The term “quiet quitting” took social media by storm, rapidly becoming a catch-all phrase for employee disengagement. It typically describes employees who choose to do the bare minimum at work – fulfilling their job requirements without going above and beyond or subscribing to the “hustle culture” mentality.

This trend emerged in the wake of significant workplace shifts. The COVID-19 pandemic forced many to re-evaluate their priorities, leading to a greater emphasis on work-life balance. Additionally, factors like burnout, lack of recognition, and limited growth opportunities contribute to the growing sentiment of doing just enough to get by.

Quiet Quitting or Healthy Boundaries?

While “quiet quitting” might seem like a new phenomenon, it’s essential to recognize the fine line between disengagement and setting healthy boundaries. Let’s break it down:

Quiet Quitting:

• Apathy and Withdrawal: Characterized by a lack of enthusiasm, minimal effort, and a general sense of detachment from one’s work.
• Reduced Productivity and Quality: May result in decreased work output, missed deadlines, and a decline in the overall quality of work produced.
• Negative Impact on Team Morale: Quiet quitting can create a sense of resentment among colleagues who feel burdened with additional work or a lack of support.

Setting Boundaries:

• Prioritizing Well-being: Establishing clear limits to protect personal time, mental health, and prevent burnout.
• Communicating Needs: Openly communicating with managers and colleagues about workload, deadlines, and availability to manage expectations effectively.
• Sustainable Work Practices: Focusing on efficiency and productivity within work hours, rather than extending work into personal time.

The critical difference lies in intention and impact. Quiet quitting is passive, often fueled by negativity and resentment. In contrast, setting boundaries is a proactive approach to creating a sustainable and fulfilling work experience.