Let us take the case of Aparna, who works for a popular bakery. Known for her insatiable curiosity and boundless enthusiasm for learning new recipes, techniques and ingredients, she thrives on attending workshops, experimenting with flavour combinations and delving into the nuances of pastry making. Despite her relentless pursuit of knowledge, Aparna’s output may not always match that of her colleague, Mark, who consistently churns out flawless pastries with precision and speed. Should the bakery reward Aparna, the perpetual learner, as generously as Mark, the top performer?

“While it may seem straightforward to reward top performers, a nuanced approach is required to ensure that the organisation thrives both in the present and in the long term,” points out Pankaj Lochan, CHRO, Navin Fluorine. It is crucial to assess the value employees generate for the organisation through their learning outcomes. For instance, if an individual is adept at acquiring knowledge but fails to apply it effectively in their work, resulting in stagnant output and negligible value addition, then their learning efforts may be futile.

“While it may seem straightforward to reward top performers, a nuanced approach is required to ensure that the organisation thrives both in the present and in the long term.”

Pankaj Lochan, CHRO, Navin Fluorine

“While both aspects hold significant value, finding the right balance between the two is crucial for fostering a motivated and innovative workforce,” emphasises Manish Majumdar, head-HR, Centum Electronics. While rewarding performance serves as a clear indication of an individual’s contribution to the organisation’s objectives, learning-based rewards, on the other hand, promote a culture of continuous improvement and personal development, fostering creativity and resilience within the workforce.

While performance-based rewards motivate employees to excel in their roles, driving productivity and efficiency, encouraging employees to acquire new skills, explore innovative ideas and adapt to changing industry trends is essential to stay competitive.

“Rather than viewing it as an either-or scenario, organisations can consider adopting a more holistic approach that recognises and rewards the symbiotic relationship between learning and performance.”

Sharad Verma, VP & CHRO, Iris Software

“Rather than viewing it as an either-or scenario, organisations can consider adopting a more holistic approach that recognises and rewards the symbiotic relationship between learning and performance,” suggests Sharad Verma, VP & CHRO, Iris Software. High performers who are also avid learners essentially future-proof themselves and the organisation. By continuously expanding their knowledge and skills, they not only maintain their current high levels of performance but also equip themselves to adapt and excel as business needs evolve.

Conversely, those who are great learners but struggle with performance may simply need more targeted coaching and development opportunities to translate their newfound knowledge into tangible results.

“While both aspects hold significant value, finding the right balance between the two is crucial for fostering a motivated and innovative workforce.”

Manish Majumdar, head-HR, Centum Electronics

However, solely focusing on one metrics can have its drawbacks. For instance, employees who actively seek knowledge and acquire new skills contribute to the organisation’s long-term success. Ignoring learning efforts may lead to stagnation and hinder innovation.

Similarly, while ensuring performance is relatively straightforward, with tangible outcomes such as sales targets achieved or projects completed on time, assessing learning is more challenging. “Unlike performance, which can often be quantified through metrics and KPIs, assessing learning outcomes can be more subjective and nuanced.  Determining the extent of learning and its direct impact on organisational success requires a structured framework and objective evaluation criteria,” asserts Majumdar. Objectivity is crucial in this process, as learning experiences can be subjective and difficult to evaluate uniformly.

Furthermore, the relevance of learning to one’s job role must be considered. While some learning directly enhances job performance, individuals may also seek knowledge outside their immediate responsibilities. Balancing these divergent learning paths is essential to ensure that learning efforts contribute meaningfully to organisational objectives.

To reward employees based on their learning capabilities, Lochan suggests three key criteria. First and foremost, it is crucial to assess the extent to which employees apply their learning to enhance their work and contribute positively to the organisation; mere acquisition of knowledge without value creation diminishes the significance of learning achievements. Secondly, it is essential to examine employees’ potential for growth beyond their current roles for succession planning and talent development. Lastly, emphasis should be placed on employees’ innovative capacity, as those who leverage continuous learning to drive innovation and spearhead breakthrough practices contribute significantly to the organisation’s long-term success.

Both aspects of employee development warrant appreciation, albeit within the context of their respective contributions to the organisation. Therefore, another approach to rewarding learning is to tie it directly to job-related activities and responsibilities. For instance, employees who acquire new skills or knowledge relevant to their roles can be given opportunities to apply and share their learning within the organisation. This may involve mentoring colleagues, leading training sessions, or participating in knowledge-sharing initiatives.

Another approach, as Lochan suggests, is “to categorise employees into quadrants based on their learning orientation and execution excellence.” In this framework, Quadrant C represents individuals who excel in both learning and performance, making them prime candidates for recognition and reward. However, the focus should not solely rest on this quadrant; rather, attention should be directed towards Quadrant D, where employees demonstrate a strong inclination towards learning but struggle to translate it into tangible results.

Instead of pitting learning against performance, organisations can implement a reward system that celebrates the virtuous cycle of learning enabling better performance, which, in turn, creates new learning opportunities. “This can involve offering personalised development plans, stretch assignments, or even job rotations to high-potential employees who demonstrate both a hunger for knowledge and the ability to apply it effectively,” asserts Verma.

Furthermore, a comprehensive approach to rewarding employees involves aligning incentives with both short-term achievements and long-term strategic objectives. Organisations can overcome the challenge of measuring learning and execution performance by adopting meaningful metrics such as learning agility, knowledge transfer, impact assessment, and 360-degree feedback. These metrics allow for effective assessment of employee development and ensure that rewards are distributed equitably based on both immediate contributions and long-term potential.

Whether to reward employees based on learning or performance is a question that necessitates a nuanced approach taking into consideration the value they bring to the organisation, their potential for growth, as well as their capacity for innovation. By striking a balance between recognising learning achievements and rewarding tangible results, organisations can foster a culture of continuous improvement and drive sustainable growth in the ever-evolving business landscape.

The post Striking a balance: Rewarding learning vs rewarding performance in the workplace appeared first on HR Katha.

This toxic behaviour, characterised by denial of reality, subtle disapprovals and attempts to undermine confidence, can wreak havoc on both personal and professional well-being. By understanding its nuances and implementing effective coping strategies, individuals and organisations can lift this shroud and cultivate flourishing work environments.

What fuels gaslighting?

Gaslighting often stems from power imbalances or a desire for control. Pradyumna Pandey, head-HR, HeroMotocorp, sheds light on this dynamic. “Micromanagement fosters a breeding ground for gaslighting, where individuals manipulate their teams to sow doubt and insecurity.” This constant barrage of negativity can chip away at an employee’s confidence, leaving them questioning their own abilities and perceptions.

“Micromanagement fosters a breeding ground for gaslighting, where individuals manipulate their teams to sow doubt and insecurity.”

Pradyumna Pandey, head-HR, HeroMotocorp

 

Manish Majumdar, head-HR, Centum Electronics, adds another layer to the narrative. “Insecurity or a shortcut to success can fuel gaslighting.” A threatened manager may resort to subtle digs or veiled accusations to diminish a rising star, while colleagues locked in a competitive race may weaponise manipulation to sabotage each other’s progress.

The consequences of gaslighting are far-reaching, impacting both the psyche and the paycheck. “The constant erosion of confidence can lead to stress, anxiety and even depression,” warns Majumdar. The victims, trapped in a web of doubt, may struggle to navigate their professional life, hindering their growth and potential.

How to combat gaslighting  

The menace of gaslighting demands a multifaceted approach to combat its effects. Individual vigilance is key, as Pandey emphasises, “Recognising red flags such as persistent negativity, public gossip and deliberate exclusion empowers individuals to shield themselves.” By staying alert to these warning signs, employees can take proactive steps to protect their mental and emotional well-being.

“Mere pronouncements on walls are not enough; consistent communication and reinforcement are crucial to drive cultural change.”

Manish Majumdar, head-HR, Centum Electronics

Organisations, too, must play an active role in dismantling the culture of gaslighting. Majumdar highlights the importance of clearly defining acceptable behaviour and values. “Mere pronouncements on walls are not enough; consistent communication and reinforcement are crucial to drive cultural change,” he asserts. Openness and transparency become the cornerstones of a healthy work environment, fostering trust and encouraging employees to voice concerns without fear of reprisal.

How to foster resilience

Leadership training focused on empathy, active listening and humility can help create a culture where gaslighting is less likely to thrive. Establishing clear expectations and policies regarding acceptable behaviour can further set the tone for a respectful and supportive work environment.

Pandey advocates a multi-pronged approach. “Fostering open communication, transparency and support is essential.” Leadership training programmes that instil humility and challenge the traditional ‘leader knows best’ mindset can go a long way in creating a more egalitarian atmosphere.

Establishing a performance-management system based on objective metrics, rather than subjective evaluations, can further neutralise the gaslighter’s tactics. When constructive feedback is valued and performance reviews are grounded in facts, the manipulative power of gaslighting diminishes.

Empowering employees to speak up is another crucial step. Encouraging open communication, mentoring leaders to embrace active listening and addressing power dynamics head on can create a safe space where gaslighting can be identified and addressed effectively.

Unveiling a brighter future

The power of gaslighting wanes in the face of awareness and proactive measures. Therefore, by understanding its mechanisms, recognising its warning signs, and implementing effective coping strategies, both individuals and organisations can lift the toxic veil of gaslighting and cultivate workplaces where everyone can thrive.

Ultimately, addressing power dynamics is key to creating a culture where gaslighting cannot thrive. Organisations must ensure that all employees, regardless of their position, feel empowered to speak up about unhealthy behaviour. As Pandey rightly says, “a culture of openness and support, where everyone feels safe to voice their concerns, is the antidote to the toxic web of gaslighting.”

The post Lifting the veil: Workplace gaslighting and strategies for coping appeared first on HR Katha.

Both approaches have their own strengths. So then, which one is the more accurate of the two?

“AI-based tools are helpful in analysing the data to identify patterns in employee attrition,” says Manish Majumdar, head-HR, EMS, Centum Electronics. These tools use AI algorithms to determine when employees are most likely to leave, such as after a period of 24 or 36 months of employment. By identifying these patterns, organisations can focus their efforts on retaining employees who are approaching these milestones, as their likelihood of quitting or moving on may be higher. For instance, if most employees leave after 36 months, organisations can start focusing on retaining employees as they approach their 20th or 30th month of employment.

“AI facilitates the process by accessing the huge volume of data that even the companies sometimes don’t have bandwidth for,” opines Rishav Dev, CHRO, Noveltech Feeds.

“While I recognise the benefits of using AI tools to analyse data, I do have concerns about the parameters being used and the quality of data input.”

Manish Majumdar, head-HR, EMS, Centum Electronics

Additionally, “AI-based data analysis can provide a more objective and data-driven approach to identifying patterns and trends related to employee turnover,” says Mukul Harish Chopra, CHRO, ConveGenius.  By analysing large amounts of data, AI algorithms can identify factors that may be contributing to turnover, such as job satisfaction, work-life balance, or compensation.

However, can data beat the ingenious instincts of human gut feeling?

Not really, according to Chopra who explains this by citing the example of the recent programme launched by the Indian government to evacuate people in Sudan. “Under ‘Project Kaweri’, Indian pilots are evacuating people using the C-130 Hercules, which is an all-weather, all-terrain aircraft capable of landing in extreme conditions. However, the aircraft was not programmed to land on the airstrip they are using, as certain conditions needed to be fulfilled. In response, the pilots used their ingenuity and improvised. They used night-vision glasses to conduct a landing that their aircraft wasn’t even designed for. While night-vision glasses are typically used by special forces, the pilots were able to use them successfully to land the aircraft, even though it wasn’t meant for it. This situation demonstrates the importance of human ingenuity and problem-solving skills, even in the presence of advanced technology.”

“Humans have a unique ability to behave in seemingly contradictory ways under similar circumstances, making them the most intelligent beings. That is why, AI should be viewed as an aid to human intelligence, rather than a replacement for it.”

Mukul Harish Chopra, CHRO, ConveGenius

He adds, “Humans have a unique ability to behave in seemingly contradictory ways under similar circumstances, making them the most intelligent beings. That is why, AI should be viewed as an aid to human intelligence, rather than a replacement for it.”

“The role of AI in natural language processing is limited to what it has been trained to do. It only understands what we teach it and operates based on scientific principles. If the data goes wrong, the judgement will also be wrong,” points out Dev. AI-based data analysis may also miss important contextual factors that are not captured by the available data.

Some AI software may consider factors such as decreased productivity rates while analysing data to identify potential quitters. However, the success of AI algorithms relies heavily on having the right data sources and parameters. “While I recognise the benefits of using AI tools to analyse data, I do have concerns about the parameters being used and the quality of data input,” points out Majumdar.

“The role of AI in natural language processing is limited to what it has been trained to do. It only understands what we teach it and operates based on scientific principles. If the data goes wrong, the judgement will also be wrong.”

Rishav Dev, CHRO, Noveltech Feeds

For instance, AI software can be used to analyse various data points such as age group, gender, location, department, designations, HODs, managers and performance records to identify the factors contributing to employee attrition. This can be especially useful for larger organisations with a large amount of data to crunch. However, it is important to note that human perception and gut feeling are still important for managers, as there are certain nuances and factors that AI may not be able to pick up.

“The process of quitting is not spontaneous but accumulated over time, and machines may only track 90 per cent of the necessary information. While technology can help manage a large team, it still requires the human touch to truly understand and connect with employees,” believes Chopra. Technology cannot help retain disengaged employees if there is no human connection to begin with. Building relationships and listening to employees’ concerns is crucial in retaining them.

In managing a team, it is crucial to have a finger on the pulse of the people, regardless of age, gender, location or other parameters. Even dedicated and hardworking employees may want to leave for various reasons. “While AI can be useful to analyse data, it cannot replace the importance of human intuition and connection. A manager can pick up cues and sense moods that AI may miss, such as a remark or a reaction to something. Data analysis can sometimes be inaccurate, but people’s behaviour can reveal their true feelings about their job,” believes Majumdar.

Majumdar recalls a personal experience in his organisation where a person was supposed to join a meeting but didn’t show up. This was unusual, and upon investigating, it was discovered that the person, unhappy with their portfolio, had been contemplating changing it, and seemed willing to leave, if there was no solution in sight.  “This is not something that AI would necessarily sense as it doesn’t fit into the usual data points such as tenure, age, gender and so on,” observes Majumdar. However, he feels, “It’s important for managers to be perceptive and mindful of how their employees are feeling, even if it doesn’t show up in the data”.

Agreeing with the statement, Chopra also shares, “Human gut feeling, or intuition, can sometimes pick up on subtle cues that may not be immediately obvious from the data.” For instance, managers who have a good relationship with their teams may be more likely to notice changes in behaviour or mood that may indicate that an employee is considering quitting.

If an employee is considering switching, their immediate supervisor or manager would be the first to know. “Therefore, every team leader or manager should have a good relationship with their employees and show empathy towards them, so that they can detect any signs of disengagement early on. This is the most effective way to prevent employees from leaving,” opines Dev.

Data crunching can be helpful in facilitating the process, especially in big organisations, but one cannot rely solely on AI.

“Data is meant to assist the process and make it more efficient, but it cannot be relied upon solely. There is a possibility of missing important information as emotions cannot be entirely captured in data. For instance, if someone is dissatisfied with their job, they may not openly express it, and may only confide in their close friends. In situations where the human element is lacking, AI can provide some valuable insights, but it cannot replace the need for human relationships and connections,” concludes Dev.

The post Gut feeling or AI — which one can sense when an employee is ready to quit? appeared first on HR Katha.

As Ajay Tiwari, senior VP-HR, Lupin rightly puts it, the two terms are flip sides of a coin. ‘Attrition’ is a more general term that encompasses all types of employee turnover, while ‘resignation’ specifically refers to employees choosing to leave their job.

“At the end of the day, whether it is ‘attrition’ or ‘resignation’, the company is losing people,” observes Manish Majumdar, head – HR, EMS, Centum Electronics. Both terms suggest a loss of human capital for an organisation, and impact the organisation equally.

“The Great Resignation was a trend characterised by employees leaving their jobs in search of better opportunities or to take advantage of the increased flexibility that resulted from the pandemic, as the economy seemed quite bright.”

Lalit Kar, senior VP & head – HR, Reliance Digital

The Great Resignation referred to the trend of employees leaving their jobs in large numbers due to the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The year after everything came back to normal post two years of lockdown, the economy seemed really bright and growing. “Companies were expanding, startups were mushrooming, and a lot of talent was available in the market”, says Lalit Kar, senior VP & head – HR, Reliance Digital. This trend was characterised by employees leaving their jobs in search of better opportunities or to take advantage of the increased flexibility that resulted from the pandemic.

Companies were welcoming talent across sectors and people also had many opportunities to try, but still there was attrition. “It is possible that after the Great Resignation, companies may have faced the Great Attrition as well,” he adds.

“In industries such as pharma and IT, both ‘resignation’ and ‘attrition’ are equally considered. In these sectors, we require certain niche/specific skills, which creates a lot of pressure to retain talent within the organisation.”

(Personal views and opinions)

Ajay Tiwari, senior VP-HR,  Lupin

Talking about the current rough global scenario, Kar says that even though the global economy is facing many uncertainities due to various reasons — such as the rising inflation in the US and the UK, the Ukraine War, the upcoming recession, and the growing resistance to Chinese goods in European countries — attrition remains a reality. He further adds, “Attrition is more like a natural phenomenon that has always existed, along with resignation”.

However, even though the two concepts are similar, there are some key differences as follows:

External vs internal factors

The Great Resignation was more an outcome of external factors. “People had many options and they were eager to try new and better opportunities available. The Great Attrition, on the other hand, refers to a more general trend of employees leaving an organisation due to a variety of internal reasons,” points out Majumdar. This can include factors such as improper work functioning, low pay, lack of opportunities for advancement, and dissatisfaction with company culture.

Sector specific

Attrition is a trend that happens in certain sectors or specific divisions of a company. Tiwari opines, “In industries such as pharma and IT, both ‘resignation’ and ‘attrition’ are equally considered. In these sectors, we require certain niche/specific skills, which creates a lot of pressure to retain talent within the organisation.” These sectors keep expanding and hiring new talent even while maintaining the old employees to avoid any unnecessary talent gap. Also, this saves a lost in terms of hiring and training costs.

“Unlike The Great Resignation, The Great Attrition is not limited to a specific time period or event. It can happen over a longer period of time. It also damages the internal functioning of the company and breaks the morale of existing employees.”

Manish Majumdar, head – HR, EMS, Centum Electronics

Opportunities

People generally resign when they have a better opportunity, but in attrition, they do so even when they don’t have jobs in hand. As per a report by Mckinsey, 36 per cent of employees quit their jobs even without having a new job in hand. This is yet another way the Great Attrition differs fundamentally from previous downturn-and-recovery cycles.

Image of the organisation

Resignations do not really reflect badly on an organisation as the employees aren’t leaving because of the company. They are only doing so of their own accord, for their future growth prospects. They may have got the same opportunity with the current company after some time, but decided to seize the new opportunity with a senior role that came by. “If not for a new opportunity or offer, they would’ve stayed,” opines Majumdar. On the contrary, high attrition reflects badly on a company. These unhappy/dissatisfied employees moving on from the organisation may damage the employer branding and future networking opportunities of the company.

Time period

Unlike The Great Resignation, The Great Attrition is not limited to a specific time period or event. It can happen over a longer period of time. It also damages the internal functioning of the company and breaks the morale of existing employees. “It creates a domino effect,” says Majumdar. When productive employees leave, the morale of the existing employees is affected as they start questioning their own future at the workplace.

While Majumdar believes attrition is more fatal for an organisation, Kar thinks it is not something to be much concerned about.

Control

When many employees are leaving from a specific division, it may considered a trend, otherwise, attrition is not something significant. He further explains, “The Great Resignation was beyond our control, as the phenomenon was more on an economic level. India is still in a green position as we are still importing (good relations with Russia), and our economy isn’t as badly hit as the others (the US, China and the UK). Hence, The Great Attrition is not that major a concern, and it’s still in the hands of the company.”

Causes

Tiwari observes that a company can consider and work around the causes of attrition. Improved attrition will not only save costs in terms of training new employees, but also save the company from any business disruptions, and reduce the talent gap. He suggests that organisations conduct surveys to understand the root cause and then act accordingly. “There will definitely be some organisations that need no change, but some may require real attention,” he says.

While the Great Resignation is driven by external factors and can be difficult to fully control, companies can take steps to mitigate its effects. The Great Attrition is more internal and companies can have more control over it by implementing policies and strategies to reduce employee turnover and keep their current workforce engaged.

The post How different is ‘The Great Attrition’ from ‘The Great Resignation’ appeared first on HR Katha.

The reality for gig workers is way different from how it is perceived. These ‘independent workers’ have a lot of challenges as well, and these challenges are very different from those faced by full-time employees.

For instance, Sheetal, who has been an interior designer for over a decade now, is an independent professional. She gets her projects online and has a set of clients that she works for. Looking at her time schedule, she has a lot of flexibility in terms of where and when she wants to work. However, at times, she often has to work on weekends and public holidays just to be able to meet the deadlines set by her clients.

One time, when her mother fell ill, Sheetal was unable to work for 10 days, but her client’s deadline was sacrosanct, and they needed the deliverables on time. Therefore, she had to work on weekends and even on public holidays.

“Freelancers have to invest in their own upkskilling themselves”

Jayesh Sampat, senior HR leader

If a full-time employee falls sick or has to take care of a patient at home, he or she is bound to receive some support from the manager and the organisation and may not have to stretch too much.

Manish Majumdar, head – HR, EMS, Centum Electronics, mentions that working as an independent professional actually restricts one in many ways. “The relationship dynamics are very different in case of independent workers, who are more like service providers for their clients. They will be expected to deliver anyhow. Employees, on the other hand, may be able to enjoy some relaxation,” shares Majumdar.

Another challenge for freelancers is upskilling. Employees have employers to invest in their upskilling, but freelancers have to coach and upskill themselves.

As an independent interior designer, Sheetal attends various seminars and workshops, and not all of them are free. She has to pay the fee from her own pocket and also spend on conveyance, just to stay updated on the upcoming trends in her field. There is no option, because as an independent worker no one else but she alone is worried about her upskilling.

“Freelancers have to invest in their own upkskilling themselves,” points out Jayesh Sampat, senior HR leader.

Consistency of income is yet another challenge that most freelancers face. Many a time, Sheetal is seen travelling the country with her husband and kids, but she has to keep a close check on her expenses, because her income is not fixed.

Full-time employees, on the other hand, have less to worry on that front. Whether there is too much work or no work at all, they receive a fixed monthly salary that they are entitled to and also enjoy paid leaves. For freelancers, some months may be prosperous, while other months may be lean and rather tight in terms of finances.

“The relationship dynamics are very different in case of independent workers, who are more like service providers for their clients. They will be expected to deliver anyhow. Employees, on the other hand, may be able to enjoy some relaxation”

Manish Majumdar, head – HR, EMS, Centum Electronics

“Independent workers need to be resilient, especially in situations of rejection of work. Income may not be consistent. Additionally, freelancers need to be more disciplined and good at time management. After all, the days they are not working, are the days of no income,” observes Majumdar. The fact remains that while freelancers / gig workers may enjoy a lot of flexibility, they will have to manage that flexibility in a disciplined manner.

The gig workforce today is over 20 lakh strong, with 47 per cent working jobs that require mid-level skills. About 22 per cent are engaged in high-level skilled jobs while the rest are working in jobs requiring low level of skills (as per a report by NITI Ayog).

India, however, is yet to make optimal use of the available gig talent. “In India, organisations are not evolved enough to utilise gig workers. Managers find they have less control over gig workers who appear to have no accountability in terms of deliverables. That means, they do not take responsibility for anything that goes wrong,” admits Sampat. In countries such as the US, the relationship between the organisations and gig employees has very much evolved. The latter are responsible for the final outcome of the work assigned to them.

Clearly, gig work is not as easy as it seems or sounds. In India, gig workers are still not entitled to any employee benefits that regular employees enjoy. As HR leaders point out, in order to succeed, freelancers need to be highly resilient and disciplined self-managers.

Their survival also depends on their psychological orientation. If they can work independently without being concerned about how they are adding value to the final outcome of a project, they will be at ease. They will excel if they are constant learners, quick and spontaneous, and happy not being attached to a single employer.

The post Realities of gig working appeared first on HR Katha.

Leaders have been talking about how harmful the phenomenon can be for the careers of the employees and for the overall culture of an organisation. There is talk of about quiet quitting can disturb the ecosystem and take away the zeal to win and stay in the lead.

For those who are unaware, ‘quiet quitting’ is a topic that has gained a lot of attraction of late, thanks to social media influencers around the world. The term refers to the practice of employees choosing to adhere to just the job assigned to them. Simply put, it refers to the employees’ unwillingness to go above and beyond their duty, or choosing to not put in those extra hours that may require them to work beyond their key responsibility areas or KRA.

“There is a tendency to misunderstand things when one starts losing one’s employees”

Debjani Roy, CHRO, Mind Your Fleet

However, many leaders argue that this term has been misunderstood by the industry and its leaders. People have taken no time to ridicule the concept of ‘quiet quitting’, labelling ‘quiet quitters’ as mere ‘employees’ or ‘lazy people’ as they chose not to go the extra mile.

Some people argue that ‘quiet quitting’ has nothing to do with productivity and laziness in employees, and that it is more about not making one’s life all about ‘work’ alone. It is all about rejecting the idea of work dominating our lives.

Quiet quitting is more about giving importance to a perfect work-life balance, where there is nothing wrong in enjoying one’s life, spending time with the family and doing what one wants.

As per Debjani Roy, CHRO, Mind Your Fleet, post the pandemic, companies have been focusing strongly on scaling up the business. However, it was also the time where there were immense opportunities outside for people as well. This led to businesses losing their talent. “There is a tendency to misunderstand things when one starts losing one’s employees,” admits Roy.

In fact, some professionals argue that industry leaders and the media have been manipulating the term ‘quite quitting’ for their own benefit. With so much negativity surrounding the concept, the hard working lot of employees try to keep the philosophy ? which seems to be spreading like wildfire ? at bay.

Generally, this practice has been observed more in Gen Z, the youngest cohort of employees.

What drives them to think so?

The pandemic has played its role and made people realise that spending extra hours at work and slogging it out like a donkey pays nothing. They have come to realise that spending time with loved ones and doing what one loves is equally important.

“Organisations will have to actually move with this cultural shift in the new generation that expects to be instantly compensated for the hard work and every bit of effort they put in”

Manish Majumdar, head-HR, EMS, Centum Electronics

Gen Z has been witness to the economic recession a decade back. They saw their parents getting laid off. Even during the pandemic, they saw people losing their jobs. Naturally, it makes them think whether going the extra mile or putting in those extra hours is worth all the trouble.

Also, as Manish Majumdar, head-HR, EMS, Centum Electronics, rightly points out, “Companies will always have some flaws with the rewards and remuneration (R&R) system”.

Roy also agrees that hard work does not always translate to satisfying rewards for people.

In fact, rather than choosing to fight the idea of ‘quiet quitting’, organisations should accept it and act accordingly. “Organisations will have to actually move with this cultural shift in the new generation that expects to be instantly compensated for the hard work and every bit of effort they put in,” shares Majumdar.

Roy strongly believes that the industry needs to get more familiar with this new generation. “We need to accept that they are ready to work, but only on their own terms. And most importantly, for any extra effort that they put in, they will question, ‘What is in it for me?’’” asserts Roy.

Majumdar adds that the progressive companies try to enable their employees to go that extra mile by automating some tasks or supporting them by providing flexibility. However, he observes that only some companies are do it and some others are on their journey.

Maybe it is time for managers and leaders to ask themselves, ‘What is wrong in employees seeking ‘me’ time’?

The post Is ‘quiet quitting’ misunderstood? appeared first on HR Katha.