Reluctance to “go above and beyond”
There has been an explosion of articles concerning quiet quitting recently. This is the phenomenon of employees reining in their effort put forth in their job, doing what is minimally necessary for their job, or refraining from going “above and beyond” what is expected in their jobs. Some have even called quiet quitting “acting their wage”.
From an employer’s perspective, quiet quitting is disturbing because for years many employers have profited from “engaged” employees who go “above and beyond” without the employer having to really pay for it. Through employee engagement programs employers have cultivated emotional commitment among their employees in order to enhance company productivity without needing to enhance employee’s pay.
Equity Theory and Quiet Quitting
Applying Equity Theory (J. Stacy Adams) provides insight into the motivation of employees in “quiet quitting” situations. Equity Theory posits that employees do mental equity assessments taking their perceived inputs to the job (their skills, abilities and effort) then compare this to the perceived outcomes from a job (rewards such as pay and benefits). Where perceived inequity is encountered – that is, a perceived imbalance between inputs and outcomes – psychological tension is created which the employee will take steps to reduce or eliminate. In the case of quiet quitting an employee perceives their inputs outweigh their outcomes, thus the employee reduces their inputs to balance with the perceived outcomes of their job. So the question remains, among the legion of quiet quitters, what is causing the imbalance, the sense of inequity, that is motivating quiet quitters to rein in their effort now?
Employers Respond to COVID-19 Pandemic
A recent study by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics may shed some light on this question. The “2021 U.S. Business Response to the Coronavirus Pandemic” surveyed private-sector establishments across the United States. One area of study involved whether and to what extent the establishments adopted telework in response to the pandemic. The study found that 34.5% of establishments reported “increased telework for some or all employees”. The estimated number of employees in such establishments was 59,877,706. Another area of study involved whether establishments adopted flexible work arrangements in response to the pandemic. The study found that 34.5% of establishments reported adopting at least one of five workplace flexibility measures, such as “flexible or staggered work hours” or “compressed or alternative work schedules”. The estimated number of employees in such establishments was 55,704,908.
Pandemic Response Changed Workers’ Perceptions About Work
As a result of adaptations to the pandemic, telework (remote work) and flexible work arrangements became a valued outcome of jobs for 10’s of millions of US workers. As the pandemic subsides, employers are eager to return to pre-pandemic working norms. Many employers have reduced or eliminated remote work and flexible work arrangements as though the pandemic never happened. But it did, and many employees’ perceptions have changed as a result. Where employers reduce or eliminate remote work and flexible work arrangements, for a portion of their employees, there will be psychological tension arising from a sense of inequity, imbalance, in what they’re putting into their jobs and what they’re getting out of their jobs. Therefore, Equity Theory predicts that employees will reining in their effort put forth in their job, doing what is minimally necessary for their job, or refraining from going “above and beyond” as they once did before the pandemic.