The Rise of “Quiet Quitting“
The modern workplace can feel like a pressure cooker of deadlines and expectations. Amidst this, “quiet quitting” has emerged as a buzzword, igniting discussions about work-life balance and employee engagement. But is it really a new phenomenon, or just a new name for setting boundaries?
Decoding “Quiet Quitting“
“Quiet quitting” typically describes doing the bare minimum at work, fulfilling only basic requirements. While the term is recent, the sentiment isn’t. Burnout, feeling undervalued, and pressure to overwork have long been workplace struggles. Remote work, the gig economy, and pandemic uncertainties have only amplified these feelings.
However, labeling this trend solely as “quiet quitting” can be misleading. It suggests passive disengagement, a silent protest against a dissatisfactory workplace. But what if it’s actually a shift towards setting healthy boundaries?
Quiet Quitting or Boundary Setting: Understanding the Difference
The key difference lies in intention and approach. “Quiet quitting” implies apathy and resentment, a withdrawal from meaningful contribution. Setting boundaries, conversely, is a proactive step towards well-being and sustainable work-life integration.
Here’s a breakdown:
- Quiet Quitting:
- Minimal effort, doing the bare minimum.
- Withholding ideas and contributions.
- Emotional disengagement from work and colleagues.
