The Rise of “Quiet Quitting”
The term “quiet quitting” has exploded across social media and infiltrated water cooler conversations, sparking both praise and condemnation. But what does it really mean? Is it a silent protest against hustle culture, a sign of a disengaged workforce, or simply a new term for an age-old practice – setting boundaries?
Some argue that “quiet quitting” is a misnomer, suggesting that employees are still fulfilling their job requirements, but are no longer subscribing to the “above and beyond” mentality. Instead of pulling all-nighters or constantly checking emails after hours, they’re setting boundaries to protect their time and mental health.
Quiet Quitting vs. Setting Boundaries: What’s the Difference?
While the term itself might be new, the act of setting boundaries at work is not. So, what’s the difference between quiet quitting and simply establishing healthy work-life integration?
- Quiet Quitting: Can be seen as passive disengagement. Employees might be mentally checked out, doing the bare minimum, and lacking enthusiasm for their work. This can lead to decreased productivity and a decline in work quality.
- Setting Boundaries: Involves proactively communicating limits and expectations. This might mean declining meetings outside of work hours, taking regular breaks, or delegating tasks when necessary. It’s about working efficiently within a defined scope, without sacrificing personal time or well-being.