Quiet Quitting: The Good, Bad, and Ugly of the Viral Movement

What is ‘quiet quitting’? Quiet quitting has generated intense media attention, with mass coverage exploring the workplace trend. The buzz surrounding the newly coined concept of ‘quiet quitting’ seems to have struck a resonant chord now. Why exactly is that — and what does its popularization say about our broader cultural attitudes towards work?

What does ‘quiet quitting’ really mean? Why is it such a hot and controversial topic now? (I should note that in writing this article, I am approaching this topic from the perspective and experience of a (former) business owner, executive, and employee.)

Quiet quitting is a term and a trend that emerged in mid-2022 from a viral TikTok video. The movement comes in the wake of the COVID-19 global pandemic that caused employees to reimagine what work could look like if transformed.

There are several definitions and interpretations of ‘quiet quitting’. Part of the challenge lies in the fact that these varying definitions or schools of thought lead to unnecessary confusion and controversy. For the sake of simplicity, I have attempted to distill these varied definitions into two simple schools of thought:

1. ‘Quiet quitting’ is setting boundaries and doing exactly what the job requires, no more no less, without quitting.
2. ‘Quiet quitting’ is silently ‘quitting in the job’ without actually quitting and doing just enough work to avoid being fired. (They aren’t outright quitting the job, but quitting the idea of going above and beyond.)

Of note, there is also some sentiment that the ‘quiet quitting’ movement is a rehash of an old, yet persistent, movement of employees that are coasting, clocking in-and-out while getting the bare minimum done to collect their checks. I do not see the movement being a reflection of this although I am sure many espouse this school of thought who are in the movement nonetheless.

For the first definition, “‘Quiet quitting’ is setting boundaries and doing exactly what the job requires, no more no less, without quitting.”, the school of thought supporting this definition is based on employee sentiment similar to the following:

• “I could work 24/7 and never get all of my work done.”
• “No matter how much I hustle in my job, there isn’t a growth system or recognition incentive in place to reward me.”
• “We’ve had a few people quit or fired in our department and I now have to do their work in addition to my own.”
• “I am a salaried employee but I am working 60 plus hours a week and burning out along the way.”
• “I’ve had to set boundaries at work so I don’t burn out or have to work 6–7 days a week to get everything done.”
• “If I didn’t ‘quiet quit’ my job, I would burn out.”

For the second definition, “‘Quiet quitting’ is silently ‘quitting in the job’ without actually quitting and doing just enough work to avoid being fired.”, employers, management, and critics have adopted the following school of thought:

• “The employees who ‘quiet quit’ are hurting the company and other employees who are working hard by slacking or giving up.”
• “‘Quiet quitting’ isn’t just about quitting in a job, it’s a step toward quitting on life.”
• “Those who are ‘quiet quitting’ are salaried employees being paid to get the work done. How can then say they are not being paid for the work they are doing or feel overworked for doing what they are paid to do?”
• “The employees who are ‘quiet quitting’ are cheating the company and getting paid to do so.”
• “We’re all working hard and long hours. That’s just how it is. What would happen if we all ‘quiet quit’?”

No matter which definition you use or the school of thought you support, there is a stigma to them. First off, the use of “quit”, “quitter”, or “quitting” words immediately infers ‘giving up’ or ‘not finishing’ something. This is a bad first impression to make with the term. It immediately has a negative connotation and perceived value. So, my immediate feedback would be, that the movement faces two primary challenges upfront:

1. While it is a catchy phrase, ‘quiet quitting’ should be rebranded or renamed to avoid the negative baggage that comes with it. (What business is going to come out and say, “We support our employees in ‘quiet quitting’?” or “We are thankful to our employees who ‘quietly quit’ to send us, their employer, a message about setting proper work boundaries?”
2. Anytime you ‘quietly quit’ you risk silencing your voice in a company or organization and deprive yourself of the opportunity to change that company.

The challenge remains, as “quiet quitters” defend their choice to take a step back from work, company executives and workplace experts argue that while doing less might feel good in the short term, it could harm careers — and companies — in the long run.

What Should the Transformative ‘Quiet Quitting’ Mission Be?

For the ‘quiet quitting’ movement to effectively move through the controversy, it needs to grow from a movement and transition to a mature philosophy founded on a sound foundation and business principles. Here are a few ideas and suggestions for what those might be:

1. When employers don’t set proper boundaries, employees burn out, disengage, or grow resentful of their employers.
2. A salaried position does not mean an employee has unlimited hours to work.
3. Each employee’s job description and requirements need to be regularly reviewed against their daily/weekly/monthly ‘real workload’ and be reassessed and rewritten to ensure it is current.
4. When employees quit or are fired, employers need to understand that existing employees do not have an infinite pool of hours to ‘pick up the slack’ for those departed employees.
5. If employers expect employees to go above and beyond the job description and requirements of their role, they should also have proper measurements in place to recognize this effort, productivity, and performance, and reward it.
6. Employers need to provide healthy work environments where employees feel comfortable and supported in taking time off of work.
7. Employers need to invite, welcome, and reward employees who share their concerns and pushback about the work environment and workload burnout while also proactively working on solving such issues.

These are just a start from my perspective. Those embracing the movement should invest some time in blueprinting and building out the mission and strategy to transform the movement into an actionable plan for positive work environment change.

Employers are Worried About ‘Quiet Quitting’ Impact

With worries of an economic slowdown everywhere, productivity levels are a significant concern to company executives and management. Companies are now looking at productivity scales as a metric for excellence. Major tech companies like Google are signaling that they are slowing hiring and could lay off staff amid concerns about overall productivity.

In the wake of the global pandemic, companies and employers need to recognize:

• Employee burnout is real — Social distancing and remote work have caused severe burnout. Global workforces and time zones have made it harder for some employees to take breaks from home. Employers need to recognize employees need to step away from the workplace for their mental health.
• Job dissatisfaction — Gallup’s State of the Global Workplace report found that job dissatisfaction is at a staggering all-time high and that unhappy and disengaged employees cost the global economy nearly $8 trillion in lost productivity.
• Deepening disconnect between employees and managers — Gallup figures show only 21% of 15,001 US employees feel their organization cares for their overall wellbeing — as opposed to half of the employees during the peak of the pandemic.
• Hustle culture may be disappearing — The decision to step away from “hustle culture” can cause tension between employees and company executives, and can also cause a rift between colleagues who may have to pick up the slack.
• Businesses aren’t families — Stop claiming your business or work environment is like a family. It isn’t. Families don’t let their children go when they hit financial difficulties. Families also don’t threaten their children of being fired when they don’t do their chores. If you want to claim your business is like a family, back it up!

Employers shouldn’t feel threatened by the ‘quiet quitting’ movement. The movement is effectively redrawing boundaries back to the job description so that people aren’t thinking about work 24/7. While this is disruptive in a sense it isn’t a rebellion so much as a potential opportunity to realign jointly-agreed upon work-life boundaries.

Generational Differences and How to Address Them

There are potential generational differences between the Boomers and Gen-X executives that have embraced the ‘rise and grind’ mentality to ascend the corporate ladder, versus younger generations that tend to prioritize a better work-life balance. Recent surveys also found that among the top concerns of the Gen-Z and Millennial generations is finances, with pay being the top reason employees in the demographic left their roles in the last two years.

Aside from providing employees remote-work flexibility and on-site perks at the office, workplace environments need to value employees’ moments of pushback. Making employees comfortable enough to voice their concerns before they get to the stage of “quietly” changing their pace at work. Each generation's approach works differently but in the end, all would benefit from a better work environment.

Quiet Quitters: Should They Stay or Should They Go?

‘Quiet quitters’ should also recognize that the buzz of their movement may never fully translate into the company or organizational change they seek. As such, they should be prepared to stick it out at their company or move on to find a better fit. As an employee, you can carefully choose whom you go above and beyond and determine if it’s worth it. Sometimes it pays off, but sometimes it doesn’t. Alternatively, finding a new job, manager, team, or company that better aligns with your goals and helps you out of a ‘quiet quitting’ mindset.

Either way, those considering ‘quietly quitting’ should recognize their option of staying with a desire to change and improve their current work environment or leaving to find a better one.

While there are many employees not in a position to leave their roles: they may have non-transferable skills, accrued flexibility, and benefits. Always going above and beyond the call of duty consumes mental resources and causes stress.

Key Takeaways and Thoughts for Both Employers and Employees

Now, after more than two years of a pandemic overlapping with other crises like war and supply chain issues, workers are rethinking work, especially as they notice their jobs making the same demands that they did before a cascading series of world-changing events.

There is a large portion of the workforce that went above and beyond, over time, but particularly during the pandemic, and received absolutely no reward for that — and maybe actually lost something in the process. If there is no incentive to exceed expectations, you should not expect people to go above and beyond.

If you are an employer or management and are in a situation where you’ve had people exceeding expectations and you’ve done absolutely nothing for them, then you should re-evaluate your business practices. Sooner than later given the rise of ‘quiet quitting’.

Remember, ‘quiet quitting’ isn’t about employees being lazy. It’s about rejecting broken work culture and the risk of burnout. Employees are already dogged by burnout, stress, and presenteeism, often as a consequence of our modern, always-on work culture. Leaders and managers need to seriously consider what is realistic and acceptable to ask of employees that are in the workforce now.

About the Author

Bray Brockbank is CMO and VP of Strategy for Brandegy, a specialized brand and digital marketing agency for technology companies. Bray has led marketing efforts for a variety of B2B and B2C SaaS startups and tech enterprises. He has also served as a fractional CMO for several SaaS technology companies.