FRESH FEED

Long hours culture permeates working life across much of Asia. It takes different forms in different countries, but the pattern is consistent: people work significantly more hours than their contracts require, and the expectation to do so is baked into the culture rather than written into any policy. In China, 996, working 9am to 9pm six days a week, became the defining term for this. Japan has its own deep-rooted long hours culture, one so severe that it produced the term karoshi, death by overwork. South Korea has gwarosa, the same thing. These are the extreme outcomes. But underneath them is a general norm where people simply don't leave, don't push back, and don't question whether the hours are necessary. Governments across the region have tried to legislate against it, with varying degrees of success. China's Supreme People's Court ruled 996 schedules illegal in 2021. Some Chinese companies have gone further: DJI now sends managers round at 9pm to physically clear offices, and Midea has banned employees from staying past 6:20pm. Japan capped overtime at 45 hours per month in 2019, but PM Takaichi's "work, work, work, work, and work" pledge, named the country's buzzword of 2025, shows how far the culture still has to shift. South Korea cut its legal maximum from 68 hours a week to 52, then briefly floated raising it to 69 before public backlash killed the proposal. In Singapore, the question is whether 996 norms will take root as Chinese tech firms expand their presence there, with the Straits Times recently framing it as a cultural challenge the country is actively navigating. The Crunch Connection  For those in the games and creative industries, crunch and long hours culture run in parallel, and the relationship between them matters. Crunch is a production problem. It emerges from missed milestones, scope creep, and resourcing decisions that didn't hold up. It's still very much an issue in the industry. But it's a solvable one, because the root cause is usually traceable to planning. Long hours culture is something else. It doesn't need a deadline to exist. It's the deeper norm where staying late signals commitment and leaving on time signals the opposite, and it persists even when there's nothing urgent to deliver. The danger is that the two feed each other. In a region where overwork is already the baseline, crunch doesn't stand out as an exception. It just feels like more of the same. That makes it harder to spot, harder to push back on, and harder to end. And it doesn't stop at your own teams. A significant amount of production work in APAC is done by outsource partners, often in countries where long hours norms are strongest. Your studio might have great policies, but if your external teams are working 996 schedules to hit the same deadlines, the problem hasn't gone away. It's just been moved. What global companies can do about it For international companies and studios operating in APAC, the challenge starts with understanding how people actually experience the workplace in different countries and what the accepted norms really are. You may have great policies in Europe or North America, but without cultural awareness and the right leadership locally, they won't translate on the ground. I've seen senior leaders from global HQs tell APAC teams "it's fine to work flexibly or leave early, you have our permission," and locally, nobody takes them up on it. It just isn't culturally something people do. This is a leadership problem. Not a policy problem. And it won't be a quick fix. In many APAC markets, local leaders were themselves promoted because they worked those hours. Their entire career has reinforced the behaviour you're now asking them to change. This is generational, structural work. But it starts with three things. Change what leadership rewards. If excessive hours are treated as high performance, people will keep doing it. Stop praising it. Stop making it the story of how a project got delivered. When leaders treat overwork as a planning failure rather than a badge of honour, the signal changes fast. This is also where psychological safety lives or dies. If the most senior person in the room celebrates the all-nighter, nobody beneath them will ever say "this workload isn't sustainable." The willingness to raise that without consequence is the thing you're trying to build. Change how leaders show up. Do they send emails at midnight? Do they visibly take time off? Do they leave on time? Across most of APAC, people take their cues from the person above them. The behaviour you model is the behaviour you get. Make it part of how you assess leadership effectiveness. If your leaders aren't demonstrating sustainable work patterns, no policy or programme will compensate for that. Build recovery into the plan. For studios and production teams, this means treating the period after intense delivery with the same rigour as the delivery itself. Mandatory time off after a milestone. Reduced hours for a defined period. If crunch is sometimes unavoidable, recovery shouldn't be optional. The studios that retain people are the ones that plan for both sides of the intensity cycle, not just the sprint. Until organisations reward sustainable performance over presenteeism, this culture will continue, and people will continue to endure. References BBC News - 996 work culture spreading globally Forbes - Inside Silicon Valley's 996 Culture Business Insider - 996 Work Culture, Silicon Valley Burnout Chinese Government Statement on 996 BCG - AI at Work: Is Asia Pacific Leading the Way? The Straits Times - Will 996 Culture Take Root in Singapore? Campaign Asia - 996 Debates Continue KrASIA - DJI and Midea Making Employees Leave on Time Reuters - China Tries to Call Time on 996 Culture East Asia Forum - Japan's Workhorse Prime Minister Tests Labour Limits CNN - South Korea's 69-Hour Workweek Backlash

Every boardroom in the country is currently occupied with AI. How much can be automated, and how can it be used to increase productivity? But there’s a massive side effect no one’s really talking about. The people actually doing the work? They’re exhausted. The "human" side of leadership isn't optional anymore. It’s the only thing keeping the wheels from falling off. As AI accelerates the pace of change at work, emotional intelligence is quickly becoming one of the most important leadership capabilities organisations need. When a company announces a "new AI-driven direction," the room doesn't usually fill with cheers. It’s usually a very specific kind of silence. That’s change fatigue. People are often sitting there wondering what it all means for them - whether their role will change, whether their skills will still be needed, or whether they’ll still have a seat at the table in six months. That’s where change fatigue and uncertainty start to creep in. Logic only goes so far in a crisis. You need leaders who actually get people - leaders with the emotional intelligence to recognise what their teams are experiencing, communicate honestly and support people through uncertainty. How to Lead With Empathy If AI is changing how work gets done, leaders need to focus on a few fundamentals that technology can’t replace: If things are changing and it’s going to be bumpy, just say it. Here at Fresh Seed, we advocate that transparency is a lot better than a polished corporate script. EQ is a skill, not a personality trait. It can be developed, and in a workplace where change is happening faster than ever, supporting managers to build those skills is becoming increasingly important. Efficiency is one meter. Psychological safety is another. Organisations that focus only on the technology side of change risk losing sight of culture, engagement and psychological safety - the things that actually keep people performing and staying. If a firm doubles down on the tech but ignores the people, they aren't becoming “future-ready”. They’re just becoming a place where nobody wants to stay. AI is brilliant at answering queries, but it’s useless at spotting the things that people are too afraid to ask about in an all-hands meeting. So are your leaders giving your teams space to ask questions, and are they prepared to answer? The Reality Check At the end of the day, AI is a tool. It can support a decision, but it shouldn’t be making the final call on anything that involves an actual human connection. The organisations that will thrive are the ones that combine smart technology with leaders who know how to support, understand and connect with their people. Supporting managers to lead with emotional intelligence is something we care deeply about at Fresh Seed. Our ‘ Leading with Emotional Intelligence’ training helps managers and leaders build practical skills to communicate effectively, support their teams through change and create psychologically safe environments where people can do their best work. If you're thinking about how to equip your leaders for a changing workplace, we’d love to chat - drop us a line using the button below. 

We’ve all heard that AI is here to take the "grunt work" off our plates. But if you look at the average career trajectory of almost any senior leader, they didn't start at the top.

Explore how clear manager-employee boundaries build healthier work relationships, reduce miscommunication, and foster psychological safety.

Practical guidance on handling uncomfortable conversations around workplace relationships, conflict and boundaries with empathy, clarity and purpose.

Discover how to create a company culture people genuinely love, with tips on purpose, trust, clear communication and leadership that inspires.

Now that it’s law, the major reforms of the Employment Rights Act 2025 will be phased in from February 2026, April 2026, October 2026, and into 2027.

The recent introduction of the Employment Rights Act 2025, formerly known as the Employment Rights Bill (ERB), is one of those points where employment law stops being background noise and starts demanding real attention.

What it Means for Employers & People at Work (Without the Politics)