Quiet quitting: the new trend that requires us to rethink work

Unfortunately, the constant demotivation and progressive fatigue of employees in our organizations are not new issues. Phenomena such as significant resignations or active disengagement within corporate populations are now widespread like wildfire, it is no coincidence — in fact — that they have been talked about for many years without finding a proper solution to improve the way we do business. To these trends, more recently, a further one has been added that — as far as possible — is even more complex and challenging to identify. It is quiet quitting, a self-explanatory expression that originated on TikTok and other social networks.

What is quiet quitting?

It is a less manic approach to one’s work, less totalizing, and much less… busy. While on the surface these may also seem like positive connotations in an attempt perhaps to re-establish an often forgotten well-being in post-pandemic work, they are in reality and on balance aspects that have an extremely negative impact on the enterprise. Quiet quitting is, in fact, a substantial rejection of work as a generator of meaning in one’s life and a willingness to focus one’s time and energy on other activities or leisure time, without — of course — quitting from the company.

But is this a concrete phenomenon? According to Gallup’s data: yes! Far beyond the labels borrowed from the American world and social trends, it seems that it is 50 percent of the entire U.S. workforce that is part of the phenomenon, with even greater peaks on the youngest; it is, in fact, more than 54 percent of those born after 1989 who report that they do not feel involved in their jobs.

Employee demotivation costs the company (and the employees themselves).

Far beyond a simple social phenomenon, employee demotivation has a massive cost for organizations, especially large ones. Indeed, this phenomenon results in a worse circulation of knowledge within the company, a diminished sense of belonging, greater difficulty in innovating, a decline in the ability to serve the market, and worsened overall efficiency. The negative return in economic terms is substantial: some research estimates an impact of more than 1.5 billion euros globally.

Beyond the economic indicators, we have come to understand — to our cost — that less man — and woman-friendly companies make us unhappier, more tired, dissatisfied in our personal lives, and more likely to build a worse society.

We need to find meaning in what we do.

What, then, is a possible solution to properly address this phenomenon?

Once again this is a purpose issue, this is what companies need to put the emphasis back on to generate new organizational models that are truly positive players in people’s lives. You need to answer the question of why you do things, much more than how, you need to create value for the entire social ecosystem, not just for a company’s shareholders. Without going to the extremes of Patagonia, whose CEO “donated” the company to save the planet, rewriting the meaning of work and of the companies we are a part of is now an increasingly urgent mission to which leaders, consultants, HR directors, and all those who — in various capacities — have a responsibility on rebuilding existing models are called.

Without this ingredient, phenomena such as quiet quitting, great resignation, widespread demotivation, and active disengagement will be increasingly endemic within companies.

To close by quoting Margaret Wheatley, an expert on organizational behavior:

“The fact that we work for an organization intent on creating knowledge is a magnificent source of motivation; not because that will increase the organization’s profits, but because it will make our lives seem more worth living.”

This is the real challenge we face in designing a new future of work.