Compete With Hunger, Not Hours

Summary

Patrick Lencioni argues that competitiveness should be driven by employee hunger, ownership and passion — not by counting hours. He critiques long-hours prescriptions (like the 9-9-6 model) and restrictions such as strict “right to disconnect” rules that focus on time rather than motivation. Lencioni says leaders should create cultures that reward responsibility and commitment, allow flexibility, and trust employees; hungry employees will make trade-offs, cover for colleagues, and deliver sustained results without being micromanaged by time sheets.

Key Points

Competitiveness depends on employee hunger and ownership, not just total hours worked.
Extreme schedules (e.g., 9-9-6) have costs and are not a reliable path to sustainable performance.
Legislation or policies that rigidly limit contact or time can create competitive disadvantages if they prioritise hours over effort.
Trust and flexibility encourage loyalty: hungry employees repay that trust with creativity, reliability and extra effort when needed.
Leaders should reward passion and accountability; those unwilling to engage either adapt, leave, or are managed out.

Content Summary

Lencioni opens by noting renewed talk about competitiveness in corporate culture and policy. He warns against equating competitiveness with hours worked, sharing personal experience of long-hour stints and concluding they are not a sustainable model.

He criticises both the push for draconian, long-hour schedules and laws that make it impossible for managers to expect higher standards. Using examples such as the European debate and Australia’s “Right To Disconnect” rules, he illustrates how focusing on hours misses the point.

The crux: leaders should cultivate hunger — employees who feel personal ownership and pride in their work. Hungry people will balance commitments, make up time when needed, help colleagues, and remain loyal because they value the trust given to them. Such cultures reward the right people and produce sustainable competitiveness that aligns with a reasonable work-life balance.

Context and Relevance

This piece is timely amid ongoing debates about post‑Covid work models, labour law, global competitiveness and executive strategy. For CEOs and HR leaders deciding how to motivate teams, the article reframes the discussion: focus on intrinsic motivation and responsibility rather than enforcing hours. It connects to trends around hybrid work, employee engagement, and productivity measurement.

Author style

Punchy. Lencioni writes plainly and sharply — he calls out fads, pulls from personal experience, and drives to a single managerial prescription: hire for hunger and design culture around ownership. If you lead people, the tone is both blunt and useful.

Why should I read this?

Because counting hours is lazy management. This short piece explains, in plain language, why passion and ownership beat time cards — and gives leaders a quick mental model for hiring, rewarding and organising teams that actually deliver. Worth a few minutes if you hire, fire or set policy.