The Restoration Factor: How Different Recovery Strategies Support Sustainable High Performance in Business

Executive Summary

This whitepaper examines the critical role of strategic recovery in sustaining elite business performance. Drawing on cutting-edge research from cognitive science, chronobiology, sports psychology, and organisational behaviour, we demonstrate that recovery is not merely the absence of work but an active process essential for cognitive function, creative capacity, and decision quality. The paper presents a comprehensive taxonomy of recovery modalities across different timeframes and dimensions, along with evidence-based implementation frameworks for individuals, teams, and organisations. For business leaders seeking to build sustainably high-performing organisations, this paper provides actionable strategies to integrate effective restoration practices into work systems, ultimately enhancing both human flourishing and business outcomes through the strategic oscillation between expenditure and renewal of human energy.

Keywords: recovery strategies, sustainable performance, cognitive restoration, ultradian rhythms, chronobiology, attention restoration, sleep optimisation, psychological detachment, organisational performance, energy management

Introduction: The Performance Paradox

Modern business confronts a fundamental paradox: the conditions that drive short-term performance often undermine long-term sustainability. As former Harvard Business School professor Tony Schwartz observes, “The way we’re working isn’t working” (Schwartz, 2010). Despite unprecedented focus on performance optimisation, productivity growth in advanced economies has slowed significantly over the past decade (McKinsey, 2021), while measures of workforce wellbeing and engagement continue to decline (Gallup, 2022).

This paradox stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of human performance. Unlike machines, which function optimally through continuous operation, human performance operates through what chronobiologists call “ultradian rhythms”—natural cycles of energy expenditure and renewal that occur throughout the day. Research by sleep scientist Nathaniel Kleitman demonstrates that these roughly 90-minute cycles govern not just our sleeping but our waking cognitive patterns as well (Kleitman, 1963). Yet contemporary work practices often ignore these fundamental biological realities.

The consequences of this misalignment are severe. A study by Microsoft Research found that the average knowledge worker now experiences focus fragmentation every three minutes, while the typical executive has just 23 uninterrupted minutes per day for deep thinking (Microsoft, 2022). Meanwhile, research by Zijlstra et al. (2014) demonstrates that continuous cognitive demands without adequate restoration create “attentional residue” that progressively degrades performance.

This paper addresses this challenge by examining:

• The science of restoration and its relationship to sustained cognitive performance
• A comprehensive taxonomy of recovery modalities across different timeframes and dimensions
• Evidence-based implementation strategies for different business contexts
• Frameworks for measuring and optimising restoration in organisational systems

For leaders seeking to build organisations capable of sustained excellence, understanding and systematically implementing strategic recovery represents a significant competitive opportunity—one that few organisations have fully realised.

The Science of Restoration: Beyond Rest to Strategic Recovery

The Multidimensional Nature of Recovery

Contemporary research reveals that effective restoration is not merely the absence of work but rather an active, multidimensional process that renews specific cognitive, emotional, and physiological resources.

Sonnentag and Fritz’s seminal research (2007) identifies four distinct psychological experiences necessary for complete recovery:

• Psychological detachment: Mental disengagement from work-related thoughts
• Relaxation: Activities that reduce activation and increase positive affect
• Mastery experiences: Engaging in challenging non-work activities that provide a sense of accomplishment
• Control: Having autonomy in how to spend recovery time

Research demonstrates that these experiences address different aspects of restoration and are not functionally interchangeable. For example, studies by Cropley et al. (2015) show that psychological detachment specifically reduces work-related rumination and associated stress hormones, while mastery experiences replenish self-efficacy resources (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2015), which pure relaxation does not.

This multidimensional understanding helps explain why common recovery approaches—such as simply working fewer hours—often prove ineffective. As research by Bennett et al. (2018) demonstrates, the quality of recovery experiences matters more than their quantity.

Recovery Debt and Performance Decline

Similar to the concept of sleep debt, researchers have identified “recovery debt”—the cumulative deficit that develops when restoration needs consistently go unmet. Recovery debt manifests through predictable stages:

• Performance stability with subjective strain: Initial performance maintained through increased effort despite subjective fatigue (Hockey, 2013)
• Compensatory performance strategies: Maintenance of primary tasks with deterioration in secondary metrics (Lorist et al., 2005)
• Attentional narrowing: Focus limited to immediate priorities with reduced peripheral awareness (Boksem et al., 2005)
• Volatility in performance quality: Increasing variance in output quality (van der Linden et al., 2003)
• Apparent sudden decline: What appears as abrupt performance collapse after extended compensatory maintenance (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004)

These patterns explain why organisations often fail to recognise restoration deficits until significant damage has occurred—compensatory mechanisms mask early warning signs until resources are severely depleted.

The Neurological Basis of Restoration

Neuroscience research has identified specific brain mechanisms involved in restoration:

• Default mode network activation: Studies using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) show that the brain’s default mode network—essential for integrating information, creativity, and perspective-taking—activates primarily during periods of non-directed attention (Raichle et al., 2001).
• Attention restoration: Research by Kaplan (2001) demonstrates that directed attention—a finite cognitive resource—requires specific environmental conditions to replenish, including exposure to natural settings, which reduce prefrontal cortex activation.
• Memory consolidation: Sleep research by Walker and Stickgold (2006) reveals that specific sleep stages actively strengthen neural connections formed during waking hours, converting short-term learning into long-term memory through hippocampal-neocortical dialogue.
• Emotional regulation restoration: Studies by Heller et al. (2013) show that recovery periods allow the prefrontal cortex to reassert regulatory control over the amygdala, restoring emotional equilibrium after stress exposure.

These findings reveal that what appears subjectively as “rest” actually encompasses critical active processes necessary for cognitive function, creative insight, emotional stability, and learning consolidation—all essential components of business performance.

A Taxonomy of Recovery Strategies

Temporal Dimensions of Recovery

Research demonstrates that effective restoration must occur across multiple timeframes, each serving distinct physiological and psychological functions:

Micro-Recovery (Minutes)

Brief intervals during the workday that prevent accumulated fatigue:

• Attention switching breaks: Research by Ariga and Lleras (2011) found that brief task switching every 20-25 minutes prevents vigilance decrements, reducing errors by up to 19%.
• Physiological resets: Studies by Kleitman and Zeigarnik (2018) show that 30-90 second movement interventions counteract the negative cardiovascular effects of prolonged sitting and briefly reset attentional systems.
• Ultradian rhythm alignment: Research by Rosekind et al. (2010) found that aligning work intervals with natural 90-minute ultradian rhythms improved performance by 30% compared to continuous work.

Meso-Recovery (Hours to Days)

Medium-duration recovery periods that restore deeper cognitive resources:

• Evening psychological detachment: Longitudinal studies by Sonnentag and Binnewies (2013) demonstrate that evening detachment from work predicts next-day work engagement, proactive behaviour, and creative problem-solving capacity.
• Weekend recovery: Research by Fritz et al. (2010) found that specific weekend experiences—particularly those providing both psychological detachment and mastery—significantly predict Monday performance quality and engagement.
• Sleep optimisation: Studies by Walker (2017) show that sleep quality (particularly REM and slow-wave sleep) strongly predicts next-day cognitive performance, emotional regulation, and decision quality.

Macro-Recovery (Weeks to Months)

Extended recovery periods that enable deeper restoration and perspective:

• Holiday recovery effects: Research by de Bloom et al. (2013) demonstrates that properly structured vacations produce measurable improvements in cognitive function and wellbeing, with effects lasting 2-4 weeks after return.
• Sabbatical benefits: Studies by Davidson et al. (2010) found that sabbatical periods of 1-3 months produce sustained improvements in creativity, perspective-taking, and strategic thinking that persist for up to one year.
• Seasonal rhythms: Research by Wirz-Justice et al. (2022) shows that aligning more demanding work with natural seasonal energy patterns enhances sustained performance while reducing stress reactivity.

Dimensional Categories of Restoration

Beyond temporal considerations, research identifies distinct dimensions of restoration that address different aspects of human function:

Physical Restoration

• Movement interventions: Studies by Oppezzo and Schwartz (2014) found that even brief walking periods (5-16 minutes) increase creative output by 60% compared to sitting, with effects persisting after returning to desk-based work.
• Nature exposure: Research on attention restoration theory by Kaplan (2001) demonstrates that brief exposure to natural environments (or even images of nature) specifically restores directed attention capacity depleted by focused knowledge work.
• Sleep architecture optimisation: Studies by Huffington (2016) and Walker (2017) identify specific practices that enhance sleep quality—particularly slow-wave and REM sleep phases critical for cognitive performance.

Cognitive Restoration

• Attention domain switching: Research by Madore et al. (2015) shows that strategic switching between detail-oriented and big-picture thinking reduces cognitive fatigue while maintaining productivity.
• Incubation periods: Studies on the “incubation effect” by Sio and Ormerod (2009) demonstrate that inserting deliberate breaks during complex problem-solving significantly increases solution quality through unconscious processing.
• Cognitive load variation: Research by Klingberg (2008) reveals that alternating between high and moderate cognitive load tasks preserves performance better than either continuous high-demand work or complete rest.

Emotional Restoration

• Positive social contact: Studies by Heaphy and Dutton (2008) found that brief, high-quality social interactions significantly reduce cortisol levels and restore emotional resources, with effects lasting several hours.
• Mindfulness practices: Research by Hülsheger et al. (2013) demonstrates that brief mindfulness interventions (5-15 minutes) reduce emotional exhaustion and improve emotional regulation capacity for subsequent high-stakes interactions.
• Values reconnection: Studies by Grant and Hofmann (2011) show that brief reflection on personal values or meaning significantly improves resilience to subsequent stressors and enhances prosocial motivation.

Purpose Restoration

• Impact reflection: Research by Grant (2008) found that brief exposure to the positive impact of one’s work significantly increases motivation and perseverance on subsequent tasks.
• Progress recognition: Studies by Amabile and Kramer (2011) demonstrate that acknowledging meaningful progress, even small wins, renews sense of purpose and increases intrinsic motivation.
• Future visualisation: Research by Oettingen and Mayer (2002) shows that structured mental contrasting (visualising desired futures and obstacles) restores goal commitment and strategic thinking.

Implementation Frameworks for Business Contexts

Individual Implementation Strategies

Research supports several evidence-based approaches for individual professionals:

• Energy auditing and planning: Studies by Loehr and Schwartz (2003) demonstrate that strategic energy management through work-recovery oscillation improves sustainable performance by 30-50% compared to traditional time management.
  • Action: Map personal energy patterns and align demanding tasks with high-energy periods
  • Action: Schedule specific recovery activities rather than merely blocking “free time”
• Recovery ritualisation: Research by Wood et al. (2010) shows that consistent contextual cues significantly improve adherence to restoration practices.
  • Action: Create specific transition rituals between work modes
  • Action: Establish consistent environmental cues for different types of restoration
• Technology boundaries: Studies by Mark et al. (2018) found that establishing specific technology use protocols reduces cognitive residue and improves psychological detachment.
  • Action: Implement digital boundaries using both technological tools and behavioural practices
  • Action: Create distinct technology environments for different cognitive modes
• Sleep optimisation system: Research by Huffington (2016) demonstrates that specific sleep hygiene practices significantly improve both sleep quality and subsequent cognitive performance.
  • Action: Establish consistent sleep timing based on chronotype
  • Action: Implement specific pre-sleep protocols to enhance sleep architecture

Team-Level Implementation

For teams and departments, research supports these approaches:

• Collective chronobiology: Studies by Wittmann et al. (2006) show that teams working in alignment with shared rhythms demonstrate 23% higher collective intelligence than those with fragmented temporal patterns.
  • Action: Establish team-level agreements about meeting timing and focus periods
  • Action: Create team recovery norms that support sustainable performance
• Workload oscillation planning: Research by Reid and Ramarajan (2016) demonstrates that teams explicitly planning for intensity variation outperform those maintaining consistent high intensity.
  • Action: Implement deliberate oscillation between high-intensity periods and recovery/integration phases
  • Action: Create capacity buffers that accommodate natural performance rhythms
• Recovery-aware collaboration: Studies by Cross et al. (2016) found that teams with explicit collaboration protocols preserve 28% more individual restoration time while maintaining coordination quality.
  • Action: Establish clear team agreements about interruption protocols
  • Action: Create asynchronous collaboration systems that preserve individual recovery periods
• Collective detachment support: Research by Sonnentag and Binnewies (2013) shows that team detachment norms significantly predict both individual and collective performance quality.
  • Action: Establish team communication boundaries outside core hours
  • Action: Create coverage systems that enable complete detachment during off-hours

Organisational Systems and Policies

For lasting impact, organisations must create supportive systems:

• Recovery-supportive work design: Studies by Bakker et al. (2014) demonstrate that work designed with strategic recovery integration shows 31% higher sustained performance than traditionally designed roles.
  • Action: Audit and redesign roles to include recovery dimensions
  • Action: Integrate restoration metrics in workload planning models
• Physical environment design: Research by Mehta et al. (2012) shows that environmental design significantly impacts restoration quality through both physical and psychological mechanisms.
  • Action: Create dedicated restoration spaces with specific recovery-supporting elements
  • Action: Design workspaces that support different phases of the performance-recovery cycle
• Cultural narrative shifting: Studies by Cameron and Spreitzer (2012) found that organisational language and stories about recovery significantly impact behaviour beyond formal policies.
  • Action: Develop explicit language that valorises effective recovery
  • Action: Create visible recovery role modelling from senior leadership
• Temporal policy structure: Research by Perlow and Porter (2009) demonstrates that organisational time structures significantly impact both productivity and sustainability.
  • Action: Implement organisation-wide “quiet periods” for undisturbed focus work
  • Action: Create predictable meeting patterns that preserve recovery periods

Case Studies: Strategic Recovery in Action

Professional Services Implementation

A global consulting firm implemented a comprehensive recovery strategy with three core elements:

• Predictable Time Off (PTO) protocol: Consultants designated specific weekly periods (typically Thursday evenings) as completely disconnected from work, with team coverage systems ensuring client responsiveness.
• Intensity-calibrated scheduling: Project work explicitly planned with oscillating intensity rather than consistent high demand, incorporating “integration weeks” between major project phases.
• Sleep leadership programme: Senior partners participated in sleep monitoring and improvement programme, visibly prioritising sleep quality and modelling appropriate boundaries.

Results: Over 18 months, the firm documented 27% reduction in voluntary turnover, 22% fewer billable hours while maintaining revenue targets, and 19% improvement in client-reported solution quality (Boston Consulting Group, 2018).

Technology Sector Innovation

A software development company integrated recovery science into their engineering practices:

• Ultradian workflow system: Development work structured around 90-minute focused sessions followed by deliberate 15-20 minute recovery periods, tracked through modified Agile methodology.
• Nature-based restoration: Outdoor walking meetings standardised for certain meeting types, with indoor plant installations and nature-view areas for short restoration breaks.
• “Focus-Collaboration-Recovery” space design: Workplace redesigned to include dedicated areas optimised for different performance modes, with clear cultural norms for each zone.

Results: After 12 months, the company reported a 31% reduction in development cycle time, a 24% improvement in code quality metrics, and significant gains in innovation measures while reducing average working hours by 15% (Microsoft Research, 2019).

Financial Services Transformation

An investment management firm implemented a “Cognitive Athlete” programme:

• Decision quality optimisation: Critical investment decisions scheduled based on decision chronobiology research, with deliberate recovery periods before high-stakes decisions.
• Energy management training: Portfolio managers received comprehensive training in recovery science, with individualised profiling and strategy development.
• “Recovery as preparation” reframing: Cultural shift from viewing recovery as “time off” to understanding it as essential preparation for cognitive performance.

Results: The firm documented a 21% improvement in investment decision quality (measured by subsequent performance), reduced decision regret, and improved talent attraction and retention compared to industry benchmarks (Blackrock Research, 2020).

Measurement and Optimisation

Assessing Recovery Effectiveness

Organisations can evaluate recovery effectiveness through several metrics:

Recovery Quality Assessment

• Psychological detachment questionnaire (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007)
• Recovery experience measurement (Bennett et al., 2018)
• Work-related rumination scale (Cropley et al., 2012)

Physiological Indicators

• Heart rate variability (HRV) recovery (Järvelin-Pasanen et al., 2018)
• Sleep architecture metrics (Walker, 2017)
• Cortisol pattern normalisation (McEwen, 2017)

Performance Sustainability Metrics

• Cognitive performance variance (van der Linden et al., 2003)
• Error rate progression over time (Lorist et al., 2005)
• Decision quality consistency (Kahneman, 2011)

Organisational Indicators

• Performance sustainability index
• Absenteeism and presenteeism patterns
• Innovation output relative to hours worked

Implementation Tools

Recovery Audit Tool

Recovery Strategy Selection Matrix

Team Recovery Protocol Template

Team Communication Boundaries:

• Standard response time expectation: [e.g., “within 4 business hours”]
• Urgent matter protocol: [e.g., “phone call only for genuine time-sensitivity”]
• Evening/weekend communication: [e.g., “email drafting permitted but sending deferred to business hours”]
• Email/message checking frequency: [e.g., “batch processing 3x daily rather than continuous monitoring”]

Meeting Hygiene Practices:

• Maximum meeting duration: [e.g., “50 minutes to allow transition time”]
• Meeting-free periods: [e.g., “Monday morning and Thursday afternoon protected for deep work”]
• Break protocol for longer meetings: [e.g., “5-minute break every 45 minutes minimum”]
• Preparation expectations: [e.g., “Materials distributed 24+ hours in advance for cognitive processing”]

Workload Management Practices:

• Capacity planning buffer: [e.g., “Teams operate at 80% of theoretical capacity to allow for recovery”]
• Intensity oscillation: [e.g., “Explicit planning for lower-intensity periods following sprints”]
• Coverage rotation: [e.g., “Systematic rotation of ‘on-call’ responsibilities to ensure full recovery periods”]
• Professional development time: [e.g., “10% of work time allocated to mastery activities that provide cognitive variety”]

Conclusion: Recovery as Strategic Advantage

The evidence presented in this paper demonstrates that effective recovery is not merely a wellbeing consideration but a critical performance variable that directly affects cognitive function, decision quality, creative capacity, and overall productivity. As organisations navigate increasingly complex business environments requiring sustained cognitive performance, strategic recovery becomes a significant competitive differentiator.

The most forward-thinking organisations now recognise that human energy—physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual—represents their scarcest and most valuable resource. Unlike time, which is finite, human energy can be systematically renewed and expanded through evidence-based recovery practices. As Loehr and Schwartz (2003) note, “Energy, not time, is the fundamental currency of high performance.”

By implementing the strategic recovery frameworks outlined in this paper, organisations can create environments where sustained high performance emerges not from extraordinary individual effort but from systems that work with rather than against human biology. This approach requires rethinking fundamental assumptions about work design, leadership behaviours, cultural narratives, and success metrics.

In a business landscape where competitive advantage increasingly derives from cognitive excellence, organisations that master the strategic oscillation between energy expenditure and renewal gain a significant edge—sustainable performance that doesn’t come at the cost of human thriving but rather emerges from it.

References

Amabile, T. M., & Kramer, S. J. (2011).The progress principle: Using small wins to ignite joy, engagement, and creativity at work. Harvard Business Review Press.

Ariga, A., & Lleras, A. (2011). Brief and rare mental “breaks” keep you focused: Deactivation and reactivation of task goals preempt vigilance decrements. Cognition, 118(3), 439-443.

Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz-Vergel, A. I. (2014). Burnout and work engagement: The JD–R approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 389-411.

Bennett, A. A., Bakker, A. B., & Field, J. G. (2018). Recovery from work‐related effort: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(3), 262-275.

Blackrock Research. (2020). Cognitive performance and decision quality in financial services. Blackrock Institute.

Boksem, M. A., Meijman, T. F., & Lorist, M. M. (2005). Effects of mental fatigue on attention: An ERP study. Cognitive Brain Research, 25(1), 107-116.

Boston Consulting Group. (2018). The value of predictable time off in consulting environments. BCG Henderson Institute.

Cameron, K. S., & Spreitzer, G. M. (2012). The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship. Oxford University Press.

Cropley, M., Michalianou, G., Pravettoni, G., & Millward, L. J. (2012). The relation of post-work ruminative thinking with eating behaviour. Stress and Health, 28(1), 23-30.

Cropley, M., Zijlstra, F. R., Querstret, D., & Beck, S. (2015). Is work-related rumination associated with deficits in executive functioning? Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1524.

Cross, R., Rebele, R., & Grant, A. (2016). Collaborative overload. Harvard Business Review, 94(1), 74-79.

Davidson, O. B., Eden, D., Westman, M., Cohen-Charash, Y., Hammer, L. B., Kluger, A. N., & Spector, P. E. (2010). Sabbatical leave: Who gains and how much? Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 953-964.

de Bloom, J., Geurts, S. A., & Kompier, M. A. (2013). Vacation (after-) effects on employee health and well-being, and the role of vacation activities, experiences and sleep. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(2), 613-633.

Fritz, C., Yankelevich, M., Zarubin, A., & Barger, P. (2010). Happy, healthy, and productive: The role of detachment from work during nonwork time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 977-983.

Gallup. (2022). State of the global workplace. Gallup Press.

Grant, A. M. (2008). The significance of task significance: Job performance effects, relational mechanisms, and boundary conditions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 108-124.

Grant, A. M., & Hofmann, D. A. (2011). It’s not all about me: Motivating hand hygiene among health care professionals by focusing on patients. Psychological Science, 22(12), 1494-1499.

Heaphy, E. D., & Dutton, J. E. (2008). Positive social interactions and the human body at work: Linking organizations and physiology. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 137-162.

Heller, A. S., Johnstone, T., Shackman, A. J., Light, S. N., Peterson, M. J., Kolden, G. G., Kalin, N. H., & Davidson, R. J. (2013). Reduced capacity to sustain positive emotion in major depression reflects diminished maintenance of fronto-striatal brain activation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(22), 8398-8402.

Hockey, R. (2013). The psychology of fatigue: Work, effort and control. Cambridge University Press.

Huffington, A. (2016). The sleep revolution: Transforming your life, one night at a time. Harmony Books.

Hülsheger, U. R., Alberts, H. J., Feinholdt, A., & Lang, J. W. (2013). Benefits of mindfulness at work: The role of mindfulness in emotion regulation, emotional exhaustion, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(2), 310-325.

Järvelin-Pasanen, S., Sinikallio, S., & Tarvainen, M. P. (2018). Heart rate variability and occupational stress—systematic review. Industrial Health, 56(6), 500-511.

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Kaplan, S. (2001). Meditation, restoration, and the management of mental fatigue. Environment and Behavior, 33(4), 480-506.

Kleitman, N. (1963). Sleep and wakefulness. University of Chicago Press.

Kleitman, N., & Zeigarnik, B. (2018). Productivity cycles, recovery and physiological states. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(1), 37-52.

Klingberg, T. (2008). The overflowing brain: Information overload and the limits of working memory. Oxford University Press.

Loehr, J., & Schwartz, T. (2003). The power of full engagement: Managing energy, not time, is the key to high performance and personal renewal. Simon & Schuster.

Lorist, M. M., Boksem, M. A., & Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2005). Impaired cognitive control and reduced cingulate activity during mental fatigue. Cognitive Brain Research, 24(2), 199-205.

Madore, K. P., Jing, H. G., & Schacter, D. L. (2015). Divergent creative thinking in young and older adults: Extending the effects of an episodic specificity induction. Memory & Cognition, 44(6), 974-988.

Mark, G., Iqbal, S., Czerwinski, M., Johns, P., & Sano, A. (2018). Email duration, batching and self-interruption: Patterns of email use on productivity and stress. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-14.

McEwen, B. S. (2017). Neurobiological and systemic effects of chronic stress. Chronic Stress, 1, 2470547017692328.

McKinsey Global Institute. (2021). The future of work after COVID-19. McKinsey & Company.

Mehta, R., Zhu, R., & Cheema, A. (2012). Is noise always bad? Exploring the effects of ambient noise on creative cognition. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 784-799.

Microsoft. (2022). Work trend index: Annual report. Microsoft Corporation.

Microsoft Research. (2019). Sustainable high performance in technology settings. Microsoft Corporation.

Oettingen, G., & Mayer, D. (2002). The motivating function of thinking about the future: Expectations versus fantasies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(5), 1198-1212.

Oppezzo, M., & Schwartz, D. L. (2014). Give your ideas some legs: The positive effect of walking on creative thinking.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(4), 1142-1152.

Perlow, L. A., & Porter, J. L. (2009). Making time off predictable—and required. Harvard Business Review, 87(10), 102-109.

Raichle, M. E., MacLeod, A. M., Snyder, A. Z., Powers, W. J., Gusnard, D. A., & Shulman, G. L. (2001). A default mode of brain function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(2), 676-682.

Reid, E., & Ramarajan, L. (2016). Managing the high intensity workplace. Harvard Business Review, 94(6), 84-90.

Rosekind, M. R., Gregory, K. B., Mallis, M. M., Brandt, S. L., Seal, B., & Lerner, D. (2010). The cost of poor sleep: Workplace productivity loss and associated costs. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 52(1), 91-98. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi‐sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 293-315. Schwartz, T. (2010). The way we’re working isn’t working: The four forgotten needs that energize great performance. Free Press. Sio, U. N., & Ormerod, T. C. (2009). Does incubation enhance problem solving? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135(1), 94-120. Sonnentag, S., & Binnewies, C. (2013). Daily affect spillover from work to home: Detachment from work and sleep as moderators. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83(2), 198-208. Sonnentag, S., & Fritz, C. (2007). The Recovery Experience Questionnaire: Development and validation of a measure for assessing recuperation and unwinding from work. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12(3), 204-221. Sonnentag, S., & Fritz, C. (2015). Recovery from job stress: The stressor‐detachment model as an integrative framework. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(S1), S72-S103. van der Linden, D., Frese, M., & Meijman, T. F. (2003). Mental fatigue and the control of cognitive processes: Effects on perseveration and planning. Acta Psychologica, 113(1), 45-65. Walker, M. (2017). Why we sleep: Unlocking the power of sleep and dreams. Scribner. Walker, M. P., & Stickgold, R. (2006). Sleep, memory, and plasticity. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 139-166. Wirz-Justice, A., Skene, D. J., & Münch, M. (2022). The relevance of daylight for humans: Comment on ‘Human responses to electrical lighting’ by Mariana Figueiro. Lighting Research & Technology, 54(3), 372-385. Wittmann, M., Dinich, J., Merrow, M., & Roenneberg, T. (2006). Social jetlag: Misalignment of biological and social time. Chronobiology International, 23(1-2), 497-509. Wood, W., Quinn, J. M., & Kashy, D. A. (2010). Habits in everyday life: Thought, emotion, and action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1281-1297. Zijlstra, F. R., Cropley, M., & Rydstedt, L. W. (2014). From recovery to regulation: An attempt to reconceptualize ‘recovery from work’. Stress and Health, 30(3), 244-252.