Have you ever felt yourself slipping into a mode at work where you do only what is necessary — no staying late, no volunteering for extras, no extra mile? This is not simply laziness; it has a name and a history. The phenomenon, known as quiet quitting, describes employees fulfilling their contractual duties while drawing a firm line at anything beyond. Although it does not involve an actual resignation, it signals a withdrawal from discretionary effort and from the unspoken demands of modern workplaces.
Quiet quitting is not new, but its revival in the years following the COVID-19 pandemic has raised important questions. Burnout, job dissatisfaction and a lack of purpose are commonly cited explanations, but two researchers at Stevens Institute of Technology believed there was more to uncover. Assistant Professor Justine Herve, a labour economist, noticed the flood of hashtags and headlines on the subject and was curious about why it had re-emerged so strongly. Her colleague, Assistant Professor Hyewon Oh, a consumer psychologist focused on wellbeing, was equally intrigued. Both wondered whether quiet quitting reflected a simple disengagement or whether it hinted at something more profound in people’s lives.
The pair teamed up to investigate and soon found that quiet quitting is often misunderstood. Herve points out that employees who adopt this approach are still performing their duties as expected. They are not necessarily disengaged; instead, they are protecting their time and energy by refusing tasks that extend beyond agreed-upon hours. As she explains, “Refusing to go beyond what is contractually required is not the same as failing to engage during work hours.” For Oh, this overlap between workplace behaviour and broader questions of meaning made quiet quitting a perfect topic for cross-disciplinary study.
Their research began with a hypothesis: that the resurgence of quiet quitting was linked to reduced feelings of control during uncertain times. Using CloudResearch, an online platform for surveys, they recruited 1,400 participants and asked questions designed to measure perceptions of control over daily life. The results strongly supported their hypothesis. When individuals felt less control, they were more likely to exhibit quiet quitting behaviours. These findings were published in June 2025 in Human Resource Management under the title Quiet Quitting in Times of Uncertainty: Definition and Relationship with Perceived Control.
The study situates quiet quitting within a larger context. Periods of upheaval — political instability, economic downturns, health emergencies or climate crises — all erode the sense of control people have over their circumstances. The pandemic, Herve notes, was an “aggregate shock” to that perception, explaining why quiet quitting became so visible in its aftermath. The authors also identified two pathways through which loss of control leads to this behaviour: heightened feelings of replaceability and a reduced emotional connection to the employer. Though the relationship is complex, the central lesson is clear — uncertainty undermines commitment, prompting people to retreat into doing only what is required.
Still, the researchers believe quiet quitting can be addressed. When employees feel valued, autonomous, and able to contribute meaningfully, they are less likely to limit themselves to the bare minimum. Oh emphasises that this is not about perks or extra tasks but about cultivating genuine agency. Involving employees in decisions, showing how their efforts link to broader goals, and giving ownership over projects can reinforce a sense of control and purpose. For Herve and Oh, the chance to combine economics and psychology at Stevens demonstrates the value of interdisciplinary research — and sheds light on why this much-discussed trend speaks to more profound questions about work, wellbeing, and the human response to uncertainty.
More information: Justine Hervé et al, Quiet Quitting in Times of Uncertainty: Definition and Relationship With Perceived Control, Human Resource Management. DOI: 10.1002/hrm.22317
Journal information: Human Resource Management Provided by Stevens Institute of Technology