Countries with long average working hours are economically more successful than those countries which do not work long hours. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It has been considered that the higher number of working

hours

is beneficial the success in the

economy

of a country

in contrast

to other nations with lower average working time. I disagree with that perspective, and the following essay will provide

the

Remove the article

apply

show examples

reasons. Thinking that long

hours

of

labor

Change the spelling

labour

show examples

guarantee more work is done seems obvious;

however

, some successful countries with leading economies have demonstrated the opposite by being very productive with a reduced schedule, and less

laboring

Change the spelling

labouring

show examples

time.

Such

is the case of countries like Germany, which has been recognized to have the lowest average number of

hours

worked annually, which is 1400, and yet it is the

third

strongest

economy

in the world which is worth 1.3 trillion dollars. Their focus has been mainly on utilizing more technology, and a philosophy to work smarter rather than harder.

On the other hand

, a different scenario is seen from nations that have the perspective that longer schedules will grant a higher yield in the

economy

. Unfortunately, the extended working periods do not necessarily bring the expected results. According to “The World In Data” a website dedicated to sharing statistic trends worldwide showed that South Africa that has relatively weak finances has the toughest working conditions, and has an averaged of 2300

hours

that a worker has to do yearly. In conclusion, a more extensive schedule in the workforce does not necessarily translate into more productivity and a more efficient local

economy

,

therefore

, governments could implement a system similar to the one used by Germany based on High-Tech and innovative ideas.