I run www.4dayweek.io (Software Jobs with a better work / life balance) and recently I've talked to 100+ companies trying to convince them to offer their job listings on a 4 day work week (e.g. 32 hours) - for many companies they simply aren't interested.Here are some common responses:- We are a start up working hard to launch so it wouldn't work for us. I read this as: "we've advertised this as full time, but really it's 24/7"- It would require too much effort to change our current culture. I read this as: "it's the way we've always done it, so no thanks"- "We are only looking for full-time employees". This is the most common response. I always find it interesting when companies who struggle to attract top talent don’t consider offering a benefit such as a 4 day week. The law of diminishing returns means there is little difference between the output in a 4 vs 5 day week. This is also due to Parkinson’s Law.If there was a financial incentive, however, I feel many of these companies would be more inclined to offering a 4 day week.So my question is, if you weren't able to get a 4 day work week job (e.g. 32hrs) on a full salary, would you accept a small reduction in salary? Or would you instead stick to 5 days @ 100% salary?I've also created a poll on Twitter asking this [1]. So if you have a moment to give your honest reply, I'd really appreciate it. It may help me convince more companies to offer their roles on a 4 day work week - there are huge benefits for both employers and employees imo.I personally believe that working 4 days per week doesn't equate to 80% output, more like 90%, and therefore I feel the salary should reflect this. However, in order to normalise the 4 day week, I feel that a small salary reduction might be a good first step.[1] Link to the poll: 