Monday morning, everyone's in, the computers switch on, the deadlines get hit. The monthly report checks out fine. But in meetings, nobody puts their hand up for a new task, nobody flags process failures, and by five o'clock the office has emptied out. Quiet quitting looks exactly like this: the employee keeps their job, but withdraws their discretionary effort and does only the bare minimum set out in their job description. For a long time, this silence shows up in no report anywhere, yet the damage it does is very real.

Quiet quitting: an old phenomenon with a new name

Popular legend has it that the term was first used by the economist Mark Bolger in 2009, at a symposium at Texas A&M. There's actually no written evidence for this: a 2022 investigative piece found no trace of the symposium whatsoever, and the relevant Wikipedia claim appeared without a source. The first known person to use the term was career coach Bryan Creely, who talked about it in a TikTok video in March 2022. Its real breakthrough came four months later, when a 17-second video by New York engineer Zaid Khan went viral.

The phenomenon itself is as old as wage labour. It fits neatly into William A. Kahn's 1990 theory of engagement: the employee honours the formal contract, but withdraws the loyalty and extra energy promised under the psychological contract. Building on Kahn's classic model, today's organisational researchers describe quiet quitting as a cognitive and emotional gap in engagement, disengagement, in other words. Quiet quitting is really more of a silent negotiation, a way of drawing a boundary. It emerges when an organisation fails to provide the psychological safety and recognition Kahn considered a basic precondition.

It's worth separating the term from its close relatives. Someone who quits loudly voices their dissatisfaction openly and actively disrupts how things run. Quiet firing starts from the other side, from management: it pushes an employee out through isolation and by withholding development opportunities. Quiet cracking describes the slow grinding-down of an employee who's unhappy but stays put out of labour-market necessity. According to organisational psychologist Adam Grant, these trendy labels are simply burnout rebranded.

Other researchers take issue with the word "quitting" itself. In their view, expecting unpaid extra work from someone who's fulfilling every contractual obligation is employer exploitation, plain and simple.

Six in ten Hungarian workers are doing only the bare minimum

Gallup's latest State of the Global Workplace report, covering 2026 and drawing on 2025 data, paints a worsening picture. Global engagement, the worldwide measure of how motivated and engaged employees are in their jobs — fell to 20%, the lowest figure since 2020. The previous high was 23%, recorded in both 2022 and 2023. For the first time since measurement began, the figure has now fallen for two consecutive years, with no improvement in a single region. Under Gallup's definition, a disengaged employee — one who is, in effect, quietly quitting, gives their time to the job but withholds their energy and enthusiasm. At 12%, Europe is the least engaged region in the world.

In Hungary, Gallup's 2025 figures show 19% of employees engaged, 62% not engaged, and 19% actively disengaged. Engagement here runs above the European average, yet more than sixty percent of the Hungarian workforce is still operating in the quiet-quitting zone. At a hundred-person company, that's sixty-two people showing up for work while holding back some of their energy and creativity. What's driving this? 35% of Hungarian workers reported high stress the previous day, and wages aren't helping matters. According to a Hays survey, 23% of employees received a pay rise above 10% in 2025, down from 36% in 2024. Data from the Randstad Workmonitor shows 37% of Hungarian respondents are already looking around for new opportunities.

A bad boss is the strongest trigger

Jack Zenger and Joseph Folkman analysed assessments of nearly three thousand managers. On the teams of the weakest managers, 14% of staff were quietly quitting, and only 20% were willing to put in extra effort. Under managers who kept results and relationships in balance, 62% of staff were willing to go the extra mile, and only 3% were quiet quitters. Gallup reached a similar conclusion: management quality explains 70% of the variation in engagement between teams.

Hybrid work has opened up a new fault line. 70% of managers have had no formal training in leading a hybrid team, and 64% say their staff have picked up extra tasks as a result. In the TalentLMS survey, 29% of employees consider their workload unmanageable, and 15% don't clearly understand what's expected of them in their role. Among those experiencing quiet cracking, only 26% feel valued, compared with 80% among their more settled colleagues. Between 2019 and 2022, the share of engaged workers under 35 fell by 4 percentage points, while the share actively disengaged rose by 6 points.

A ten-trillion-dollar silence

Gallup estimates that low engagement cost the global economy $10 trillion in lost productivity in 2025. The 2023 report put the figure at $8.8 trillion, or 9% of global GDP. The gap shows up at company level too: business units in the top quartile for engagement post 23% higher profit than those in the bottom quartile.

Most of the loss happens beneath the surface. The quiet quitter doesn't flag process failures, and checks out of innovation altogether. The resulting workload gets picked up by the engaged key people, who then burn out faster themselves. A South Korean study of 258 employees found that quiet quitting, by eroding satisfaction, also raises actual turnover intentions.

Middle managers caught between two fires

Senior leadership expects results from them, while some of their own staff are sinking into apathy. According to Gallup, manager engagement fell from 27% to 22% between 2024 and 2025. 46% of managers report high stress day to day, 33% report anger, and 31% report loneliness. Gallup CEO Jon Clifton says a quarter of leaders feel burnt out often or always. Data from Germany also reveals a distorted self-image: 97% of leaders consider themselves good managers, while 69% of employees say they've worked under a bad one. A burnt-out middle manager fails to clarify goals, doesn't give feedback, and their own fatigue spreads to the team. It's a vicious circle.

What actually works in practice

Free coffee and a meditation app alone won't cure quiet quitting. According to Gallup, the most effective tool is a substantive 15-to-30-minute conversation with every team member, every week. At a private-equity-backed company, ZRG Partners eliminated overlapping roles, made performance evaluation transparent, and then measured a 20% improvement in engagement scores. South Korean research highlights psychological safety: where staff can flag capacity problems without fear of punishment, the harmful effects of quiet quitting are negligible. In all three cases, the improvement traced back to the quality of the management itself.

When the leader's chair sits empty

The risk spikes during a change of leadership, an acquisition, or a reorganisation. In Gallup's survey, 51% of managers named team restructuring as a serious challenge. At moments like these, the psychological contract gets damaged, the vision for the future turns hazy, and employees pull back. Leaders themselves are caught up in it too, overloaded, and rarely able to stay impartial.

An external transitional leader steps in and takes charge immediately in this kind of situation, so the team is never left without direction. Because they're not angling for the permanent role, staff tend to speak to them more openly about blockers and grievances. They assess capacity quickly, reorder priorities, and shut down processes that create no value. By the end of the engagement, they've made weekly one-to-ones routine, and they prepare the permanent leader to carry that forward so the team doesn't slide back.

Quiet quitting spreads wherever an employee can't see what's expected of them, or what their effort will actually lead to. Interim management is built on exactly the same insight, since every interim engagement starts with a tightly defined goal, a deadline, and a measurable outcome. Interim Kft.'s experienced interim managers bring that same mindset into transitional periods, so that leaders and their teams can see clearly again where the organisation is headed.

Frequently asked questions

What does quiet quitting mean?

Quiet quitting means the employee keeps their job but does only the bare minimum set out in their job description. They take on no extra tasks, don't flag problems, and check out of innovation. The term was first used by career coach Bryan Creely in March 2022, and spread worldwide after Zaid Khan's video.

What's the difference between quiet quitting and quitting loudly?

The quiet quitter withdraws passively: they show up for work but hold back their energy and enthusiasm. Someone who quits loudly voices their dissatisfaction openly and actively disrupts how things run. Quiet firing, by contrast, starts from management's side, pushing an employee out through isolation and by withholding development opportunities.

How many Hungarian employees are affected by quiet quitting?

According to Gallup's 2025 figures, 62% of Hungarian employees are not engaged — in other words, they're operating in the quiet-quitting zone. 19% are engaged, and 19% are actively disengaged. At a hundred-person company, that's sixty-two people showing up for work while holding back some of their energy and creativity.

What causes quiet quitting, and what can company leadership do about it?

The strongest trigger for quiet quitting is weak leadership: according to Gallup, management quality explains 70% of the variation in engagement between teams. The most effective remedy is a substantive 15-to-30-minute conversation with every team member, every week. Clear role expectations, transparent performance evaluation, and psychological safety all help a great deal too.

How can an interim manager help address quiet quitting?

During a change of leadership or a reorganisation, an interim manager takes charge immediately, so the team is never left without direction. Because they're not angling for the permanent role, staff tend to speak to them more openly about problems. They assess capacity quickly, reorder priorities, introduce regular one-to-ones, and prepare the permanent leader to carry things forward.