Safeguard Global has moved away from a single four-day workweek model after concluding that a fixed schedule did not provide genuine flexibility for all employees, according to chief executive Bjorn Reynolds.
The company’s experiment began with a straightforward aim: to give staff more time while maintaining or improving outcomes for customers and the business. Some employees embraced the arrangement, and several continue to work that way, but others found that having everyone follow the same four days was restrictive.
Reynolds said the experience showed that changing the number of working days was not the same as allowing people to choose how they worked. The company had, in effect, replaced one standard schedule with another.
Why the four-day workweek was not enough
Safeguard Global then reassessed its approach on a role-by-role basis, asking how much choice employees could have while still meeting the needs of their teams, customers and the wider business.
Reynolds describes the resulting approach as “optionality”: allowing people to structure their work in different ways rather than imposing one company-wide arrangement.
Employees who can fulfil their responsibilities in four days can continue to do so, while a five-day week remains available where it is more suitable. The same principle applies to location. The company is overwhelmingly remote, but retains offices and coworking options for those who want or need them.
“The point isn’t to eliminate structure,” Reynolds said. Instead, the aim is to give employees as much choice as the work permits, without prescribing a single version of flexibility for everyone.
Accountability remains central to flexible working
The model depends on clear expectations and accountability, with managers encouraged to assess results rather than hours worked or physical presence.
Safeguard Global has defined what employees in different roles need to achieve. For customer-facing staff, this could include strengthening an important customer relationship, reducing recurring problems or improving customer sentiment.
Reynolds said the measures will vary between roles, but the underlying principle is consistent: performance should be judged by meaningful outcomes rather than time spent online or in an office.
He also acknowledged that giving employees more freedom requires greater discipline from leaders. Managers must be precise about what success looks like, rather than relying on attendance or time at a computer as a proxy for performance.
Reynolds said the company’s experience had changed his view of workplace policy. Four-day weeks, hybrid arrangements and return-to-office plans can all become top-down solutions when leaders decide on a model and expect employees to adapt to it.
He argued that organisations should be prepared to test ideas, observe how they work in practice and change direction when the results do not match expectations. For Safeguard Global, that process has led to a broader emphasis on choice rather than a single definition of flexible working.
