Twice a year, society agrees to a completely unnecessary group project.
This week on Seriously, What Could They Be Thinking?, Dr. Cindy Goodwin-Sak and Dr. Jaime Peters tackle daylight saving time: the policy that promises efficiency, delivers exhaustion, and somehow survives year after year.
They explore the history behind DST, whether it actually saves energy, what the research says about health and workplace performance, and why leaders so often leave bad systems in place long after the original rationale has faded. What starts as a conversation about the clock turns into a bigger discussion about policy inertia, decision-making, and what leaders owe the people affected by their choices.
Inside the episode:
* the wartime roots of daylight saving time
* the myth that farmers wanted it
* the shaky evidence on energy savings
* the more convincing evidence on health, safety, and productivity costs
* the debate over permanent standard time versus permanent daylight time
* practical manager takeaways on friction, policy review, and decision criteria
It is sharp, funny, and uncomfortably relatable for anyone who has ever looked at a long-standing policy and thought, this cannot possibly still be the best idea.
If the system is making people tired, annoyed, and less effective, familiarity is not a good enough excuse to keep it.
