The phrase “quiet quitting” is somewhat misleading. It doesn’t actually involve quitting your job at all. Instead, it refers to the act of doing the bare minimum at work—fulfilling your job description but not going above and beyond. Think strictly adhering to work hours, not volunteering for extra projects, and generally disengaging from the hustle culture mentality.

This trend has gained traction in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, which forced many to re-evaluate their priorities and relationship with work. Burnout, lack of work-life balance, and a desire for greater autonomy have fueled the quiet quitting movement.

Quiet Quitting vs. Setting Boundaries: What’s the Difference?

The real question is: is “quiet quitting” simply a new term for an age-old concept—setting boundaries?

Here’s a breakdown of the key arguments:

The Case for Quiet Quitting:

• A Rejection of Hustle Culture: Quiet quitting can be seen as a rebellion against the expectation of constant overwork and a celebration of personal time.
• Protecting Mental Health: By setting limits, employees prioritize their well-being and prevent burnout.
• Redefining Success: It challenges the traditional definition of career success, shifting the focus from climbing the corporate ladder to achieving personal fulfillment.

The Case for Boundary Setting:

• A More Accurate Term: Setting boundaries is about clearly communicating your limits and expectations, which is a crucial skill for any healthy work environment.
• Fosters Open Communication: By expressing your needs, you open up a dialogue with your employer, potentially leading to more sustainable work practices.
• More Sustainable Long-Term: While quiet quitting can lead to disengagement and potential career limitations, setting boundaries allows you to maintain professionalism while advocating for your needs.