While impressions of staff being happier and full of energy aren’t exactly scientific basis for declaring 6-hour work days as 'better' than the 8.7-hour work day endured by the average American, we do have evidence that what we’re doing right now isn’t working.[1]

The study equates productivity with quality of care, which doesn't necessarily translate to white-collar work.[2]

[The company] had to hire an additional 15 nurses, which cost 6,000,000 Swedish krona (about $735,000). About half of that expense was offset by the decrease in sick days and time off. That said, the experiment didn't measure how the improved care affected the overall bottom line.[2]

To cope with the significant cut in working hours, Feldt says staff are asked to stay off social media and other distractions while at work and meetings are kept to a minimum.[1]

with more people in work, unemployment benefit payments are cut, but the savings accrue to the state, not the municipality that bears the cost of hiring more staff.[3]

Daniel Bernmar, leader of the Left party group on Gothenburg city council, which pushed for the trial at Svartedalens, admits a six-hour day costs more money, but insists it is a matter of quality of life for public sector workers and for residents in elderly care.[3]

What I see is a quantitative drop in productivity being justified with a qualitative survey. None of which supports "boosts productivity". Along with this is less vacation, but more day-to-day personal time. I'm happier working longer hours for more time off. The only thing that appeals to me in this list is shorter meetings. I work in the private sector though, which doesn't seem to be included in any studies.

[1] http://www.sciencealert.com/sweden-is-shifting-to-a-6-hour-w...

[2] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-10/the-six-ho...

[3] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/17/efficiency-up-t...