Simultaneously, a growing conversation around mental health and work-life balance emerged. Employees began questioning the expectation of going above and beyond as the norm, leading to the rise of “quiet quitting” as a form of resistance against hustle culture.

Quiet Quitting vs. Setting Boundaries: What’s the Difference?

The heart of the debate lies in differentiating between “quiet quitting” and simply setting healthy boundaries. Let’s break it down:

Quiet Quitting:

• Disengagement: This involves a psychological withdrawal from work, characterized by apathy and a lack of motivation.
• Minimal Effort: Doing the bare minimum required for the job, avoiding extra responsibilities or going the extra mile.
• Lack of Communication: Quiet quitters often don’t communicate their dissatisfaction or reasons for disengagement.

Setting Boundaries:

• Prioritizing Well-being: This involves consciously setting limits to protect personal time and mental health.
• Clear Communication: Openly communicating boundaries and expectations with managers and colleagues.
• Sustainable Work Style: Maintaining a sustainable workload and declining tasks that exceed agreed-upon responsibilities.

While “quiet quitting” can be seen as a passive form of protest, it often leads to resentment and a decline in work quality. Setting boundaries, on the other hand, is a proactive approach that fosters open communication and a healthier work-life balance.

Moving Forward: Embracing Sustainable Work

I believe the conversation around “quiet quitting” highlights a crucial need for a paradigm shift in how we approach work. It’s not about advocating for minimal effort, but rather about challenging the expectation of constant overperformance.

We need to normalize setting boundaries, prioritizing well-being, and having open conversations about workload and expectations. This requires a collective effort from both employers and employees.