Tech Start-Ups Drive Return of 70-Hour Working Week Culture

A growing number of technology companies are openly advertising roles requiring employees to work approximately 70 hours weekly, marking a significant shift in workplace expectations within the sector.

Rilla, an artificial intelligence firm based in New York that develops monitoring systems for sales teams, has positioned itself at the forefront of this trend. The company's recruitment materials explicitly state that candidates should not apply unless prepared to work roughly 70 hours per week alongside what it describes as highly driven colleagues.

Will Gao, Rilla's head of growth, characterises the firm's 120-strong workforce as possessing qualities akin to elite athletes. He emphasises that employees are seeking to accomplish significant achievements whilst maintaining enjoyment in their work. Gao notes that whilst hours tend to be extended, the structure remains flexible, allowing individuals to work late into the night on projects before arriving later the following day.

This intensive working pattern, commonly termed 996 culture—referencing nine-to-nine shifts across six days weekly—has gained traction particularly among AI-focused businesses. The phenomenon reflects mounting pressure within the technology sector as companies compete to develop and commercialise artificial intelligence capabilities amid substantial venture capital investment.

The practice originated in China's technology sector approximately a decade ago, when the nation was transitioning from manufacturing towards advanced technology leadership. Prominent business figures including Jack Ma, founder of Alibaba, publicly endorsed extended working hours. Ma described the ability to work such schedules as a considerable advantage, arguing that successful individuals across various fields commonly maintained similar commitments due to passion for their work rather than exceptional willpower.

Richard Liu, who established JD.com, similarly championed intense work dedication, controversially stating in 2019 correspondence with staff that those unwilling to commit fully were not aligned with company values.

However, the approach generated substantial criticism in China, with employees highlighting labour law violations and inadequate overtime compensation. By 2021, authorities responded with regulatory enforcement. Whilst the culture persists in China, public advocacy has largely diminished. A notable exception occurred in 2024 when Baidu's then-public relations chief Qu Jing defended demanding workplace standards on social media, dismissing employee welfare concerns by stating she prioritised results over personal care. The backlash ultimately led to her departure from the company.

Beyond China, the concept has found supporters. Narayana Murthy, founder of Indian software corporation Infosys, praised China's work intensity in a television interview, asserting that no society has progressed without committed effort.

The recent surge in AI development has catalysed adoption of intensive working patterns within American technology firms. Adrian Kinnersley, who operates recruitment agencies across Europe and North America, identifies AI companies with venture capital backing as primary adopters. These organisations face competitive pressure to develop and launch products before rivals, leading to beliefs that extended hours provide competitive advantage.

Magnus Müller, a German entrepreneur who co-founded Browser-Use—a start-up creating tools enabling AI systems to navigate web browsers—exemplifies this mindset. Operating from a shared living and working space, Müller and colleagues maintain continuous collaboration. He views lengthy hours as inherent to solving complex technical challenges, suggesting that deep immersion in problems yields breakthrough moments.

Browser-Use currently employs seven people and seeks additional staff with comparable commitment levels. Müller states that individuals seeking conventional 40-hour weeks would not suit the environment, comparing the work to addictive gaming where activity feels less like employment and more like pursuing passionate interests.

Contrasting perspectives exist within the investment community. Deedy Das, a partner at Menlo Ventures—a venture capital firm with nearly five decades of technology investment experience—believes young entrepreneurs frequently err by demanding 996-style commitments from employees.

Das argues that founders mistakenly equate hours worked with productivity, creating a flawed premise. He suggests that compelling employees to maintain hustle culture stems from this misconception and risks alienating workers with family responsibilities alongside experienced professionals who achieve superior results through efficiency rather than extended presence. Das warns that sustained intensive schedules lead to burnout.

Nevertheless, Das acknowledges different standards apply to company founders themselves, who possess financial stakes and wealth-creation potential. He expresses that he would find it surprising if founders were not working 70 to 80 hours weekly, noting that such commitment serves as an indicator when evaluating early-stage investments.

Tamara Myles, an academic and author specialising in workplace culture, describes hustle culture as ultimately unsustainable, particularly when individuals feel obligated to work constantly. She acknowledges complexity exists within the discussion.

Extended working hours carry documented health consequences. Japan, with its established culture of intensive work commitment where employees have historically supported economic growth through dedication to employers, has terminology specifically addressing these risks. Karōshi refers to death through overwork, primarily from strokes and heart attacks among those maintaining very long hours. Karōjisatsu describes workplace stress-related suicide or attempts.

Both concepts hold recognition in Japanese law, with families theoretically eligible for government compensation, though proving work-related causation remains challenging in practice.

Broader analysis published in 2021 by the World Health Organization and International Labour Organization examined global impacts of long working hours, defined as exceeding 55 weekly. The research concluded that such schedules contributed to 745,000 deaths from stroke and heart disease worldwide in 2016 alone.

The study determined that working 55 or more hours weekly increased heart disease mortality risk by 17 percent compared with 35 to 40 hours, whilst stroke risk rose by 35 percent.

Productivity considerations also factor into the debate. Research demonstrates that output initially increases with additional hours but eventually declines as physical and mental exhaustion accumulate. The optimal point is widely recognised at approximately 40 hours weekly.

Recent academic work notes that workers generally maintain productivity satisfactorily around 40 hours across five days, but exceeding this threshold causes gradual performance deterioration due to fatigue and compromised health conditions. Beyond this point, incremental output per additional hour worked diminishes.

Companies face temptation to employ fewer people working longer hours, as each additional employee carries recruitment, training, and compensation costs. However, research suggests this strategy may prove counterproductive. Michigan State University findings indicate productivity can decline so sharply that employees working 70 hours weekly produce almost identical output to those working 50 hours.

This principle is not novel. A century ago, Henry Ford pioneered change by reducing factory workers' schedules to 40-hour, five-day weeks, establishing a precedent followed by other major industrialists.

Some British business figures advocate adopting aspects of American technology sector practices. James Watt, co-founder and former chief executive of BrewDog, shared widely circulated commentary suggesting that work-life balance concepts were created by individuals disliking their employment. He proposed that loving one's work eliminates the need for balance, requiring instead work-life integration.

Watt subsequently referenced King's College London research showing British people among the least likely to prioritise work above all else, describing the UK as among the world's least work-oriented nations.

A 2022 documentary featured accusations of inappropriate workplace behaviour and power abuse against Watt. He apologised to anyone made uncomfortable by his conduct whilst disputing what he characterised as false rumours. BrewDog's current chief executive James Taylor stated in the previous year that the business has moved beyond earlier controversies.

Extended hours are not entirely unfamiliar within certain UK sectors. Major corporate law firms offer substantial salaries but frequently demand lengthy working days in exchange. A survey conducted by Legal Cheek found average days of 12 hours or more are not uncommon.

Investment banking—the financial sector division handling mergers, acquisitions, and public offerings—similarly maintains a reputation for demanding schedules. Industry sources indicate 65 to 70 hours weekly are relatively standard, potentially extending to 100 hours during major transaction closings.

UK working time regulations specify that most employees should not work beyond 48 hours weekly on average. However, individuals may opt out and work longer by choice. Provided employee consent is given, 996 schedules are legally permissible.

Ben Wilmott, head of public policy at the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, disputes the notion that extended hours improve performance. He states no apparent correlation exists between long hours and productivity, whilst evidence demonstrates increased health risks including elevated stroke and heart disease incidence.

Wilmott advocates focusing on working more intelligently rather than longer, through enhanced management capability, technology adoption, and AI implementation to boost productivity rather than increasing hours.

Some advocates propose the UK could benefit from reduced working hours through four-day week adoption. They reference a 2022 pilot involving 61 organisations that reduced hours for all staff over six months without reducing pay.

The project concluded that the change significantly decreased workforce stress and illness whilst improving staff retention without productivity loss.

Recruitment specialist Adrian Kinnersley believes current enthusiasm for 996 patterns remains largely confined to technology, for understandable reasons. He suggests that whilst debatable whether 80-hour weeks are necessary, competing effectively in the present environment with a relaxed 35-hour culture would prove challenging.

For Magnus Müller at Browser-Use, the hours he and contemporaries maintain in Silicon Valley appear unremarkable. He notes his origins in a small German village where farmers rise at five o'clock daily, working over 12 hours across seven days with minimal holidays beyond brief periods when livestock care can be delegated.

Müller suggests numerous industries feature considerably harder jobs with more intense struggles and greater work demands, describing technology sector efforts as relatively modest by comparison.

Industry Impact and Market Implications

The resurgence of intensive working cultures among technology start-ups reflects fundamental shifts in competitive dynamics within the AI sector. Companies operating with venture capital funding face pressure to demonstrate rapid progress and achieve market position before rivals, potentially creating a self-reinforcing cycle where extreme hours become an expected norm for attracting investment.

This trend could influence talent acquisition patterns across the technology industry. Firms adopting 996 schedules may attract specific demographic groups—primarily younger workers without family obligations and those viewing intensive commitment as temporary investment towards future wealth. Conversely, this approach may limit access to experienced professionals and diverse talent pools, potentially impacting long-term innovation capacity.

The phenomenon also raises questions about sustainability of business models built on intensive labour inputs. Research suggesting productivity plateaus or declines beyond 40 to 50 hours weekly implies that companies relying on extreme schedules may face diminishing returns, particularly as initial founding teams expand and organisational complexity increases.

Traditional sectors known for demanding hours, including corporate law and investment banking, may face renewed scrutiny if technology companies normalise even longer schedules. Alternatively, if health consequences or productivity limitations become more apparent, the current wave could accelerate adoption of alternative approaches including flexible working and condensed weeks.

The regulatory environment may also evolve. Whilst UK law permits opt-out arrangements, widespread adoption of 996 patterns could prompt policy discussions about worker protections, particularly if health data continues demonstrating elevated risks from sustained long hours.

For investors, the debate presents considerations around sustainable growth versus short-term competitive intensity. Venture capital firms may need to evaluate whether companies built on extreme working cultures can maintain performance as they scale and mature beyond founder-led phases.