At its core, “quiet quitting” refers to the act of doing the bare minimum at work. It’s about fulfilling your job description without going above and beyond, opting out of the hustle culture that often glorifies overworking and constant availability.

The term itself can be a bit misleading, as it doesn’t necessarily involve actual quitting. Instead, it’s more about a shift in mindset—a conscious decision to disengage from the idea that our jobs should be our entire lives.

Setting Boundaries vs. Checking Out: Where Do We Draw the Line?

The debate surrounding “quiet quitting” hinges on a crucial distinction: is it simply a healthy way to establish boundaries, or is it a slippery slope toward disengagement and career stagnation?

Arguments for ‘Quiet Quitting’ as Boundary Setting:

• Prioritizing well-being: In a culture that often glorifies overwork, “quiet quitting” allows individuals to prioritize their mental and physical health by setting limits on their time and energy.
• Redefining success: It challenges the notion that our self-worth is solely tied to our professional achievements, encouraging a more holistic view of success.
• Promoting work-life balance: By setting boundaries, individuals can create more space for personal pursuits, relationships, and hobbies, leading to a more fulfilling life overall.

Arguments Against ‘Quiet Quitting’:

• Impact on career progression: Critics argue that consistently doing the bare minimum can hinder career advancement and limit opportunities for growth.
• Potential for resentment: If not handled carefully, “quiet quitting” can breed resentment among colleagues who feel like they’re picking up the slack.
• Missed opportunities: By disengaging, individuals might miss out on valuable learning experiences, collaborations, and the satisfaction that comes from going above and beyond.