A high-performing employee suddenly finds himself criticized for his work, even when there is no justification for doing so. His manager begins to exclude him from meetings and conversations and fails to provide clear development targets.
Employees who find themselves in a similar situation may be subjected to a deliberate and calculated move to compel them to quit without their employers having to bear the monetary, legal, and psychological consequences of dismissing these employees.
However, this act of “quiet firing” is perhaps more symptomatic of poor leadership that is pervasive in an organization.
Zsofia Balatoni, Chief Strategy Officer, Rothman & Roman, told HRM Asia, “Quiet firing is usually the result of poor leadership when leaders choose not to give sufficient and actionable feedback. It might seem like an ‘easy’ solution for a manager, but let’s be blunt: it is not an honest one.”
“The results can be devastating for both employee, manager and company, who often spend months in a painful and non-productive work relationship and create a work environment where no one can thrive. Being a leader is hard, but that’s what the job is about.”
See also: UPS defeat delivers lesson for employers on how to fire properly
Instead, leaders should provide objective and constructive feedback and encourage all team members to do the same. Even the most junior team member, said Balatoni, has the right to receive regular constructive feedback from their manager and to ask for it if it is not forthcoming.
She continued, “In a world where organizations focus immense efforts to improve their ESG performance, let’s not forget that the ‘S’—the social aspect—is exactly about providing an equal and just workplace. Every employee has the right to a fair workplace.”
Instead of ‘quiet firing’, leaders should embrace feedback
As multi-generational workforces become more prevalent, managers should embrace feedback (and act on it) as a key learning tool on their journey to becoming better leaders. Values-driven younger employees, in particular, prioritize honesty and transparency and want to be empowered to view themselves as an equal party in a working relationship.
Organizations that continue to condone or even tacitly support their leaders’ practice of biased quiet firing methods are doing themselves a disservice and creating a detrimental effect on business and culture.
“Quiet firing absolutely affects the morale of the rest of the workforce,” agreed Balatoni. “It is a not-transparent, quite dishonest way to deal with employees and by allowing it to happen, organizations send the message that they don’t value or require transparency. This is a very bad message in today’s ESG-driven world but especially towards the younger workforce, who are keen to work at purpose-driven, fair and just organizations.”
Shawn Liew wrote this story for HRM Asia. Find more from this author at HRMAsia.com
