the case that this isn't a fringe experiment anymore.

The first is a two year academic study led by Professor John Hopkins of Deakin University, published via The Conversation in May 2026, with the topline finding, that firms saw no productivity losses and all but one kept the model, also reported separately by ABC News. Researchers ran in depth interviews with 15 Australian small and medium businesses, from early 2023 to late 2024, all running the 100:80:100 model: 100 percent of previous pay, for 80 percent of previous hours, with output held at 100 percent. Of those 15 firms, 6 reported productivity had risen, 9 reported it had stayed about the same, and none reported a drop. The average success rating businesses gave the model was 8.5 out of 10, and 14 of the 15 firms had kept running it by the time researchers followed up, with the one exception dropping it for unrelated organisational timing reasons rather than a failed result. The businesses ranged from 2 to 85 staff, spanning logistics, property management, healthcare and publishing, and burnout reduction was the single most commonly cited reason for trying it in the first place, named by 6 of the 15 firms.

The second is an earlier, larger pilot: 4 Day Week Global's official Australia and New Zealand results, a six month trial using the same 100:80:100 structure with a two month preparation phase. That pilot reported 64 percent of employees experienced reduced burnout, 96 percent of employees wanted to continue the arrangement afterward, 54 percent reported improved work ability, sick and personal days fell by 44 percent, and 95 percent of participating businesses said they planned to keep running the model.

Two separate trials, two different research teams, two different time periods, and neither one found productivity falling. That's the actual evidence base behind the phrase "four day work week trial results Australia", not a single anecdote dressed up as a movement.

Companies with a four day week in Australia right now

The trial data proves the model works. The practical question for a job seeker is who is actually hiring under it. 4dayweek.io's directory of Australian employers tracks more than 20 named companies currently running a four day week or an equivalent reduced hours arrangement at full pay, most on a 32 hour week. It includes web engineering firm XWP, practice management software company Cliniko, bug tracking SaaS BugHerd, UX research platform Lyssna, brand consultancy House of Brand, behavioural science consultancy Inventium, intellectual property law firm MBIP, and social enterprise Our Community, among others, spanning technology, professional services, creative agencies, not for profits and consulting. Company sizes in that list run from single digit teams to XWP's 80 staff, the largest in the directory, which matters for how you approach the application: a 9 person design studio and a 45 person software company are not going to run identical hiring processes, but both are genuinely operating the model, not trialling it as a PR exercise.

That directory is worth checking directly and regularly rather than relying on this list going stale, since new employers join and some drop off. Treat it as a starting point for a targeted search, not the complete universe of every four day week employer in the country. Plenty of other employers run informal or unadvertised reduced hours arrangements that never make a public directory at all, so a targeted approach beats treating the list as exhaustive.

How to get a four day week job: what these employers are actually screening for

The mechanics of applying don't change, cover letter, resume, maybe a screening call. What changes is what each of those documents needs to prove. An employer running 100:80:100 has already accepted the tradeoff of fewer hours in exchange for held or improved output. What they're screening for in your application is evidence you can hold your end of that bargain, meaning they read a resume full of hours based signals, "responsible for," "managed the day to day," "handled ongoing," as a mismatch, because none of that tells them what actually got produced.

Reframe every bullet around delivered outcomes, not time spent or duties held. A resume line that reads "Managed customer support inbox and handled day to day queries" describes presence, not output. Rewritten for an output based screen, it becomes something like "Cleared a backlog of 340 support tickets to zero within six weeks and cut average response time from 18 hours to 4, without adding headcount." The second version answers the exact question a 100:80:100 employer is actually asking: what did you deliver, and how efficiently.

Lead with results that were achieved in compressed or fixed time, if you have them. If you've ever hit a deadline early, delivered a project ahead of schedule, or produced the same output with fewer resources than a previous version of the role required, that's the single most directly relevant kind of evidence you can offer, because it's proof you've already operated the way this employer needs you to operate.

Drop language that signals hours as the achievement. Phrases like "consistently worked long hours to," "always available," or "went above and beyond on time commitment" read as a mismatch for an output based role, since they imply the value delivered is proportional to time spent, which is precisely the assumption the 100:80:100 model is built to disprove. Replace time signals with output signals throughout.

A worked example: cover letter line

Say you're applying to a marketing role at a firm running a four day week, and your current resume includes the duty "Ran weekly social media content calendar." Rewritten as an output based cover letter line, that becomes: "In my current role I produce and schedule a full month of social content in the equivalent of three working days by batching creative and copy together, which freed capacity for two additional campaign launches last quarter without extra hours." That single sentence does three things at once: it proves you already think in output per unit of time rather than hours worked, it gives a real number a hiring manager can picture, and it signals directly that you'd be a low risk hire under a compressed week, because you're already operating like one.

Our guide on tailoring a resume to a job description covers the broader discipline of matching your real achievements to what a specific ad is actually asking for, truthfully rather than by inflating language. The output reframe described here is that same discipline applied to one specific, currently growing segment of the market. And since this kind of evidence is easiest to write well when you're not reconstructing it from memory under deadline pressure, keeping a running master resume of concrete outcomes as they happen, not just duties held, is what makes a strong output based rewrite possible in the first place rather than something you're inventing the night before you apply.

What not to do

Don't say you want a four day week because of lifestyle or family time as the primary pitch in an application, even if that's honestly part of your motivation. It's true for almost every candidate applying to these roles and it tells the employer nothing they can't assume. What differentiates an application is evidence that you'll hold up your end of the output bargain, not that you want the benefit. Save the lifestyle framing, if you want to mention it at all, for an interview conversation once they already believe you can deliver.

Don't assume "four day week" on a job ad always means 100:80:100 at full pay. Some roles compress the same hours into four longer days rather than reducing total hours, and some reduce pay proportionally to reduced hours. Read the ad and, if it's not stated, ask directly at the screening stage rather than assuming. The trial data cited above specifically covers the 100 percent pay, 80 percent hours model, and conflating a compressed schedule with that model in an application shows you haven't actually read the offer carefully.

A short routine for targeting these roles

1. Check a live directory like 4dayweek.io's Australian list on a rolling basis, not once, since new employers join it over time.
2. For each role that interests you, identify one to three achievements from your recent work that show output delivered against a constraint, time, budget, headcount, and rewrite them as specific, numbered bullets before you touch the rest of the application.
3. Cut any bullet or line that measures effort or hours rather than result.
4. If the ad doesn't specify the exact structure, hours, pay and expectations, ask at first contact rather than assuming.

Common questions

Are four day work week jobs actually common in Australia now, or still rare?

They're a real, growing segment rather than mainstream yet. A public directory currently tracks more than 20 named Australian employers running the model at full pay, spanning technology, professional services, creative agencies and not for profits, alongside two completed trials that found no employer reporting a productivity drop.

What were the actual results of Australia's four day work week trial?

A two year Deakin University study of 15 Australian firms found 6 saw productivity rise, 9 saw it hold steady, and none saw it fall, with an average success rating of 8.5 out of 10 and 14 of the 15 firms still running the model afterward. An earlier six month pilot by 4 Day Week Global reported 64 percent of employees experienced less burnout and 95 percent of participating businesses planned to continue.

Which Australian companies currently run a four day week?

Named employers include XWP, Cliniko, BugHerd, Lyssna, House of Brand and Inventium, among more than 20 others tracked in a public directory, spanning technology, professional services and creative industries, most running a 32 hour week at full pay.

How do I write a resume for an output based role instead of an hours based one?

Rewrite duty based bullets into results based ones, replacing phrases like "responsible for" or "handled ongoing" with a specific outcome and a number, for example turning "managed customer inbox" into "cleared a 340 ticket backlog in six weeks, cutting response time from 18 hours to 4." The goal is proving what you delivered, not what you were present for.

Does a four day week always mean the same pay for fewer hours?

Not always, so check before assuming. The trial data in this piece specifically covers the 100:80:100 model, full pay for 80 percent of hours, but some employers instead compress the same total hours into four longer days, or reduce pay in proportion to reduced hours, so it's worth confirming the specific structure at the first conversation rather than assuming from the job ad alone.

Will applying with an output focused resume guarantee an interview for a four day week role?

No, and no honest guide can promise that. What it does is remove the most common mismatch in these applications, a resume that reads as hours based to an employer explicitly screening for output based thinking, which puts your real achievements in front of the person making that call in the terms they're actually evaluating against.

Where ResumeProofed fits, and where it doesn't

ResumeProofed can't tell you whether a specific employer's four day week is genuinely 100:80:100 or something looser, that's on you to confirm in the ad or at first contact. What it can do is take your real achievements and help you reframe them around delivered output rather than hours or duties, matched to the specific language a given job ad is actually screening for, so an application to one of these roles reads as evidence rather than a hopeful guess.

Try ResumeProofed free: two tailored applications on the house, no card required.