‘Quiet Cutting’: 4 reasons this trend is a bad idea

Sounds innocent enough, but “Quiet Cutting” is a people management trend you want to avoid.

Some claim Quiet Cutting is a strategic, compassionate way to right-size or right-fit an organization: You — or other staff leaders — reassign employees, expecting they’ll fail and quit (or, if you’re lucky, they turn the tables, succeed and excel).

A quarter of companies buy into it, admitting they practice Quiet Cutting, according to a survey from Zetwerk. And a third of employees have experienced it — either personally or witnessing a colleague affected by the cut.

“The most significant harm in Quiet Cutting is the potential erosion of trust and morale,” says Madeline Weirman, Creative Strategist for Zetwerk. “This practice can lead to feelings of betrayal, impacting overall employee satisfaction and productivity.”

Quiet Cutting works — kind of

Despite those downsides, Quiet Cutting might seem like it works: Zetwerk found 40% of the people who are quietly cut eventually leave and about 25% more plan to leave.

But they don’t leave quietly: Half feel betrayed by the company’s approach and 30% have left negative company reviews.

So, while it generally gets people you don’t want to walk out the door, the departure leaves more scars than it’s probably worth.

“With 56% of employees preferring outright termination over quiet cutting and over half feeling betrayed by it, it’s evident that this approach can have detrimental effects on workforce morale and engagement,” says Weirman. “These sentiments also extended to co-workers, with 62% of respondents who observed colleagues being quietly cut feeling negatively toward their employer, and nearly half were motivated to leave because of it.”

So let’s put a microscope on the four biggest reasons Quiet Cutting is a bad idea.

1. It hurts morale

Employers might think they’re sneaky — or not so obvious — when they reassign employees who they actually want to get rid of. But in most cases, you aren’t giving all your employees enough credit.

They usually see what’s going on before it happens, when the reassignment goes down and after it starts to unravel. And guess what they’re thinking? That was terrible to do to him. Am I next? He wasn’t that bad. Should I start looking for another job?

You’re killing morale when you cut quietly.

Better: Get your front-line managers to lean into performance assessments and performance improvement plans (PIPs) so skill and behavioral issues are addressed early. It makes sense to help employees up their skills in current roles, too.

“As opposed to reassigning employees with the expectation they’ll leave, investing in skill development and training programs can be highly beneficial,” says Weirman. “With 57% of quietly cut employees learning new skills in their reassigned roles, this approach not only benefits the individual but also contributes to a more skilled and versatile workforce.”

2. It clouds transparency

People need — and want to know — where they stand at work. And they need to hear it often enough so they can correct course, if necessary, or continue what they’re doing when it’s great.

Reassigning people on false pretense is not transparent. It will break down trust with the employee and those who witness it and are affected by the change.

Better: Make regular check-ins with candid feedback from both manager and employee a measured part of performance. If possible, give them a checklist of performance goals, expectations and personal concerns or observations to cover.

“Open and honest communication between employers and employees is crucial,” says Weirman. “A transparent approach that values clear communication is favored for maintaining trust and positive workplace dynamics.”

3. It hurts your reputation

Quiet Cutting reflects badly on employers. Remember that a third of those who get quietly cut will post bad reviews. That doesn’t take into account the number of employees who bad mouth the company on their personal social media platforms and verbally to colleagues in the workplace.

And almost a third of employees who witness Quiet Cutting think negatively of their employers.

When others hear that managers at a company undermine employees — rather than address issues outright — they’ll be less likely to apply for jobs, buy from the company and/or promote it.

Better: Manage your reputation. Continue to handle employee issues — and train front-line managers — following your normal protocols so employees know what to expect. When things aren’t working, be respectful of their feelings and future as you decide the best way forward — that being re- or up-skilling, a PIP or a proper termination.

4. It’s unprofessional

Remember: Almost 60% of employees prefer straightforward termination over Quiet Cutting.

Some companies and bosses take the Quiet Cutting approach because they don’t want to hurt good people who might not be good employees. Or they want to circumvent severance packages or unemployment and health benefits.

Better: Follow your normal termination procedure, staying in line with all laws and guidelines that govern fair termination.

“If all other options are exhausted and a termination is necessary, then providing fair severance packages can help maintain goodwill and uphold the company’s reputation, even during times of transition,” says Weirman. “While it involves a financial commitment, this approach aligns with the belief of 80% of business owners who consider offering severance as the more professional approach.”