Will Quiet Firing Work?

The company Dell has recently gotten some attention for making a new policy in regards to Remote Work.

Despite Michael Dell (CEO of Dell) recently calling Return-To-Office Mandates "Forced Hours" and saying that Remote-Work is both the "Future of Work" and "More Inclusive", it seems there has been a change.

Instead of giving All Employees the "opportunity to develop" as they have in the past, it seems that now Remote Employees will No Longer be given Opportunities for Promotion.

Why such a drastic change?

Why would one of the largest proponents for Remote Work so suddenly go back on EVERYTHING they claimed?

Well, there is a rumor spreading around that many Tech Companies, including Dell, are making these types of Policies to enact "Quiet Firing".

Essentially, instead of directly Firing Employees and requiring severance package payouts, companies actively Fail to provide Support and Development to Employees in the hope that Employees choose to Quit.

Could Dell simply be following this trend?

Would it even work if that was their Goal?

Or would it just completely Backfire due to how Human Psychophysiology works?

Let's look at the Realities.

The first problem for Dell with enacting such a policy is that they are Directly going back on their Word.

I recently made a statement, "Be More than You Say... Our Actions reveal who we are."

Dell is making a Huge Mistake by Acting Differently than they Claim.

What will be the Results of this?

In a "best case" scenario this will lead to a Complete Loss of Respect and Trust for the Dell Leadership.

In a recent article about Trust in Leadership and AI, I spoke about how a Lack of Trust is one of Leader's Worst Problems in today's world.

This will simply make that terrible Statistic even worse.

However, there is also a possibility that, due to how Dell has for so long made claims about how they planned to keep "Opportunities Equal" among Employees, this could be seen as a form of Discrimination.

Of course, I'm not a lawyer (nor do I play one on TV), so I will leave that to be seen, but I think we could see it pop up in a Legal Case in the Future, whether at Dell or elsewhere.

However, this is ONLY the Beginning of the Problems we would see from Quiet Firing.

See, Michael Dell and the Team at Dell have gone on record as saying that there have been "...no meaningful differences for team members working remotely or office-based even before the pandemic forced everyone home."

What does this mean about the current call for Remote Workers no longer being given the Opportunity for Promotion?

Essentially, those who choose to work Remotely, for potentially Necessary Reasons, are being Punished for... NO apparent Reason.

What do we know from History about Humans when they are Punished for Unjust Reasons?

They do not like it.

It ends up creating more Problems for Leaders.

What will the likely Results be, given Human Psychophysiology?

Well, to understand that, we must first understand another Gigantic Problem we are seeing in the World of Business.

Burnout.

Burnout is a Psychophysiological State where People are in SO much Dis-Stress that they do not have enough Energy (Mg-ATP) to maintain basic functions for Survival.

This creates losses in Productivity, and blocks Flow States, Innovation, and Creative Problem Solving, as well as leads to Decreased Health, Wellness, and Worse.

How much of the Population is in Burnout?

80% of Employees currently.

This means that in most Organizations, 4 in 5 Employees are in Burnout.

Given how Neurocardiology works, it is also EXTREMELY likely that this Group Burnout will pull the 5th Employee closer and closer to Burnout unless it is fixed.

Now, what will happen when Organizations are filled with Group Burnout and then they Unjustly Punish Employees?

Nothing good, that's for sure.

But let's take this even further.

The supposed "Goal" of Quiet Firing is to make conditions so bad that Employees "choose" to Quit on their own.

But does this make ANY sense from a Human Psychophysiological Perspective?

No, absolutely not.

See, ALL Change requires one thing - Energy (Mg-ATP).

However, there is a Problem with this right now - Burnout.

Energy (Mg-ATP) is not something Employees have, otherwise they wouldn't be in Burnout.

Due to the state of Burnout, and the Human Desire to seek Homeostasis during States of Low Energy (Mg-ATP), it is FAR more likely that the Employees you "hope" will Quit will simply choose to Stay, Bitterly.

However, what happens when Employees Stay in situations Bitterly?

Well, it will lead to higher rates of Disengagement, and will likely lead further to Active Disengagement where they choose to work Against the Company from within.

What makes this worse for Leaders is the fact that Employees see these types of Mandates as "Unjust Punishments".

What are Humans who act against Unjust Systems?

Heroes - at least in their own eyes.

There is this concept of "Micropower" that exists.

When people feel they are being treated Unjustly by an Authority, they will work against the Authorities in small ways.

It's called "Micropower".

The Idea of Micropower is to cause "enough" Problems to cause Friction, but not enough to lose their Lives, or in this case Jobs.

But what happens when ENTIRE groups of Employees decide to conduct different acts of Micropower against Unjust Practices from their Leaders?

LOTS of Problems.

These are the Problems with Quiet Firing - it makes NO Logical Sense given the current State of Business and how Human Psychophysiology works.

However, it gets WORSE for Leaders due to the other side of this coin.

What happens when a Business actively only Promotes those who go into a Physical Location?

They are choosing Leaders not based on their Merits, but based on a Vanity Metric.

Essentially, Organizations are PURPOSEFULLY limiting their Talent Pool, for no obvious Reasons that make ANY Sense.

What Benefit does this provide?

None.

Why would you purposefully choose to Limit your Talent Pool?

On top of this, what types of People will be Persuaded to Return to the Office by a Punishment Policy?

Yes People.

Do Businesses need Yes People as Leaders?

NO!

Your Leaders should be the Innovators, the Creators, and the Change Makers!

However, these types of people are also those who will ACTIVELY Work against Punishment Policies and avoid Organizations that enact these types of policies.

Not only are you Limiting your overall Talent Pool, but you are further ACTIVELY DETERRING the types of Leaders that your Organization NEEDS!

No matter how you frame this, it is an Extremely Poor Leadership Decision to enact an Unjustified Punishment, while Empowering Employees to become Actively Disengaged.

If Quiet Firing is Dell's Goal, it WILL work against them, as it will work against EVERY Organization that tries it.

However, at this point, it also doesn't "matter" whether this is Dell's Goal or not, because PERCEPTION becomes Reality.

What People "Think" is True will determine how they decide to Act.

In this case, this Policy will be "Perceived" as an Unjust Punishment, whether Dell intends it or not.

Dell's Leaders will be "Perceived" as Untrustworthy and Unrespectable.

So, this means that Employees will Act "as if" their Perception is True.

The fact that I've already read this as the Rumor online shows the Perception already exists, which is bad news for Dell.

Even if Dell made a "public statement" saying otherwise, the words would be seen as Untrustable, just another company using PR-Talk to attempt to Cover a Blatant Mistake they made.

Once you lose Trust, it is nearly Impossible to ever get back.