The Rise of “Quiet Quitting”: A New Term or a New Trend?
The term “quiet quitting” has taken over social media and workplace discussions. But is this concept of employees doing the bare minimum and mentally checking out really new? Or is it just a new name for something many workers have been doing for years: setting boundaries?
Quiet Quitting vs. Boundary Setting: What’s the Difference?
The terms “quiet quitting” and “setting boundaries” are often used interchangeably, but they’re not the same thing. While both involve limiting work engagement, the motivation behind each is different.
Quiet Quitting: Disengagement and Apathy
Quiet quitting implies a sense of disengagement and apathy towards work. Employees might be physically present but mentally checked out, doing the bare minimum and avoiding extra effort.
Setting Boundaries: Prioritizing Well-being
Setting boundaries, on the other hand, is a proactive approach to protect personal time and well-being. It’s about consciously defining limits between work and personal life, and saying “no” to tasks outside agreed-upon responsibilities.
The key difference lies in the intention. Quiet quitting is a passive-aggressive response to feeling overworked, while setting boundaries is a proactive step towards a healthier work-life balance.
Reframing the Conversation: Beyond the Buzzword
While “quiet quitting” might resonate with many, the term itself is misleading and potentially harmful. It frames setting healthy boundaries as something negative, perpetuating a narrative of disengagement rather than empowerment.