How did you define quiet quitting? 

We started by asking people what they thought quiet quitting meant and developed a clear definition and measurement for it. This way, future research can build on a consistent foundation. We also tested a model to understand what causes quiet quitting and what happens when employees engage in it.

We define quiet quitting as intentionally performing to the minimum requirements of the job. It’s not about quitting a job entirely. Rather, it’s a deliberate decision to restrict one’s contribution to what is minimally required. Quiet quitting doesn’t necessarily mean, for example, low performance or laziness. Someone engaged in quiet quitting might still perform adequately or even be more productive than someone else. This is just a very calculated response to their experiences at work. 

What might be a driving factor? 

Say I joined an organization, and my manager told me that I would have a lot of autonomy and be able to work from home and schedule my own work times, and then after a few months I realized that’s not the case. So, I might feel like those promises were broken. Over time, this mismatch can reduce my job satisfaction and lead me to intentionally limit my contribution to what is minimally required. 

What kind of impact can quiet quitting really have if employees are still doing their required tasks? 

When employees quiet quit, they are less likely to engage in positive behaviors like helping colleagues, taking initiative, and going above and beyond. These behaviors are crucial for workplace collaboration and productivity, so quiet quitting can have a significant negative impact on businesses. At the same time, certain counterproductive behaviors may increase, such as withholding information, wasting company resources, sabotaging a coworker’s work, or even theft. 

Because this is a fairly new term, some people might say this is a young millennial or Gen Z trend. Are younger employees more likely to quiet quit? 

Our study did not directly examine generational differences, so we cannot draw conclusions about this yet. However, public discussions often suggest that younger employees seem more willing to prioritize their happiness and leave jobs when they feel unhappy. Compared to older generations, who often stayed in roles even when dissatisfied, younger employees may feel less pressured to stay. 

So, how can employers and employees avoid this problem? 

Quiet quitting is ultimately about unmet expectations. It’s a simple concept rooted in the idea of keeping promises. Keeping promises has a really powerful positive effect on employees. But when they’re broken, when promises are not met, they can also have huge negative impacts as well. 

Employers can reduce quiet quitting by clearly communicating expectations and work environments, as well as fostering a fair and supportive work environment. Meanwhile, employees must be willing to address their concerns directly with their managers. Employers may not remember all the things they promised to begin with or have communicated changes well to employees. 

It’s not just the reality that matters – expectations play a huge role in influencing how employees perceive their work environment. Managing expectations and maintaining communication is key on both sides and can help prevent quiet quitting and improve employee engagement.