At its core, “quiet quitting” describes the act of doing the bare minimum at work. No more going above and beyond, no more burning the midnight oil, and no more subscribing to the “hustle culture” mentality. While the phrase might be new, the sentiment isn’t. Employees have long grappled with burnout, feeling undervalued, and struggling to establish clear boundaries between their professional and personal lives.

The COVID-19 pandemic undoubtedly amplified these feelings. The lines between work and home blurred, leading to longer hours and increased workloads for many. This, coupled with the rise of remote work and digital connectivity, further fueled the need for employees to reassess their relationship with work.

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

Much of the discourse surrounding “quiet quitting” paints it as a negative trend—a sign of laziness, apathy, or even a quiet rebellion against employers. However, framing it solely in this light overlooks a crucial aspect: the importance of setting healthy boundaries.

Here’s where the distinction becomes vital:

• Quiet Quitting: Often implies a sense of disengagement and apathy towards one’s work. It suggests a passive resistance where employees remain in their roles but mentally check out, doing the absolute minimum to get by.
• Setting Boundaries: Represents a proactive approach to work-life balance. It involves clearly defining limits and expectations to protect one’s time, energy, and mental well-being. This can look like saying no to extra projects, not checking emails after work hours, or taking regular breaks.