A Majority of 32% Feel Employers Benefit the Most From Quiet Hiring

Quiet-hiring is a term that refers to the practice of acquiring new talent for a role without hiring new employees for the same. Slowly yet surely, the practice is gaining traction among one of the most ‘emerging’ work trends for 2023. More often than not, quiet hiring takes place when employers encourage and urge their existing employees to take up roles beyond their job scope. While many employees are motivated by the opportunity, others would find it difficult to cope, given the possibility of increased responsibilities, tasks, etc.

Quiet hiring strategy is trending, now more than ever, amid global economic uncertainty. Real Research, an online survey app, launched a survey to gain public opinion on quiet hiring strategy. Through this survey, it is hoped to highlight the pros and cons of quiet hiring between employees and employers and who is likely to benefit the most. Here are the results from the survey.

Highlights:

• 57.55% say the most effective quiet hiring strategy is hiring short-term contractors
• 13.81% feel the main underlying cause of quiet hiring is cost-cutting
• 32.19% vote that employers are likely to benefit the most from quiet hiring

Quiet Quitting, Quiet Hiring…

Quiet quitting, as a concept, was trending throughout 2022, with leading causes being stress, frustration, and burnout. Quiet hiring, experts feel, is predicted to trend this year. Accordingly, the survey first polled respondents on their awareness of the quiet hiring strategy; 57.88% were aware of the practice, while 29.8% had only heard of it. 12.32% are not aware of the quiet hiring strategy.

According to figure 1, “quiet hiring” can take two forms: hiring short-term contractors or assigning additional responsibilities to existing employees beyond their job descriptions. When asked which of these two strategies is more effective, 57.55% of the respondents believed that hiring short-term contractors are the more effective option. In contrast, 33.71% believed that assigning additional responsibilities to current employees is the better choice. The remaining 8.74% were uncertain and did not express a clear preference.

Causes of Quiet Hiring

There are several underlying causes of quiet hiring that organizations may consider. Among the respondents, the top three causes identified were cost-cutting (13.81%), employers’ urge to retain top performers (9.36%), and the belief that existing employees are more reliable than hiring new ones (11.34%).

Other causes identified in the data set include employees’ willingness to learn new skills while staying in their current job (9.04%), followed by:

Employees’ desire for raises and promotion (7.09%), recruitment budget constraints (7.08%), lack of new suitable candidates for the role (7.11%), and the impact of the recession (6.43%). However, it is worth noting that a significant portion of the respondents (15.27%) remained undecided on the underlying causes of quiet hiring.

These results suggest that there is no single dominant cause of quiet hiring and that the motivations behind the practice can vary significantly depending on the organization’s specific circumstances and priorities.

Benefits of Quiet Hiring for Employees

The fourth insight data set explore who benefits the most from the “quiet hiring” strategy. According to the respondents, there was a relatively even split between those who believed that employers (32.19%) or both employers and employees (28.8%) would benefit the most from quiet hiring. A smaller percentage believed that employees (20.28%) or neither employers nor employees (18.73%) would benefit the most.

Moreover, when the respondents were asked about the main benefits of quiet hiring for employees, the results revealed the chance to work in other job roles without switching companies (12.84%). Other benefits included the scope to learn new skills (8.78%), opportunities for career advancement (8.34%), increased job security (8.16%), and the chance for an appraisal for promotions (7.01%).

Other benefits that respondents mentioned included opportunities for annual salary negotiation (7.83%), expanded professional network (6.52%), and the chance to discover new interests (6.71%). However, it is worth noting that a significant percentage of respondents (17.94%) did not identify any benefits of quiet hiring for employees.

Drawbacks of Quiet Hiring for Employees

Figure 2 examines the main drawbacks of quiet hiring for employees. According to the responses, a significant percentage (14.05%) did not identify any drawbacks. However, among those who did, the most commonly cited drawback was fatigue and burnout due to multiple tasks (11.73%). Compromised quality due to increased workload (10.87%) and decreased productivity due to numerous tasks (9.01%) followed next.

Other drawbacks mentioned included a strain on achieving work-life balance (8.61%), feeling undervalued (7.27%), and feeling exploited (8.39%). Respondents also mentioned that quiet hiring induces more stress (7.91%) and can lead to less time for personal gadgets (7.72%).

These results suggest that while quiet hiring may offer several benefits for employees, such as opportunities for skills development and increased job security, drawbacks still come with it.

Benefits of Quiet Hiring for Employers

The eighth insight data set focuses on the main benefits of quiet hiring for employers. The responses indicate that a significant portion of the participants (7.14%) did not identify any benefits. However, among those who did, the most commonly cited benefit was the efficient way to address labor shortages (13.4%), followed by cost-effectiveness (12.81%) and the convenience of dealing with recession risk (10.43%).

Other benefits mentioned include the high reliability of existing staff compared to newly hired full-timers (11.52%), staff retention and productivity improvement (10.12%), and the prospect of achieving better results (9.18%). Some respondents also highlighted the time-effectiveness (7.74%) of the quiet hiring approach.

Drawbacks of Quiet Hiring for Employees

The findings reveal that a notable proportion of the participants (14.58%) did not identify any drawbacks. However, among those who did, the most commonly cited drawback was the reduced quality of work due to increased workload (19.84%), followed by the increased chances of employees quitting (17.2%) and reduced productivity due to increased workload (17.01%).

Another significant drawback mentioned was the possibility of cultivating an unhealthy work culture (16.92%). This can occur when existing employees are assigned additional responsibilities beyond their job descriptions, leading to burnout, fatigue, and decreased job satisfaction. The additional workload can create a stressful work environment, leading to decreased collaboration and teamwork.

Based on the last poll,  34.89% of respondents believed that “quiet hiring” would be very effective, while 27.38% said it would be somewhat effective. 16.3% of respondents believed that “quiet hiring” would have the same effectiveness as other recruitment methods. On the other hand, 9.04% of respondents believed that “quiet hiring” would be somewhat ineffective, while 3.75% believed it would be very ineffective. These results suggest that there is a range of opinions on the effectiveness of the quiet hiring recruitment strategy, with a significant percentage of respondents expressing confidence in its potential.