I'm totally open to the possibility that this result could be sustainable over longer time periods and persist in other countries and even (some) other types of

I'm totally open to the possibility that this result could be sustainable over longer time periods and persist in other countries and even (some) other types of work. However, it seems prudent to discount the odds of broader applicability due to all the obvious confounding factors. * Cultural norms. * Poorer pre-existing efficiency. * Introduction of new focus on time and efficiency creating optimization which fades over time. * Gains on shorter-term metrics offset by longer-term, hidden costs (eg sufficient 'slack time' is asserted to sometimes enable innovation or tasks which management may prioritize lower but which have yield important benefits). Over several decades I've been either an early employee or founder in four startups where I was able to help imagine, specify and implement what eventually became high-performing organizations. I'm often asked about "secrets of success" but all four had substantial enough differences that the only constant is they each were either created or evolved to have uniquely effective set of parameters including structure, style, culture, personnel, etc. Each org was uniquely adapted to it's competencies, customers, context and even era. Obviously, "good people" are "good" but figuring out what that looks like in advance for any particular problem set is error-prone and rife with confirmation bias upon post-hoc rationalization. The best meta-advice I'm confident enough in to share are things like adaptability, the right metrics, perceptive leaders willing to question assumptions and change course based on new evidence. Unfortunately, these come across as vague platitudes. As near as I can tell, the magic is more in custom fitting a sufficiently winning mix of org parameters, from team to metrics to work hours and more, to succeed against the specific challenges and context the org must solve to succeed. In light of my world-view that dozens or hundreds of interacting parameters need to fit (and that there are many workable "solves"), I feel that this experiment, at best, exposes another possible lever to put into your "solve" that might be beneficial contingent on a bunch of other factors.