It certainly does have a level of correlation. The less time you spend "at work" (for whatever definition you care, including work from home/the moon) the less

It certainly does have a level of correlation. The less time you spend "at work" (for whatever definition you care, including work from home/the moon) the less work you get done. Now, no, that doesn't translate to a perfect linear growth rate where working 20 hours a day is twice as good as 10 hours a day, there is a limit you can push people. People need vacation and time away. However, it's a rock star who can be as/more productive in three days a week than a similar guy working 5 days a week most weeks. I'll even grant some people can cram for three days a week and be as productive as a 5d/8h guy, but in the end you still need to put in the hours. Note, this comment doesn't allow for absurd comparisons such as "Forrest Gump coding 8 days a week will never match Donald Knuth coding 1 hour a month" or whatever. Ass comparisons should use reasonable definitions.