The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0959-6119.htm

Combating
Combating quiet quitting: Quiet Quitting
implications for future research and
practices for talent management
Bingjie Liu-Lastres
Department of Tourism, Event and Sport Management, School of Health and
Human Sciences, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA Received 31 August 2023
Revised 18 September 2023
Accepted 20 September 2023
Osman M. Karatepe
Faculty of Tourism, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, Turkey and
Department of Global Business, School of Global Eminence, Kyung Hee University,
Seoul, Republic of Korea, and
Fevzi Okumus
Hospitality Services Department, Rosen College of Hospitality Management,
University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida, USA

Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to offer viewpoints on the emergence of Quiet Quitting. Particularly, this paper
reviews the reasons behind the phenomenon and analyzes its potential influences on the hospitality
workforce. This study also proposes theory-driven solutions addressing this issue.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper is based on the relevant literature, industry reports and a
critical reflection of the authors’ experiences, research and insights.
Findings – This paper reveals that Quiet Quitting can be a major obstacle for the hospitality business to
reach service excellence. This paper also finds that Quiet Quitting is driven by several antecedents and
correlates and affects employees, customers and various businesses in the hospitality and tourism industries.
Practical implications – This paper proposes several suggestions to properly address this issue,
including enhancing the person–organization fit, work flexibility and employee well-being.
Originality/value – Quiet Quitting emerged as a new trend among the young workforce shortly after the
pandemic. Despite the popularity of such odd terminology, academic discussions surrounding this issue have
been limited. As one of the early attempts, this paper offers a critical analysis of the phenomenon and actional
insights to respond to this ongoing challenge.
Keywords Quiet Quitting, Work–life balance, Workforce management, Gen Z, Great resignation,
Turnover, Nonattendance behavior
Paper type Viewpoint

Introduction
Sparked by a viral TikTok video in the summer of 2022, Quiet Quitting has become one of
the most publicized and popular workplace-related topics on social media. Social media
content involving Quiet Quitting has attracted millions of views on multiple platforms, and
several industry reports also substantiate the emergence of Quiet Quitting (Gallup, 2022; International Journal of
Harter, 2022). For instance, a global workforce report shows that 44% of world workers are Contemporary Hospitality
Management
experiencing a record level of stress, 79% stay disengaged from work and 33% even find © Emerald Publishing Limited
0959-6119
their jobs unfulfilling (Gallup, 2022). Similarly, a recent report finds that more than half of DOI 10.1108/IJCHM-08-2023-1317
IJCHM the US workforce makes up the category of “Quiet Quitters,” who are reluctant to exceed
their job description at work (Harter, 2022). Interestingly, this trend appears widespread
among young workers, with an Axios poll showing that 85% of Gen Z workers find Quiet
Quitting appealing, and 15% are already doing it (Pandey, 2022). In the same vein,
according to the most recent American Opportunity Survey (McKinsey and Company, 2022),
Gen Z employees are facing more mental health challenges, obstacles to effective work and
concerns regarding their financial well-being and future.
Noticeably, there is a clear distinction between Quiet Quitting and quitting. Quiet
Quitting does not necessarily mean resigning abruptly and surreptitiously. Instead, as the
term implies, Quiet Quitting refers to the act of an employee consciously reducing their level
of performance and productivity within the workplace (Hamouche et al., 2023). As such, it
mainly concerns a change in attitudes and performance in the workplace; examples include
a tendency of work disengagement, decreasing work motivation and a desire for a work–life
balance (Zenger and Folkman, 2022). Quiet Quitting occurs in various forms such as limited
work commitment, making the bare minimum of effort at work, meeting only basic work
requirements, emotionally withdrawing from work and establishing boundaries between
work and personal life (Carmichael, 2022; Wade, 2022).
The practice of Quiet Quitting is often seen as a means of coping with burnout and
chronic overwork (Lord, 2022). However, it can be problematic for the hospitality industry,
which prioritizes service excellence and often requires employees to go above and beyond to
meet and even exceed customer expectations consistently. Characterized by its service
nature, hospitality businesses rely heavily on their employees’ skills and performance (Liu-
Lastres et al., 2022). Therefore, the unwillingness of hospitality employees to put in extra
effort or work might negatively affect the quality of their service, which leads to adverse
effects on customer satisfaction, loyalty and trust, as well as a damaged brand reputation
(Lai et al., 2018).
Hamouche et al. (2023) suggest that Quiet Quitting is not new, but due to recent
organizational work changes following the pandemic and the traditional work structure in
hospitality and tourism, it is likely to become more prevalent in the near future. The
hospitality industry is experiencing significant talent crises as it transitions into a
postpandemic era, with the Great Resignation already underway and a looming recession on
the horizon (Formica and Sfodera, 2022; Liu-Lastres et al., 2022). Accordingly, this paper
aims to critically analyze the phenomenon of Quiet Quitting and propose theory-driven
solutions to this emerging issue. The analysis of this paper is based on the related literature,
authors’ experiences and insights and findings of recent industry reports. In doing so, this
paper not only reviews the causes and effects of Quiet Quitting but also provides practical
insights that can benefit practitioners and various businesses in the hospitality and tourism
industries. This in-depth analysis also expects to spur further academic endeavors and
stimulate practical improvements concerning this topic.

A critical analysis of Quiet Quitting

Quiet Quitting and the COVID-19 pandemic
Because Quiet Quitting tends to rise during the pandemic, it is natural to assume that the
cause of the trend lies with the pandemic itself. However, it is argued that Quiet Quitting is
triggered rather than caused by the pandemic (Formica and Sfodera, 2022; Hamouche et al.,
2023; Liu-Lastres et al., 2022). To start with, Quiet Quitting, which relies on the method of
removing labor, is similar to some historical industrial actions such as work-to-rule (Lord,
2022). All these industrial actions are examples of a repeating pattern where workers gather
and voice their concerns collectively. However, in contrast with other industrial movements,
there appears to be a personal element involved with Quiet Quitting as it is tied to the Combating
workers’ feelings and desires (Carmichael, 2022). Quiet Quitting
Several personal reasons have been identified for the Quiet Quitting movement,
including feeling uncared for by the employer, the lack of professional development
opportunities, disconnection between the organization and the employee, a desire to work to
life and increasing dissatisfaction and disappointment toward managers (Formica and
Sfodera, 2022; Harter, 2022; Pandey, 2022; Zenger and Folkman, 2022). Besides personal
feelings, Zenger and Folkman (2022) point out that leadership is partly responsible for Quiet
Quitting, as they find that when compared to the most effective leaders, the least effective
managers supervise three to four times as many “quiet quitters.” Lastly, in some cases,
employees’ concerns over managers extend their dissatisfaction with the organization as
well (Espada, 2022). In some ways, this intense feeling underscores the employee’s
disconnection from the employer as well as their commitment to Quiet Quitting in the long
run.
Furthermore, workers’ engagement in counterproductive behaviors, manifested through
Quiet Quitting in the current case, often indicates a low level of engagement or burnout
(Wallace and Coughlan, 2023). These workforce-related issues are not new, but they have
been amplified by the pandemic, which has been ongoing for three years. The contemporary
workforce, including hospitality workers, is entering a period of “Great Reflection,” which
explores how employees are managing stress, balancing demands in the work–life nexus
and enhancing well-being in the aftermath of the pandemic (Liu-Lastres et al., 2022). As
such, it is their awareness of these increasingly significant concerns that has been the main
driving force behind their decision to participate in the Quiet Quitting trend (Lord, 2022;
Pandey, 2022). Such observations are consistent with related discussions, which emphasize
that the pandemic is a catalyst but not the cause of this “talent crisis” (Formica and Sfodera,
2022; Liu-Lastres et al., 2022; Lord, 2022; Zenger and Folkman, 2022).

Antecedents, correlates and manifestations/effects of Quiet Quitting

While it is clear that the COVID-19 pandemic is not the sole cause of Quiet Quitting, this
paper seeks to provide a deeper understanding of Quiet Quitting in hospitality by
identifying its antecedents, correlates and manifestations/effects. Accordingly, the present
attempt is based on a critical examination of the relevant literature, the experiences and
insights of the authors and the most recent industry reports. It is reflections like these that
enable academics and professionals to collaborate in an effort to find solutions to urgent
industry issues (Kwok, 2022). This paper presents ideas that are still a work in progress, but
it can serve as an inspiring starting for future discussions about this topic and advance an
inclusive academic and practical discourse.
An overview of the findings and a comprehensive list of related factors are presented in
Figure 1. As illustrated in Figure 1, this paper approached Quiet Quitting through the
following three aspects: antecedents, correlates and manifestation/effects. First, antecedents
refer to the preexisting conditions that might cause one’s involvement in Quiet Quitting and
can be further divided into individual and work-related factors. As shown in Table 1,
individual factors include demographic variables (e.g. age, gender, education and family
status), personality (e.g. customer orientation), industry involvement (e.g. sector, industry
tenure and position type) and individual concerns (e.g. work–life conflict). Work-related
factors appear more complex and can be broken down into four dimensions: jobs, human
relations, work environment and organizations.
The second component is Correlates (Table 2), a process that overlaps antecedents and
manifestations/effects and progresses as the situation evolves. It is often reflected through
IJCHM

Figure 1.
A critical analysis of
Quiet Quitting

two dimensions – work correlates and nonwork correlates. Work correlates consist of items
such as career dissatisfaction, job dissatisfaction, unmet expectations, social loafing, erosion
in organizational commitment, poor career adaptivity and on-the-job embeddedness. In
contrast, nonwork correlates are more involved with one’s personal life and include life
dissatisfaction, health problems, off-the-job embeddedness and anxiety and depression.
The third component is Manifestation/Effects, which illustrates how Quiet Quitting
affects employees, customers and various businesses in the hospitality industry. As
presented in Table 3, in the context of employees, Quiet Quitting has direct repercussions in
terms of declining performance, work disengagement and even no longer participation in
proenvironmental behaviors at work. Disengaged workers also undermine workforce
cohesion and sustainability from an operations perspective. In addition, for customers, Quiet
Quitting threatens service quality, which is the key to a successful hospitality business. The
declining service quality exemplifies a hospitality organization’s underperformance. It is
noted that underachieving hospitality organizations often result in disappointing
consumers, dissatisfied employees and churn, which ultimately harms their profitability
and productivity.

Responding to Quiet Quitting

Insights from the academics
To address Quiet Quitting adequately, hospitality management researchers and
practitioners have taken immediate action. Regarding academics, a growing number of
studies have been devoted to analyzing emerging trends in the hospitality workforce since
2020. Earlier attempts (Chen et al., 2022; McCartney et al., 2022) mainly explored the
pandemic’s effects on hospitality workers’ stress and turnover intentions. Later on, when the
pandemic eased, the talent shortage became an urgent concern for hospitality and tourism
operators. Accordingly, scholars (Baum et al., 2020; Kwok, 2022; Liu-Lastres et al., 2022)
have highlighted the need for changes on the micro, meso and macrolevels.
Demographic variables
Individual factors

Age

Gender

Education
– Education level
– Degree in hospitality and
tourism management

Family status
– Marital status
– Number of children
– Number of children living at
home
Work-related factors
Job-related factors

Stress
– Role ambiguity
– Role conflict
– Role overload
– Work pressure
– Burnout
– Psychological distress
– Work–life conflict
Job responsibility and job redesign

Poor job crafting

– Lack of organizational support
Poor job involvement

The number of work hours per week

Physical discomfort
Source: Authors’ own work
Antecedents of Quiet
Table 1.
Quitting
Employee personality

Personality domain
– Type A
– Neuroticism



Customer orientation

Emotion management
– Emotional stability
– Emotional intelligence
– Positive/Negative affectivity

Others
– Self-efficacy
– Intrinsic motivation
– Hope
– Self-esteem
– Hardiness
Human relation factors

Supervisor
– Poor mentoring
– Abusive supervision
– Leader–member exchange

Coworkers
– Abusive coworker treatment
– Employee incivility

Customer
– Customer incivility
– Social stressors
Industry involvement

Sector

Industry tenure

Organizational tenure
Position type
– Full-time/Part-time
– Salaried/hourly paid
Work environment

Workplace ostracism

Toxic work culture

Organizational politics

Sexual harassment

Workplace romance
Individual concerns

Family–work conflict

Family or marital dissatisfaction

Poor support from family, spouse, or partner

Increased risk for infectious
Organizational factors

Policy
– Poor skill-enhancing human resource practices
(e.g. limited training)
– Poor motivation-enhancing human resource
practices (e.g. lack of rewards, limited
empowerment)
– Poor opportunity-enhancing human resources
practices (e.g. limited career opportunities)
– Lack of family-friendly organizational policies

Support
– Lack of social support (i.e. instrumental and
emotional) at work

Dark triad leadership
– Narcissistic leadership
– Psychopathic leadership
– Machiavellian leadership

Other dark leadership Styles
– Despotic leadership
Combating
Quiet Quitting
IJCHM Work correlates Nonwork correlates

Career dissatisfaction
Life dissatisfaction

Job dissatisfaction
Health problems

Unmet expectations
Somatic or physical complaints

Social loafing
Anxiety and depression

Erosion in organization commitment
Substance use or abuse

Poor career adaptability
Off-the-job embeddedness

On-the-job embeddedness

Knowledge sharing behavior

Work engagement level
Table 2.
Cyberloafing
Correlates of Quiet
Quitting Source: Authors’ own work

On a microlevel, employees’ individual needs are featured. Studies have explored topics
related to understanding their values, insecurities, cultures and identities (García-Rodríguez
et al., 2020; Karatepe et al., 2022), fulfilling their specific needs (Formica and Sfodera, 2022)
and enhancing employee well-being (Guzzo et al., 2022). While under the prolonged impacts
of the COVID-19 pandemic, this research stream also addresses the essence of exploring the
workforce’s changing requirements such as gender inequality (Baum et al., 2020), work
flexibility (Liu-Lastres et al., 2022), additional stress (Chen et al., 2022) and cultural diversity
(García-Rodríguez et al., 2020).
The mesolevel suggestions mainly involve organizational efforts. The literature has
discussed several initiatives such as visualizing the career path (Goh and Okumus, 2020),
cultivating positive organizational culture and creating a vivid working environment (Baum
et al., 2020; Formica and Sfodera, 2022; Liu-Lastres et al., 2022), enhancing internal
transparency and offering organizational support (Chen et al., 2022; Goh and Okumus, 2020),
increasing corporate social responsibility activities (Guzzo et al., 2022; Karatepe et al., 2022)
and implementing mentoring programs company-wide (Goh and Okumus, 2020).
Studies assuming a macrolevel scope mainly examine the relationships between the
hospitality workforce and the broader society (Baum et al., 2020). In the context of
hospitality management, initial attempts in this area have focused on the overall impact of
the pandemic. For instance, Sönmez et al. (2020) investigated the effect of the pandemic on
immigration workers in the hospitality industry. Williams and Kayaoglu (2020) revealed the
policy responses toward undeclared work in the European hospitality sector during the
pandemic times. Lastly, Martins et al. (2020) developed a new post-COVID-19 model of
tourism and hospitality workforce resilience, highlighting nonstandard works and the
transferable skills unique to the postpandemic times. A few recent studies (Formica and
Sfodera, 2022; Hamouche et al., 2023) have focused on Quiet Quitting, examining this
emerging phenomenon through the lens of management and organizational behaviors
literature. The majority of these studies, however, tend to be conceptual, and there has been
a lack of empirical studies offering evidence-based insights.
Across the industry, fundamental changes are needed to spark improvements in the
workforce at the macrolevel. One direction is to extend and promote successful
organizational measures industry-wide. Another aspect is to enhance organizational and
industrial resilience (Baum et al., 2020). The current challenges, although triggered by the
Employees Customers Business and organizations

Poor job performance
Poor service quality
Workforce
– Task performance – Customer dissatisfaction – Increased employee turnover
– Contextual performance – Declining customer loyalty – Decreased work engagement
– Service recovery performance
Business performance
– Adaptive behavior – Increase in customer churn
– Creative performance – Decrease in profitability or productivity
– Innovative performance
Disengagement in environmental behavior
– Safety performance – Erosion in environmental sustainability or
– Counterproductive work behavior environmental performance
– Service sabotage

Nonattendance, coasting and turnover
– Turnover intentions
– Voluntary turnover
– Absenteeism
– Tardiness
– Leaving work early
– Coasting

Disengagement in proenvironmental behaviors
– Poor environmental commitment
– Poor task-related proenvironmental behavior
– Poor proactive proenvironmental behavior
– Nongreen behavior

Source: Authors’ own work

Table 3.
Combating

of Quiet Quitting
Manifestation/effects
Quiet Quitting
IJCHM pandemic, are primarily attributed to the vulnerability of hospitality businesses and their
existing operational models. Therefore, the industry should consider being more proactive
and incorporating various new measures (e.g. technology advancement) to become more
resilient. Collectively, these measures should counteract the existing negative perception of
the hospitality industry and build a new image of the industry in the minds of current and
future employees.

Hospitality industry’s responses

Parallel to academic findings, the hospitality industry has taken multiple measures. Table 4
provides a summary of the main scopes of the related academic studies and industry
measures. From a microperspective, many hospitality businesses initially tried to exceed
employees’ financial needs and raise their salaries. But unfortunately, monetary investment
did not solve the problem immediately and appeared unsustainable. More importantly, as a
result, the talent crisis remains unresolved, and most businesses have been facing additional
challenges related to disengaged and underperformed workers. The ignorance over
employee well-being, mental health and the pursuit of work–life balance seemed responsible
for such measures’ failure. To overcome these shortcomings, more and more hospitality
businesses and professional organizations provide employer assistance programs and
continuous attempts to make the working experiences more rewarding and engaging for
employees. Examples include the restaurant employee relief fund supported by the National
Restaurant Association and the bartender emergency assistance program offered by the
United States Bartenders’ Guild (USBG) National Charity Foundation.
On a mesolevel, organizational changes also took place. On one hand, some hospitality
businesses chose to reduce hours and close on certain days to adapt to the changing
situation. Nevertheless, such attempts are detrimental to the revenue, as most of them had to
increase prices to accommodate the changes while also experiencing labor shortages (Miller-
Merrell, 2022). On the other hand, recognizing the changing demand of employees, some
hospitality businesses have prioritized employee mental health and tried to increase work
flexibility. For instance, in an effort to make it appeal to Gen Z employees, Sage Hospitality
Group offers a four-day work week, which will promote work–life balance (Stabile, 2022).
Similarly, a New York restaurant owner partnered with a learning center and offered
employees subsidized childcare (Izon, 2020). In both instances, hospitality employers
showed commitment to their employees and embraced the change of a positive, supportive
and enlightened work environment. Another important yet overlooked approach revolves
around Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DE&I) practices, which require organizational
efforts to effectively create customized measures that satisfy employees’ needs for improved
well-being (Liu-Lastres et al., 2022; Ponting and Dillette, 2023).
Furthermore, the industry is undergoing macrolevel changes. Some hospitality
businesses are repurposing consumer-facing positions as multifaceted roles to maximize
efficiencies (Christoff, 2022). The new model encourages frontline employees to perform
multiple roles (e.g. receptionists and concierges) simultaneously, thus making their working
experience more rewarding and engaging. Extending this line of effort, the American Hotel
and Lodging Association has created a training program called “registered apprenticeship,”
which features the perspective of career path and crafting one’s skills specific to in-demand
occupations (American Hotel and Lodging Association Foundation, 2022).

Conclusions and recommendations

At present, despite its strong recovery, the hospitality industry is facing a talent crisis affected by
emerging trends such as Great Resignation, Loud Layoffs and Career Cushioning (Delouya, 2022). In
 Scope Microlevel Mesolevel Macrolevel
Entity (Employee-centered) (Organizational efforts) (Industry-wide changes)

Academic studies
Needs, values, cultures, identities and
visualizing the career path
Promote successful measures
well-being
cultivating positive organizational culture
Be proactive

Gender inequality, work flexibility and creating a vivid working environment
Increase resilience

enhancing internal transparency and
Reshaping public image
offering organizational support

increasing corporate social responsibility
activities

implementing mentoring programs
company-wide
Industry measures
Increase salary
Offer a four-day workweek
Improve operational models

Employee assistance
Offer additional childcare support
Apprenticeship programs

Makes the working experiences more
DE&I Initiatives
rewarding and engaging

Source: Authors’ own work

measures
Table 4.
Combating

and industry
of academic studies
Quiet Quitting

Summary of findings
IJCHM hospitality and tourism, the rise of gig culture and the desire for more work flexibility has led to
multiple jobs being held at the same time (Liu-Lastres et al., 2022). Quiet Quitting is one aspect of
these trends. As our detailed investigation indicates, Quiet Quitting is not an isolated incident or
unique occurrence, but rather it reflects the true state of the hospitality workforce, particularly among
young workers. Considering all the changes and uncertainties embedded in the postpandemic times,
it becomes critical for the hospitality industry to reflect on these challenges and take action. It is
imperative that practitioners and related organizations reevaluate their talent management strategies
to retain their workforce and remain competitive in a rapidly changing landscape.
This study has several implications for both practitioners and scholars. First, future
studies need to explore not only hospitality employees’ temporal needs but also their long-
term requirements. Various theoretical attempts are encouraged to explore how to interpret
the workforce’s physical, psychological, social, cultural and professional expectations. There
is a need to further explore the antecedents, correlates and consequences of Quiet Quitting as
well as related topics such as employee well-being, burnout, counterproductive work
performance and disengagement.
As a second consideration, organizational efforts have to be considered besides personal
approaches. Several initiatives have been explored in current studies, including corporate
social responsibility, mentoring programs and leadership. Others, however, are moving
forward and have enacted additional measures such as offering childcare support and
allowing greater work flexibility. In light of this, future studies should be updated and test
the effectiveness of these efforts. By combining practices with theories, the industry will be
able to gain valuable insights for future efforts.
Enhancing the working environment and shaping a positive work culture is another
important aspect of improvement. In light of the increasing necessity to address DE&I at
work, this approach has become even more critical. Creating effective strategies requires a
clear understanding of employees’ needs, purposes and cultural values. A widespread
promotion of this initiative is also necessary, as it requires industry-wide changes to address
these ongoing issues efficiently.

References
American Hotel and Lodging Association Foundation (2022), “Transform your workforce through
registered apprenticeship!”, available at: www.ahlafoundation.org/apprenticeship (accessed 18
November 2022).
Baum, T., Mooney, S.K., Robinson, R.N. and Solnet, D. (2020), “COVID-19’s impact on the hospitality
workforce–new crisis or amplification of the norm?”, International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, Vol. 32 No. 9, pp. 2813-2829.
Carmichael, G.S. (2022), “Quiet quitting is the fakest of fake workplace trends”, in The Washintgon Post,
available at: www.washingtonpost.com/business/quiet-quitting-is-the-fakest-of-fake-workplace-
trends/2022/09/27/bbf5e354-3e5c-11ed-8c6e-9386bd7cd826_story.html#::text¼Perhaps%20you’ve
%20heard%20of,dubious%20pandemic%20work%2Drelated%20fads
Chen, C.C., Zou, S.S. and Chen, M.H. (2022), “The fear of being infected and fired: examining the dual job
stressors of hospitality employees during COVID-19”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 102, p. 103131.
Christoff, J. (2022), “Key trends affecting hospitality sector hiring”, available at: www.travelpulse.com/
news/features/key-trends-affecting-hospitality-sector-hiring.html
Delouya, S. (2022), “From ‘quiet quitting’ to ‘career cushioning,’ here are the workplace trends that took
2022 by storm – and whether they’ll continue in 2023”, available at: www.businessinsider.com/
workplace-trends-2022-quiet-quitting-career-cushioning-great-resignation-labor-2022-12
Espada, M. (2022), “Employees say ‘quiet quitting’ is just setting boundaries”, Companies fear long- Combating
term effects, available at: www.healthleadersmedia.com/human-resources/employees-say-quiet-
quitting-just-setting-boundaries-companies-fear-long-term
Quiet Quitting
Formica, S. and Sfodera, F. (2022), “The great resignation and quiet quitting paradigm shifts: an
overview of current situation and future research directions”, Journal of Hospitality Marketing
and Management, pp. 1-9.
Gallup (2022), “State of the global workplace: 2022 report”, available at: www.gallup.com/workplace/
349484/state-of-the-global-workplace-2022-report.aspx
García-Rodríguez, F.J., Dorta-Afonso, D. and Gonzalez-de-la-Rosa, M. (2020), “Hospitality diversity
management and job satisfaction: the mediating role of organizational commitment across
individual differences”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 91, p. 102698.
Goh, E. and Okumus, F. (2020), “Avoiding the hospitality workforce bubble: strategies to attract and
retain generation Z talent in the hospitality workforce”, Tourism Management Perspectives,
Vol. 33, p. 100603.
Guzzo, R.F., Abbott, J. and Lee, M. (2022), “How CSR and well-being affect work-related outcomes: a
hospitality industry perspective”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 1470-1490.
Hamouche, S., Koritos, C. and Papastathopoulos, A. (2023), “Quiet quitting: relationship with other
concepts and implications for tourism and hospitality”, International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management.
Harter, J. (2022), “Is quiet quitting real?”, available at: www.gallup.com/workplace/398306/quiet-
quitting-real.aspx (accessed 10/24 2022).
Izon, J. (2020), “The childcare center built for hospitatliy workers”, In Full-Serivice Restaurant
Magazine, Online.
Karatepe, O.M., Okumus, F. and Saydam, M.B. (2022), “Outcomes of job insecurity among hotel
employees during COVID-19”, International Hospitality Review, doi: 10.1108/IHR-11-2021-0070.
Kwok, L. (2022), “Labor shortage: a critical reflection and a call for industry-academia collaboration”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 34 No. 11, pp. 3929-3943.
Lai, I.K., Hitchcock, M., Yang, T. and Lu, T.W. (2018), “Literature review on service quality in
hospitality and tourism (1984-2014): future directions and trends”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 114-159.
Liu-Lastres, B., Wen, H. and Huang, W.J. (2022), “A reflection on the Great Resignation in the
hospitality and tourism industry”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 35 No. 1.
Lord, J. (2022), “Quiet quitting is a new name for an old method of industrial action”, in”,
TheConversation.com.
McCartney, G., In, C.L.C. and Pinto, J.S.D.A.F. (2022), “COVID-19 impact on hospitality retail
employees’ turnover intentions”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 2092-2112.
McKinsey and Company (2022), “How does Gen Z see its place in the working world? With trepidation”,
available at: www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/sustainable-inclusive-growth/future-of-
america/how-does-gen-z-see-its-place-in-the-working-world-with-trepidation
Martins, A., Riordan, T. and Dolnicar, S. (2020), “A post-COVID-19 model of tourism and hospitality
workforce resilience”, available at: www.osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/4quga/
Miller-Merrell, J. (2022), “How the hospitality sector is adapting to a talent shortage”, available at: www.blog.
talroo.com/how-hospitality-sector-is-adapting-to-talent-shortage/#::text¼Hospitality%20workers%
20are%20migrating%20towards,are%20even%20offering%20bonus%20incentives
Pandey, E. (2022), “The staying power of quiet quitting”, In, Axios Finish Line.
IJCHM Ponting, S.S.A. and Dillette, A. (2023), “Diversity, equity, and inclusion practices: a Delphi study to
build a consensus in hospitality and tourism organizations”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management.
Sönmez, S., Apostolopoulos, Y., Lemke, M.K. and Hsieh, Y.C.J. (2020), “Understanding the effects of
COVID-19 on the health and safety of immigrant hospitality workers in the United States”,
Tourism Management Perspectives, Vol. 35, p. 100717.
Stabile, A. (2022), “Denver hospitality group offers four-day work week to attract Gen Z”, in, Fox
Business, available at: www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/denver-hospitality-group-four-day-work-
week#::text¼Sage%20Hospitality%20Group%20believes%20the,and%20retain%20Gen%20Z
%20employees
Wade, J. (2022), “Loud and quiet quitting: the new epidemic isn’t just a trend”, in. Forbes, available at:
www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbooksauthors/2022/09/26/loud-and-quiet-quitting-the-new-epidemic-
isnt-just-a-trend/?sh¼68d19eb8797e
Wallace, E. and Coughlan, J. (2023), “Burnout and counterproductive workplace behaviours among
frontline hospitality employees: the effect of perceived contract precarity”, International Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 451-468.
Williams, C.C. and Kayaoglu, A. (2020), “COVID-19 and undeclared work: impacts and policy responses
in Europe”, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 40 Nos 13/14, pp. 914-931.
Zenger, J. and Folkman, J. (2022), “Quiet quitting is about bad bosses, not bad employees”, Havard
Business Review, available at: www.hbr.org/2022/08/quiet-quitting-is-about-bad-bosses-not-
bad-employees

Corresponding author
Osman M. Karatepe can be contacted at: osman.karatepe@emu.edu.tr

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com