Because the original TikTok video about quiet quitting was posted by a Gen Zer, some have suggested that it is a new and generationally specific phenomenon, serving as a point of validation for a scientifically unsupported belief that Gen Zers are slackers at heart. Although quiet quitting is a new term, it isn’t a new phenomenon. It is another manifestation of the cultural shift happening in the world of work since the beginning of the pandemic. As many employees are reconsidering their purpose in work and in life, some are quiet quitting as a result of that reexamination.

Nonetheless, some people always have shown limited engagement at work. That isn’t a generational phenomenon either. Depending on the underlying reason for quiet quitting, it may be beneficial or detrimental to a person’s performance.

Let’s look at each claim in turn.

Is Quiet Quitting New?

In 1906, Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto observed a phenomenon in wealth distribution that would later become adapted to management and coined the Pareto principle by Joseph Juran in the 1950s. Simply put, the Pareto principle states that 80% of the outcomes will result from 20% of the causes. In workplace terms, 80% of work productivity will be created by 20% of the employees. At least since the Industrial Revolution, some workers have exerted a lot of effort, some have exerted a moderate amount, and many have exerted minimal or little effort. In other words, it seems likely that quiet quitting has been around for a while.

Similarly, in our study of personality, individual differences determine the degree to which people appear confident, competitive, challenge seeking, leader-like, and focused on achieving results—the opposite of quiet quitting. This is what we measure on the Hogan Personality Inventory’s Ambition scale. High scorers on Ambition are like the 20%; they drive most of the results in an organisation. When we plot individual differences on the Ambition scale for thousands of people, the result is close to a bell curve. People who score in the high range are unlikely to be quiet quitters. This pattern of individual differences is not new and seems to be universal.

Is Quiet Quitting Mostly Limited to Gen Z?

Conducted across several countries with hundreds of thousands of working adults, Hogan’s research shows that there are some small differences among some personality characteristics and values by generation. Although those differences are statistically significant, they have little practical significance. That means it does not appear that one generation or another can, on average, be described as more or less Ambitious, hardworking, or prone to quiet quitting. Whether a person is a quiet quitter or routinely goes above and beyond expectations at work appears unrelated to their generational cohort.

Is Quiet Quitting Helpful or Harmful to the Quiet Quitter?

It depends. For example, the Hogan Development Survey (HDS) measures a characteristic we call Diligent. High scorers on Diligent are described as detail oriented, hardworking, and having high standards. But they may also try to make everything a high priority, seem perfectionistic, and find it difficult to delegate. As a result, they might be more prone to overworking and burnout than low scorers. A high Diligent scorer who decides to focus on meeting expectations, rather than always aiming for perfection, may benefit in improved mental and physical wellbeing. For this person, a decision to work less (or in a more focused way) may reflect strong self-awareness and lead to greater overall efficacy.

However, in some circumstances, quiet quitting also can be a form of passive aggression—particularly if an individual takes no action to correct a poor work situation other than to quietly work less, putting in minimal effort with the objective of remaining employed. For example, the HDS measures another characteristic we call Leisurely. A key descriptor of high scorers on the Leisurely scale is that they avoid overt conflict while quietly or passively ignoring commitments or agreements. Because of this, high Leisurely scorers may be more prone to quiet quitting.

This type of quiet quitting can be self-defeating in a couple of ways. First, if the individual fails to meet the organisation’s expectations for the role, the strategy of working less but staying employed may backfire. At best, it would be difficult for a person to sustain a “just right” amount of work for very long, especially during an economic downturn in which performance is scrutinised closely.

Second, the person’s indirect approach to solving feelings about their work may be perceived as avoiding difficult conversations, playing the victim, or even as untrustworthy or unethical. Such perceptions can permanently damage relationships and lead to a reputation that is difficult to change.

What Is the Alternative to Quiet Quitting?

People have fundamental needs for connection with others, for status among peers, and to make sense out of the world or to find meaning. For talent management professionals and leaders, it can be productive to ask why people in your organisation may be feeling unfulfilled or undervalued by your organisation. By exploring the underlying reasons for those feelings you’ll likely find they are related to one or more of those three fundamental needs.

After you’ve identified the underlying need that isn’t being met, the critical question is why. Organisational reasons, individual reasons, or both may be at the root. For example, 65% of U.S. workers indicate they would rather fire their boss than receive a pay raise.¹ Bad bosses destroy engagement and create toxic relationships, and low engagement is related to quiet quitting.

It also could be that the individual is in a role that doesn’t fit their needs or skills, and the organisation could help find a better role inside the organisation. Fostering an open discussion about the role may be a good start.

In some cases, however, the individual simply may have made a self-defeating choice. In these cases, development activities or coaching may help raise self-awareness that could lead to a more productive choice for the individual and organisation.

This blog post was authored by Scott Gregory, PhD, a world-renowned IO psychologist.

*This post originally appeared on Hogan Assessments

The post Quiet Quitting and Personality: Who Becomes a Quiet Quitter? appeared first on Peter Berry Consultancy.

Too much change too quickly with too few resources. The toll of remote and hybrid work, quiet quitting, layoffs, turnover talent shortage, increased concern for employee well-being, and global AI uncertainty has seemed to fall squarely on the shoulders of the HR department. Unsurprisingly, about half of HR professionals say their stress has increased somewhat and about a quarter said it increased dramatically in 2024.¹

When HR professionals spend their time trying to boost companywide well-being, they sometimes pay with their own. Reduced effectiveness from HR burnout has a trickle-down effect to other employees, similar to how caregiver burnout affects dependents.

Read on to learn why the personality characteristics that make HR professionals excellent at their work also dispose them to burnout—and how organisations can help protect them.

Characteristics of HR Leaders

Using the Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI), Hogan Development Survey (HDS), and Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory (MVPI), we have analysed the personality characteristics of HR employees and HR leaders, which includes HR managers and HR executives. Our data tell a fascinating story.

HR Employees

HR employees are responsible for benefits plans, compensation packages, training and development, and other personnel-related duties. They must anticipate problems, manage conflict effectively, maintain standards, and possess excellent communication skills. Since the role of HR can directly impact employee productivity and well-being, it is essential that HR duties are executed well.

HPI – HR employees tend to be good at listening to others and supporting teams but may struggle with resilience and handling day-to-day stress. They also tend to be supportive team players but may show lower initiative, drive, or ambition.

HDS – HR employees tend to manage their insecurities through intimidation or avoidance when under stress. This derailing behaviour can emerge when an everyday strength becomes overused during times of burnout. Someone who is typically careful and thorough might become risk-averse and fearful of failure, for example.

MVPI – HR employees tend to be uninterested in competition, prefer to work alone, and prefer stable, predictable, low-risk work environments. Their preferences for making decisions democratically, focusing on tasks, and maintaining structure probably have likely been challenged on many workdays during the unpredictable recent past.

HR Leaders

HR leaders differ from HR employees in both personality characteristics and job tasks, which have a greater focus on corporate strategy, policy, and compliance. Based on our analysis of more than 1,000 HR leaders, we have identified the characteristics that tend to differentiate HR leaders from other global professionals.²

HPI – HR leaders tend to take the lead and push for results, get along with others and avoid conflict, and focus on procedure and implementation. Their HPI personality data suggest they typically show strengths in operational leadership as opposed to strategic leadership.

HDS – HR leaders differ by rank in how they tend to overuse their strengths. When under stress, HR executives may seem arrogant, impulsive, eccentric, or untrustworthy. They might use intimidation or charm to manage their problems. HR managers, on the other hand, may seem perfectionistic, micromanaging, deferential, or ingratiating when under stress. They might tend to avoid directly confronting their problems.⁴

MVPI – HR leaders tend to desire to help others (higher Altruism) and enjoy both work and life (higher Hedonism). They typically prefer to make decisions based on experience and instinct rather than objective data (lower Science).

How Personality Affects HR Burnout

The personality characteristics that make HR professionals successful at their jobs also make them likely to burn out—regardless of whether they find their work rewarding or meaningful. That HR professionals may feel passionate about their role does not shield them from unmanaged chronic workplace stress.

HPI – Of the seven HPI scales, all seven of them are associated with burnout. While high scores and low scores both have positives and negatives, lower HPI scores tend to indicate higher likelihood of burnout. Two scales have particularly strong associations with burnout: lower scores on Adjustment and Ambition, which data indicate are characteristic of HR professionals.

HDS – HR employees, managers, and leaders alike can be disposed to burning out depending on their HDS scores. High scores on this inventory show overused strengths and derailing tendencies. Of the 11 scales, eight are closely associated with burnout. Depending on the specific scale, a lower score or a higher score is correlated to burnout. HR employees seem especially likely to experience burnout based on their HDS data.

MVPI – Lower average scores on the Power, Altruism, and Affiliation scales are associated with burnout for HR professionals. Because HR professionals tend to be uninterested in competition, value tasks and productivity, and prefer to work independently, their preferred professional environment also disposes them to burnout.

The tasks of HR professionals have not only changed dramatically in recent years, but they have also come to the forefront of many companies’ strategy and forecasting. The lack of stability, staff, and supplies all serve to increase the stress of HR leaders, who may worry about productivity or accomplishing tasks.

Add the burden of setting new standards, raising morale, complying with changing policies, and addressing culture needs, and it’s no surprise that the professionals who care for others also need support.

Protecting HR Professionals from Burnout

HR professionals can mitigate burnout by understanding how their personality characteristics might contribute to derailment. Personality assessment is the first step in gaining data-driven personality insight and beginning development.

Another step is providing HR professionals with adequate technology, tools, budget, personnel, and executive support. Eighty-seven percent of HR professionals say they are under-resourced (and 42% are thinking of leaving the profession altogether).³ When nearly all HR professionals are ill-equipped and understaffed, it’s only to be expected that they are experiencing ongoing stress at and about work.

Individuals in HR can also protect themselves from burnout by coping with stress in ways that will assuage underlying fears, stressors, or insecurities. In general, activities such as adequate sleep, moderate daily exercise, outdoor recreation, family activities or hobbies, and setting boundaries for work hours have all helped other HR professionals manage stress.⁴

HR burnout is prevalent and serious, but it isn’t an insurmountable challenge. Overcoming burnout among HR professionals starts with understanding the organisational effects of personality.

Expert Contributor

Matt Lemming, MS, is chief of staff at Hogan Assessments and previously held the role of director of knowledge and infrastructure.

References

1. Colletta, J. (2025, February 26). Pouring From an ‘Empty Cup’: Why HR Burnout Needs to Be a People Priority. Human Resources Executive. https://hrexecutive.com/pouring-from-an-empty-cup-why-hr-burnout-needs-to-be-a-people-priority/
2. Sherman, R. A., & Lemming, M. R. (2021, September 17). Who Becomes an HR Leader? Talent Quarterly. https://www.talent-quarterly.com/who-becomes-an-hr-leader/
3. Baker, F., Burrell, J., and Clark, D. (2025). The HR Mental Wellbeing Report. Ultimate Resilience. https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-magazine/spring2022/pages/hr-practitioners-are-coping-with-burnout.aspx
4. Kelly, J. (2022, April 14). 98% of HR Professionals Are Burned Out, Study Shows. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2022/04/14/98-of-human-resources-professionals-are-burned-out-study-shows/

*This article originally appeared on Hogan Assessments.

The post HR Burnout: The Organisation Is Fine, But Are You? appeared first on Peter Berry Consultancy.