Quiet quitting: an agent of changing nothing

    

 A courageous follower can be a vital piece of an improving workforce. Though change, much of the time, comes from the top down, sometimes the bottom is who really needs it. When faced with problems in the workplace, courageous followers will speak up about the needs of the individuals, changes that should occur, or better ways to improve productivity or the work environment. Their advocacy can involve taking a “calculated risk” of what the consequences could be. With that being said, the idea of quiet quitting, a newly coined term seems to be the opposite of a courageous follower. This phenomenon is where employees, feeling unappreciated or over worked slowly begin to withdrawal themselves at work. The idea is that they begin doing the “bare minimum” or exactly what their job description entails and nothing more, but it raises the question if this what a courageous follower would do. When you recluse in that way it would make it difficult to be the agent of change you are capable of doing. This reflects directly on the quiet part of quiet quitting: doing so silently and without warning or explanation does not give opportunity for the betterment of an institution.  If employees stop engaging fully in their jobs, they stop being invested in what happens for the company and I think that can be an inhibitor of change. Forbes suggest the best ways to manage quiet quitters involves ensuring employees feel appreciated, allowing for life balance, increase benefits of employment when possible, and surprisingly firing those who quiet quit. This is because, they state, that though employees have a right to be apart of an enjoyable team and happy in the workplace, causing detrimental impact to a company is not the type of team member a leader wants for their organization. It is better to bring issues to find a resolution to be an agent of change than to silently pull yourself back to allow the same issues to continue for others.