The chatter about “quiet quitting” got louder on Tik-Tok over the summer, a social media celebration of how workers are setting clearer work/life boundaries and ring-fencing their own time.
The phrase was first coined in the 1990s but now, as yet another chunk of fall-out from the pandemic, it’s becoming a fully-fledged hot topic for people managers at organisations large and small, due to its potential impact on productivity and employee engagement.
Quiet quitters do their job, but don’t consciously go above and beyond. Work goals are hit, but not exceeded, and time out of work hours is very much ‘their time’.
And that’s not necessarily a problem. The quiet quitter who just needs to step off the roundabout for a short while to reenergise and re-group, often ‘comes back’ far more focused and energised.
The problem is with the workers who have effectively tuned out, turned off and mentally checked out of a job that they have no intention of quitting.
The root causes of this disengagement are the same in both cases.
Whether we’re now working at home for some or all of the time, many people feel stressed and disconnected. Much of the social side of work that connected us to colleagues is missing. We’re regularly responding to emails out of hours, have too many online meetings, and we complain of a deluge of company information.
Clearly, we should all have defined boundaries and be protective of our wellbeing. The movement towards people wanting to be treated as human beings who work to live – not live to work – is to be welcomed too.
But with the UK dipping deeper into a recession, the quiet quitters who are long-term disengaged, withdrawn and unhappy employees are the last thing an organisation needs.
Gallup research this year revealed that only 9% of workers in the UK were engaged or enthusiastic about their place of work, coming 33rd out of 38 European countries.
As communicators we understand the impact of the stats.
Engaged employees are 22% more productive than the disengaged. Engaged employees are 21% more profitable than disengaged employees. Employees with the highest levels of engagement are 87% less likely to voluntarily leave their employer.
So how can we limit the negative impact that these seriously disengaged quiet quitters have on our organisations? Can communications help to mend some of that disconnection and make a difference?
One way is to dial-up our listening, whether through engagement surveys, pulling together a few focus groups, talking with HR and managers or more informal networks to find out if quiet quitting is really taking root.
We should be asking employees how they feel about their jobs and the workplace, to what extent they trust the organisation. Do they believe they are valued by the company, that there’s effective collaboration with co-workers? And do they know where to find the tools and support they need?
Communicators can champion and support open conversations about engagement, about company values and strategic purpose that help employees feel more of a part of the bigger picture. We can help to surface authentic stories about people who are engaged – not in a syrupy, spin way, but genuine stories that are good, honest examples of bringing values or purpose to life.
Can leadership also be more visible? Perhaps hosting some regular town halls, or what we used to call ‘brown bag lunches’? (Being one of around eight or so people invited to have a sandwich-type 30 minute lunch with the boss was usually the last thing any employee wanted, but nine times out of 10 they found it pretty useful and interesting!).
Within the organisation, is there a thriving culture of appreciation? Is information on recognition and reward clear and readily available? Could it be timely to run a company-wide online ‘thanks’ campaign to give people the opportunity to publicly praise a colleague for their support? These simple ideas can soon go viral.
And have we re-thought our communication channels? Can they be simplified while still reaching people, wherever they are? Are comms and channels equitable, not just top-down? And do they give everyone a chance to share their views and stories?
There’s no single magic wand, but by taking part in more open debate, seeing a shift in dialogue, and witnessing opportunities for more two-way listening, the disengaged could perhaps be prompted to have a bit of a re-think.
