QUIET QUITTING, IMPACT PLAYERS, AND GRADING RUBRICS

QUIET QUITTING

Recently, there has been a lot written about “Quiet Quitting.” While it extends beyond Gen Z, the primary concern is that many young adults are not giving their all or going the extra mile in their jobs. Instead, they are doing what has been outlined in their job description without taking the initiative to add value beyond what is expected. They are doing only what is needed to keep their job and not get fired.

IMPACT PLAYERS

I recently read Liz Wiseman’s Impact Players – How to Take the Lead, Play Bigger, and Multiply Your Impact, and can’t help but wonder if quiet quitting is choosing to be a contributor rather than an impact player. A “contributor” does their job (and does it well) and an “impact player” looks for opportunities to add value outside of what is expected of them.

GEN X

I was raised in a generation (Gen X) overly focused on achievement and career advancement. Long hours and lack of work-life balance were a badge of honor. If we completed our work, we stayed in the office to put in “face time.” What the heck were we thinking??? I think we had it all wrong.

MILLENNIALS

Then came the Millennials. Once smartphones became the norm, it seemed as if all employees were on call. Emails, texts, and phone calls came in late at night and over the weekend. There were no boundaries. Thankfully, Millennials demanded greater balance and pushed back on unreasonable expectations. I believe this commitment to having a life outside of work started a much-needed movement towards figuring out how to live our lives in greater balance.

GEN Z AND GRADING RUBRICS

Enter Gen Z. In 2017, I returned to graduate school to study applied positive psychology. It was here that I was first introduced to the grading rubric. My four, Gen Z kids, are familiar with this concept from high school, but I never paid it much attention (they were very independent regarding their schoolwork.) In grad school, I often found the rubric more confusing than the assignment and generally ignored it.

Perhaps Gen Zers see a parallel between the grading rubrics they were expected to follow and their job descriptions. Are they simply following directions and doing what they are told to “get a good grade” or succeed at work? Is it possible that they are not looking beyond the rubric because, for the most part, that is how they were taught to think?

We have created the quiet quitting culture through these rubrics that were likely intended to create objectivity in grading. Did they really serve that purpose, or did they limit the ability of younger generations to take initiative, think outside the (rubric) box and seek opportunities to have greater impact?

WHAT CAN WE DO?

Rather than complain that these young adults are minimally engaged, what if their managers took it upon themselves to coach these valuable employees to think beyond the job description? If leaders can focus on how each individual can lean into their strengths to create greater impact, they will provide more value for their team and organization. As with each generation, Gen Z has a unique and important perspective that organizations need to thrive. I think we can do a better job of engaging them and guiding them to shift from being contributors following a job description (or the adult version of a grading rubric) to impact players who are encouraged to think outside the box.

What do you think?