Quiet quitting is used when people opt out of tasks at work that are over and above their assigned duties and/or they become less psychologically invested in work. Examples include not staying late or showing up early for work, and not attending non-mandatory meetings.
The reality is that most jobs can’t be fully defined in a formal job description or contract, so organisations rely on employees to step up to meet extra demands as needed with these ‘citizenship’ behaviours.
However, when employees feel that the exchange between their discretionary effort and the return from their employers are unbalanced, they are likely to withdraw and quiet quitting can occur. Particularly, as the economic outlook worsens and outright quitting becomes less feasible for many people, this quiet alternative is likely to become increasingly common.
In this Harvard Business Review article, Anthony Klotz and Mark Bolino provide three research-backed strategies for employers to enable them to address the root causes of quiet quitting:
- Redefine Core Job Tasks
Some amount of job creep — that is, the gradual expansion of an employee’s core duties over time — is only natural. However, once, more and more of what might once have been considered “above and beyond” becomes expected parts of workers’ jobs, the benefits of citizenship behaviour may increasingly feel outweighed by the costs. To address this, recalibrate employees’ core job responsibilities to more accurately reflect what work is actually necessary, and what should really qualify as extra.
- Listen, Then Invest
Organisations must listen to and then invest in their workers. Going the extra mile is less likely to lead to citizenship fatigue when employees feel supported by their organizations, and effective support starts with understanding what people actually need. Real listening requires employers to collect qualitative and quantitative data around what each employee needs to feel engaged at work. In addition, leaders must prioritize creating an environment in which workers feel safe speaking up, in which they believe that the organization cares about them, and in which they can have confidence that leadership will hear and address their concerns. Only after consulting with employees will leaders be equipped to make targeted investments that will address employees’ unique needs.
- Less Hustle, More Crafting
Finally, leaders must balance the positive aspects of citizenship behaviour without the unsustainable “hustle” culture. Instead of promoting an always-on mindset that ends up burning people out, leaders should encourage employees to pursue citizenship crafting. In an unhealthy workplace culture, employees often feel compelled to go above, often at the expense of their wellbeing. But if employees can prioritize citizenship behaviors that align with their own motivations and needs, these activities can be energizing rather than burdensome.
Inclusive leadership is a proactive form of leadership and as such, working in an inclusive way may feel like an extra ‘burden’ for some leaders, particularly when they are first learning what it means to work inclusively. Consequently, it is critical for leaders and organisations to take a holistic view of understanding how your people feel and what might prevent them from fully engaging in initiatives to target inclusion.
You can access the original article here.
