I've written several articles about 12-hour shift schedules in 24/7 operations. Here are links to the most popular ones:

1. https://www.shift-schedule-design.com/12-Hour_Shifts
    
2. https://www.shift-schedule-design.com/Blog?m8:post=12-hour-shifts-in-smaller-companies
    
3. https://www.shift-schedule-design.com/Blog?m8:post=matching-12-hour-shifts-to-your-workload-distribution
    
4. https://www.shift-schedule-design.com/Blog?m8:post=covering-absences-on-a-12-hour-shift-schedule
   
   
5. https://www.shift-schedule-design.com/Blog?m8:post=are-12-hour-shifts-too-long
    

I also sell 2 packages with 10 different options: one with only 12-hour fixed shifts and another with only 12-hour rotating shifts. You can read more about this here:  Schedule Examples

 

Most 12-hour shift schedules for 24/7 coverage use 4 crews. When you divide the hours in a week (168) by 4 crews, you get a average of 42 hours/week. With 12-hour shifts, this will require half the work weeks to be 36 hours (three 12-hour shifts) and half to be 48 hours (four 12-hour shifts). 

In many organizations, especially public agencies, avoiding overtime is a high priority. They view overtime as evil or an unnecessary expense. I have repeatedly tried to argue the fallacy of this belief, yet I continue to get requests for 12-hour schedules with no overtime in them. Here are 2 articles on this topic:

1. http://www.shift-schedule-design.com/Overtime_Issues
2. https://www.shift-schedule-design.com/Blog?m8:post=why-eliminating-overtime-in-24-7-schedules-can-be-costly, 
   

Reducing the hours of work to 40 or less a week will result in gaps in the coverage and will require additional personnel to fill the gaps. In most cases, this is more expensive than simply keeping overtime in the schedule. In addition to higher costs, this will also require other sacrifices as seen in the following four approaches to eliminating overtime in 12-hour schedules for 24/7 coverage. 

 

Here is a key to the symbols used in the schedules below:

D12 = 12-hour day shift

N12 = 12-hour night shift

d8 = 8-hour day shift

n8 = 8-hour night shift

d4 = 4-hour day shift

a4 = 4-hour afternoon shift

e4 = 4-hour evening shift

n4 = 4-hour night shift

Here is how the schedules work. When the schedule first starts, the crews are assigned to specific weeks in the cycle. Crew A is assigned to start in Week 1, Crew B is assigned to start in Week 2, and so on. At the end of each week, the crews rotate down to the next week in the cycle. Crew A moves to Week 2, Crew B moves to Week 3, etc. When a crew completes the last week, they rotate up to Week 1. 

 

 

1. Eliminate the 48-hour work weeks. This sounds simple enough. Just change all the 48-hour work weeks to 36 hours by eliminating one of the shifts. To maintain the same coverage, this will require 5 crews (a 25% increase in headcount), rotating shifts, and a 4-hour pay cut for all employees. (Note that with fixed shifts, this would require 6 crews). There will also be one shift with double coverage (in the example below, it's the Friday day shift). Here's one example of a 5-crew schedule:

 

Crew / Week	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun	Hours
A / Week 1	-	-	-	-	D12	D12	D12	36
B / Week 2	D12	-	-	D12	D12	-	-	36
C / Week 3	-	D12	D12	-	-	-	N12	36
D / Week 4	N12	-	-	-	N12	N12	-	36
E / Week 5	-	N12	N12	N12	-	-	-	36
							Average	36

2. Include an 8-hour shift. If you devote one day a week to 8-hour shifts and give one of the three 8-hour shifts to employees who are outside the group (e.g., part-time employees), the remaining four crews would average 40 hours a week. You would have to use a 12-hour work pattern in which the 36-hour weeks and 48-hour weeks are staggered and you would have to be able to average the work hours over a 2-week period (most companies can't do this because of overtime laws). In the sample shown below, the 8-hour afternoon shift on Wednesday would have to be given to employees who are not part of the four crews. That uncovered shift is not shown in the table below.

 

Crew / Week	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun	Hours
A / Week 1	-	D12	d8	-	-	D12	D12	44
B / Week 2	D12	-	-	D12	D12	-	-	36
C / Week 3	-	N12	n8	-	-	N12	N12	44
D / Week 4	N12	-	-	N12	N12	-	-	36
							Average	40

3. Include a 4-hour shift. If you devote one day a week to 4-hour shifts and give two 4-hour shifts (or one 8-hour shift) to employees who are outside the group, the remaining four crews would average 40 hours a week. This does not require the averaging of pay over a 2-week period or a pattern with staggered 36 and 48-hour weeks. In the sample shown below, there is an 8-hour gap in coverage on Wednesday that would have to be given to part-time employees or someone outside the four crews. That uncovered shift is not shown in the table below.

 

Crew / Week	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun	Hours
A / Week 1	-	D12	d4	-	-	D12	D12	40
B / Week 2	D12	-	a4	D12	D12	-	-	40
C / Week 3	-	N12	n4	-	-	N12	N12	40
D / Week 4	N12	-	e4	N12	N12	-	-	40
							Average	40

 

4. Reduce the work days to 11.5 hours. If you include a 30-minute unpaid meal break in the 12-hour shift, you only have to pay employees for 11.5 hours. You would have to adopt a 12-hour shift pattern in which the 48-hour weeks and 36-hour weeks were staggered. This won't completely eliminate the overtime, and you would have to be able to average the work hours over a 2-week period. An example is shown below:

 

Crew / Week	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun	Hours
A / Week 1	-	D11.5	D11.5	-	-	D11.5	D11.5	46
B / Week 2	D11.5	-	-	D11.5	D11.5	-	-	34.5
C / Week 3	-	N11.5	N11.5	-	-	N11.5	N11.5	46
D / Week 4	N11.5	-	-	N11.5	N11.5	-	-	34.5
							Average	40.25

 

 

If you are subject to Federal law that requires overtime after 40 hours a week, you won't be able to use Options #2 or #4. These can only be used by organizations such as police departments that are allowed to average the work hours over a 2-week period.

 

If you don't have enough part-time employees or you don't have employees from another department to cover the 8-hour gap in coverage every week, you'll won't be able to use Options #2 or #3. You'll either need a 5-crew schedule (see Option #1), a schedule with 11.5-hour shifts (see Option #4), or a crewless schedule that is custom-designed around your staff size.

 

Let's do a quick cost comparison of 4-crew schedules vs. 5-crew schedules:

• 4 crews * 40 hours/week * 1.4 benefit loading cost  +  4 crews * 4 hours of OT pay/week = 240 hours of pay/week
  
• 5 crews * 36-hours/week * 1.4 benefit loading cost = 252 hours of pay/week

If you already have enough staff to create a 5-crew schedule, here's a way to save money. Keep the OT in the schedule and use your extra capacity to build relief coverage into the schedule to cover absences. Similar to Option #1, you would have a 5-week schedule that averages 42 hours a week. The difference is that the 5th week of the schedule would be devoted to relief coverage.

 

Doing this would shift the OT from outside the schedule to inside the schedule. When the overtime is outside the schedule, it requires volunteers or forced / mandated overtime. When it's inside the schedule, it is shared equally by the entire staff. In many cases, the total overtime is less. You can read more about this here: https://www.shift-schedule-design.com/Blog?m8:post=you-can-t-eliminate-overtime-but-you-might-be-able-to-reduce-it.

 

We sell packages of 12-hour shifts for $199 apiece. One packages has 10 options with only fixed shifts and the other has 10 options with only rotating shifts. These all average 42 hours a week. You can read more about it here:  https://www.shift-schedule-design.com/Schedule_Examples.

 

If you need help designing a 12-hour schedule with no overtime (e.g., to match your pay week or to accommodate a few part-time employees), please fill out this form:  https://www.shift-schedule-design.com/21.html

I just had a call from a guy with a 24/7 operation. The regular employees work fixed 8-hour shifts Monday through Friday. The weekend crew works 8-hour shifts on Thursday and Friday and 12-hour shifts on Saturday and Sunday. That means double (or extra) coverage every Thursday and Friday. He wanted to adopt a 24/6 schedule for the regular associates and have the weekend crew work Sundays only. I assume this was to eliminate the wasteful double coverage every Thursday and Friday.

I first explained the shortcomings of a weekend crew:

• Lower productivity

• High turnover (especially on the night shift)

• Extra (unnecessary) pay for the double coverage on Thu/Fri

• The cost of an additional supervisor

Then I explained the problems with a 24/6 schedule:

• Loss of fixed shifts for some employees
• Loss of all weekends off
• Some employees would have to work rapidly rotating shifts 
• The need for a schedule that uses 7 half crews

I don't think I made a strong enough case. Either that or he already had his mind made up. I suspect he was merely hoping to get a free example of a 24/6 schedule that he could adopt. Does anyone else have stories to share about either weekend crews or 24/6 schedules? Maybe if you share your story, you might save someone else a lot of aggravation.

 

When organizations need a new shift schedule, their managers often begin by searching for either:

• A specific work pattern, e.g., Pitman, DuPont, 6-on-3-off, or 4-on-2-off
• A desired schedule format, e.g., 10 or 12-hour fixed shifts

This approach often will produce inferior results for three reasons:  (1) workload variations, (2) crew requirements, and (3) overlapping shifts. Let's take a look at each of these reasons in more detail.

Workload Variations
Most smaller organizations don't have a steady volume of work. Some have a workload that varies by time of day. For example, police and communications centers are often busier during the evening hours. Customer service centers may have more calls during the daylight hours, such as 4-person coverage from 0800 to 1700 and 2-person coverage from 1700 to 0800. Some organizations don't have a steady work volume throughout the week. For example, they may have lighter workloads on the weekends, such as 4-person coverage Monday to Friday and only 2-person coverage on Saturday and Sunday.

Most 24/7 schedule patterns are designed to provide the same coverage around-the-clock, e.g., 3-person coverage on a 24/7 basis. This are inappropriate for organizations whose workload varies by shift or day of the week. It's important to keep in mind that the primary reason for having a schedule is to match the coverage with the workload. Managers tend to forget this key point when they search for a schedule pattern they hope will improve morale or reduce turnover.

Crew Requirements
Work patterns are designed for a specific number of employees or crews. For example, the Pittman 12- hour shift pattern (also known as an Every Other Weekend Off schedule) is designed for 2 crews per shift. The 6-on-3-off pattern using 8-hour shifts is designed for 9 crews (or employees) on each shift.  Yet organizations use these patterns with the wrong number of crews all the time.

I just finished a job for a client that was using the 6-on-3-off pattern with only 5 employees on each shift. As a result, their coverage varied from day to day in a haphazard fashion. Employees liked the schedule pattern, but it was not an effective solution for the organization. Starting the search for a new schedule with a specific pattern in mind will rarely result in the most effective choice for the organization.

Overlapping Shifts
When organizations choose a desired shift length in an attempt to satisfy employees, they fail to consider the impact on coverage. This usually occurs with 10-hour shifts. Employees want to get an extra day off each week and they dread the idea of 12-hour shifts. So 10-hour shifts seem to be an ideal choice. The problem is that they come at a high price for the organization.

Since the organization is now working 30 hours a day (three 10-hour shifts), this requires 25% more personnel or 25% less coverage. For example, a group of 16 employees on 8-hour shifts had 4-person coverage around-the-clock. After changing to 10s, the coverage dropped to 3 people. In addition, there are six hours every day in which the shifts overlapped. They now had 6 people working for this six-hour period every day when they only needed 4 people.
 

Summary and Recommendations
Have you ever reflected on why you have a schedule? Yes, satisfying the employees is important. But that's not the reason for the schedule. The schedule is there to ensure the organization deploys its resources as effectively as possible. Many managers seem to forget this critical point. They hear about a popular pattern or they think 10-hour shifts will make everyone happy. They don't think about the impact on the organization.

I'm not saying that we ignore employee preferences. I'm simply saying that they're not the starting point in the search for a better schedule. Here is the approach I recommend:

1. Determine the hours of operation. Does the organization operate 24/7 or something less than that? If the hours are less than 24/7, make sure they are based on business requirements, not on shift length preferences. For example, a recent client was looking for 20/7 schedule. He didn't have enough staff to achieve the desired coverage levels, so I questioned him about the hours. He said he chose them in order to justify using two 10-hour shifts. He forgot that working an extra 4 hours a day would require 25% more personnel.
2. Determine whether the workload is constant or variable. If it's variable, two general approaches can be followed. One way is to establish base coverage using either 8-hour or 12-hour shifts and then add an overlay shift (sometimes called a Power shift) to boost coverage during the busy period. The other way is to combine different shift lengths or use 10-hour shifts and match the overlapping shifts with the busy period(s). 
3. Identify the coverage requirements (i.e. the number of employees you need to show up for work - by hour of the day and day of the week). Many managers mistakenly specify the coverage requirements using the current shift length. This simplifies the task, but it may not be the best match for the workload. If you can identify the work volumes and coverage requirements by hour of the day, that is ideal.
4. Decide which shift lengths are the best fit with the coverage requirements. If the workload is constant, 8-hour or 12-hour shifts would be best. If the workload varies, which shift length(s) are the best fit? If more than one shift length would work, which is preferred? Notice that shift length selection is the 4^th step in the process, not the first. 
5. Calculate whether the staff size is adequate to produce this coverage. If not, overtime may have to be built into the schedule or more employees hired. The free staffing calculator on my website can help with this step. Go to:  http://www.shift-schedule-design.com/Staffing_Calculator. If there is more staff than necessary, can these "extra" resources be used to build relief time into the schedule to cover absences?
6. If the resources are adequate, it's time to start the actual shift schedule design. Often you can apply common schedule patterns as a starting point, and modify them to fit your unique circumstances. Suppose you have 5 employees on a 12-hour day shift. This will require a 5-week schedule. You could start with a common 2-week pattern, double it to 4 weeks, and add a new pattern for the 5th week. An important consideration is to use a pattern that matches your organization's pay week. If the original pattern was intended for a different pay week, you could end up with unnecessary overtime and you could lose some of the weekends off. Again, please note that pattern selection is the 6th step in the process - not the first step.
7. We always try to create several different shift schedule options to show a range of possibilities, such as the number of consecutive days worked, different shift lengths, different work patterns, with or without relief coverage, and so on. The goal is to both satisfy client specifications and explore possibilities the client may not have considered.

The bottom line is that the search for a new schedule begins with the business requirements, not with employee preferences. If you reverse this by searching for a schedule that you think employees will be happier with, the organization will suffer the consequences. My recommended approach does not ignore employee preferences; it just doesn't start with them.

 

 

For 24/7 operations, the easiest way to create a high-overtime schedule is to reduce the number of crews. That's because there is an inverse relationship between the number of crews and the average weekly hours the employees have to work as shown below: 

Crews        Hours

   3                56

   3.5             48

   4                42

   5                33.6

I don't recommend using schedules with that much overtime. People that do this claim it's temporary or it's a common practice in their industry. I explain that high overtime schedules cause problems in the following areas: safety, quality, and employee health. There is also the risk of liability for an employee who crashed his or her car on the commute home after five or six consecutive night shifts.

Every month or so I get a call from someone who wants to run a schedule that would normally take 16 people, but they only want to use 12 or 14 employees. They ask me to give them a pattern (like 4-on-2-off) that would work. Instead of focusing on the pattern, they should start by deciding the number crews – either 3 or 3.5 crews.

I see this a lot with fire departments and paramedics. They work 24-hour shifts, and want to know if a 2-on-4-off pattern or a combination of 10 and 14-hour shifts would reduce the overtime. I explain that they need to start with the desired weekly hours of work and select the number of crews that comes closest to that target. Then and only then can they start searching for a work pattern (or different shift lengths) that provides the desired coverage.

I ran into the opposite situation recently with a major airport. Their screening officers were assigned to 5 crews on an 8-hour rotating shift schedule with a 3-on-2-off pattern. Management wanted to get more coverage without hiring more employees. I suggested 4 crew patterns that averaged 42 hours a week. By increasing the average weekly hours from 33.6 to 42, they were able to increase the coverage from 56 to 70.

 

 

 

 

In my last 4 posts, I recommended evaluating potential schedules by using the following criteria:  (1) effectiveness, (2) efficiency, (3) sleep, and (4) employee satisfaction. This post will cover the fourth and final criterion - employee satisfaction.

 

Employee schedule preferences are largely driven by demographics (age, gender, parents with young children, single parents, students, etc.) and past experiences with different schedules. The best way to determine their preferences is to show them a broad set of approaches, such as: (a) higher staffing levels vs. built-in overtime, (b) different shift lengths, (c) fixed vs. rotating shifts, (d) fixed vs. rotating days of work, (e) relief coverage vs. more coverage, and (f) others. Once you have zeroed in on the “best” overall approach, you may want to drill down into specific options, i.e. examples of different on-off work patterns associated with the preferred approach.

 

Larger organizations can do this in a multi-step process. They can begin with a survey of the employees that identifies their lifestyle patterns and general preferences for different aspects of the schedule such as start times, overtime, rotating vs. fixed shifts, longer shifts vs. fewer days off, longer breaks vs. fewer consecutive work days, and so on. The next step would be to show them examples of different options that meet the business requirements and let them vote on the options they like best.

 

If you start out by asking employees if they want to change to a 12-hour shift schedule, most will say, "No way! I'm not working that many hours." But when they are questioned about the various tradeoffs required and then shown actual examples of what that means, they are better prepared to make a choice that satisfies most of the needs.

In my next post, I will show you how to combine all four criteria into a single evaluation survey.

 

 

In my last 3 posts, I recommended using the following criteria to ensure a comprehensive approach to the schedule selection process:  (1) effectiveness, (2) efficiency, (3) sleep, and (4) employee satisfaction. This post will cover the third criterion - sleep.

 

When a schedule adversely impacts employee sleep, this can lead to health and safety problems. The following schedule elements are known to do this:

 

1. Excessive hours of work. If the schedule averages more than 42 hours a week, this could be a problem Since additional overtime is often needed to cover absences, 42 hours is probably the most hours the schedule should have. There may be occasional need to increase the hours of work, but as long as it doesn't last more than 4 to 6 weeks, you should be okay. You can read more about this topic here:  http://www.shift-schedule-design.com/uploaded/files/Overtime%20Problems.pdf

 

2. Too many consecutive days of work. For 8-hour schedules, more than 7 consecutive shifts is excessive. For 10-hour shifts, more than 5 consecutive shifts is too many. For 12-hour shifts, more than 4 consecutive shifts is too many. There are a few 12-hour schedules that have an occasional block of 5 shifts in a row, but they tend to offer longer breaks to recover from the sleep loss on the days of work.

 

3. Rotating shifts. Employees who work fixed shifts tend to get more sleep. Employees assigned to a permanent night shift get about the same amount of sleep as employees on a rotating shift schedule. There are many good reasons for organizations to avoid fixed shifts, but management should be aware of the impact on employee sleep and alertness. To read more about this topic, check this out: http://www.shift-schedule-design.com/Fixed_Shifts.

 

4. Early start times. If the day shift starts before 7 a.m., employees will get less sleep. I wrote a blog post on this subject several months ago. Here's a link: http://www.shift-schedule-design.com/Blog?m8:post=problems-with-early-morning-start-times.

    

 

 

 

 

In my last 2 posts, I recommended using the following criteria to ensure a comprehensive approach to the schedule selection process:  (1) effectiveness, (2) efficiency, (3) sleep, and (4) employee satisfaction. This post will cover the second criterion - efficiency. 

Efficiency indicates how well the schedule utilizes the organization's labor resources, i.e. employee wages, benefits and overtime. The most efficient schedule will consume the fewest labor resources. The following questions should help you to determine a schedule's efficiency: 

1. How many employees are needed?

2. What is their average wage rate?  

3. How many hours a week do they work on average to provide the basic coverage?  

4. What is the value of the benefits they receive as a percent of wages?  

5. What is the absence rate (expressed as a percentage of the hours for basic coverage?
  

Here's an example. Suppose an organization needs steady two-person coverage on a 24/7 basis. The average wage rate is $15 an hour. The cost of employee benefits (holidays, vacation, insurance, 401K, etc.) is 40% of the wages. The average absence rate is 8%
of the normal labor hours.

Option #1. This option uses 8 employees working an average of 42 hours a week. All absences would be covered by using overtime.

8 employees * 40 hours/week * $15/hour * 1.40 for benefits = $6,720/week

8 employees * 2 hours OT/week * $15/hour * 1.5 OT premium = $360/week

8 employees * 42 hours/week * 0.08 absences * $15/hour * 1.5 OT premium = $605/week

TOTAL COST = $6,720 + $360 + $605 = $7,685

 

Option #2. This option uses 9 employees working an average of 42 hours a week. A week of relief coverage would be built into a 9-week schedule which should be adequate to cover most of the absences.

9 employees * 40 hours/week * $15/hour * 1.40 for benefits = $7,560/week

9 employees * 2 hours OT/week * $15/hour * 1.5 OT premium = $405/week

TOTAL COST = $7,560 + $405 = $7,965

 

 Option #3. This option uses 11 employees working an average of 40 hours a week. The extra coverage will eliminate the need for built-in overtime. It will also eliminate the need to use overtime for absences 4 days a week. Absences on the remaining 3 days will require overtime.

11 employees * 40 hours/week * $15/hour * 1.40 for benefits = $9,240/week

11 employees * 40 hours/week *$15/hour * 0.08 absences * 3/7 uncovered days * 1.5 OT premium = $339

TOTAL COST = $9,240 + $339 = $9,579

Option #1, which uses 8 employees working an average of 42 hours a week plus additional overtime to cover absences, is the most efficient of the three approaches since it has the lowest cost.

In my last post, I recommended using the following criteria to ensure a comprehensive approach to the schedule selection process:  (1) effectiveness, (2) efficiency, (3) sleep, and (4) employee satisfaction. This post will cover the first criterion - effectiveness.

Effectiveness indicates how well a schedule satisfies the business needs. For most organizations, the primary concern is adequate coverage. Secondary issues include absence coverage, training time, cleaning and maintenance time, shift changes, equipment start-ups and shut-downs, and others. The following questions should help in the evaluation of schedule effectiveness:

• Do the coverage requirements match the workload by hour of the day? By day of the week?
• Does the coverage meet or exceed the minimum requirements?
• Is the coverage consistent?
• How well are the organization's other business issues addressed?

• Option #1:  8-hour rotating shifts. This option uses 12 officers working an average of 42 hours a week to provide 3-person coverage on a 24/7 basis. This steady coverage does not address the two busy periods, so it falls short on this important consideration. The schedule uses 4 crews which would allow the sergeants to work with the same officers at all times.
• Option #2:  10-hour rotating shifts. This option uses 15 officers working an average of 42 hours a week on two separate 10-hour schedules. Each schedule would align its overlapping shifts with one of the busy periods. This will provide 3-person coverage around the clock, plus 4 and 5-person coverage during the two busy periods. Unfortunately, these schedules do not use crews, so the sergeants would not be working with the same officers at all times.
• Option #3: 12-hour rotating shifts. This option uses 12 officers working an average of 42 hours a week. The shifts would start at 4 a.m. and 4 p.m. to match the two busy periods. Coverage on the night shift would be 4 people. Coverage on the day shift would be 2 people. The schedule uses 6 crews. This means two crews would not have a sergeant.

 

Everyone seems to have a different opinion as to what constitutes a good shift schedule. For many people, the judgment is based solely on whether the schedule satisfies a single concern or preference, such as:  (1) the desired shift length, (2) more weekends off, (3) a specific on-off work pattern, (4) no built-in overtime, or (5) coverage that meets or exceeds the minimum requirements.

The problem with such a narrow focus is that it often requires sacrifices in other areas of the business. These tend to be ignored or never acknowledged, as illustrated by the following examples:

• Employees want management to adopt a 10-hour shift schedule because it will give them another day off each week. They don't realize that the organization would have to either increase the staff by 25% or reduce the coverage by 25%. The organization also would have to add one more supervisor, and the supervisors no longer would be working with the same crew at all times. In addition, the facility isn't large enough to accommodate the double coverage that would occur during the 6 hours a day that the shifts overlap.

• The city council insists on a 24/7 schedule with no built-in overtime as a way to reduce expenses in the police department. They don't realize that this will require a larger staff. If the cost of the additional officers and their benefits is disregarded, the council members will think they made a wise financial decision. In reality, they increased the department's overall expenses as a result of the increased headcount.

Ideally, the search for a new schedule should consider the interests of all of the schedule's stakeholders (management, the union and employees). Establishing formal selection criteria to evaluate alternative schedules will force the organization to do this. It also will encourage them to set priorities and weigh the consequences. We recommend using the following criteria to ensure a comprehensive approach to the schedule selection process:  (1) effectiveness, (2) efficiency, (3) sleep, and (4) employee satisfaction.

The next few blog posts will cover these four criteria and will show how they can be used to evaluate different scheduling options.