Quiet quitting dominated headlines for two years. Leaders panicked about disengaged employees doing the bare minimum. But while you were watching for quiet quitters, something more dangerous was happening right under your nose.
Your employees aren't quietly quitting. They're quietly cracking.
The difference matters. Quiet quitting refers to individual disengagement, with employees choosing to pull back. Quiet cracking is the result of systemic breakdown as organizations push people past their breaking point while simultaneously removing the growth opportunities and recognition that make the pressure worthwhile.
Our 2025 benchmark data reveals this isn't about lazy employees or a generational work ethic problem. Far from it. Instead, it’s about leadership disengagement from reality.
Unlike quiet quitting, quiet cracking starts with overstretched systems and unsupported teams, not unmotivated individuals. It's what happens when organizations demand more while providing less: less clarity, less recognition, less opportunity, less trust.
The warning signs are everywhere if you know where to look:
Most insidious of all, performance doesn't immediately drop. Employees keep delivering because they're professionals. But they're doing it while mentally updating their resumes and emotionally detaching from your organization's future because they can't see themselves in it.
As we've seen in organizations struggling with change management, when employees don't understand where the company is heading or how they fit into that future, even high performers start planning their exits.
Our latest benchmarks paint a picture of a workforce that can do the work but increasingly questions whether they should.
The Surface Looks Fine:
|
Item |
2024 Favorability (vs. 2023) |
What It Signals |
|
I have the resources to do my job effectively |
75% ✅ |
Basic enablement still intact |
|
My workload is reasonable |
70% ✅ (+1.0) |
Overload isn't crisis-level |
But Underneath, Cracks Are Spreading:
|
Item |
2024 Favorability (vs. 2023) |
What It Signals |
|
I feel valued as an employee |
68% ⚠️ (-1.2%) |
Recognition isn't keeping up with demands |
|
Senior management communicates a clear vision |
66% ⚠️ (-1.9%) |
Clarity about the future is slipping |
|
There are career opportunities for me |
64% 🔻 |
Stalled growth = long-term disengagement risk |
This is a crisis of meaning, not a performance crisis. Employees have what they need to do today's work, but many don't see why they should keep doing it for their organization.
Growth is the pressure valve that prevents cracking, not some nice-to-have-perk.
Our 2025 analysis reveals that 4 of the top 5 drivers of intent to stay are growth-related.
Employees with high intent to stay are:
Yet what are most organizations doing? Freezing promotions. Cutting development budgets. Eliminating stretch assignments (or simply assigning them but without any additional compensation or even the thought of future growth). In short, prioritizing short-term execution over long-term capability building.
The message employees receive is clear: "You're not going anywhere here. You don't belong in whatever comes next. We're using you until you're used up."
This is destabilizing. Growth provides anchoring and stability as employees advance through the organization. When people feel they're growing, they'll weather storms with the organization. When growth stalls, even your top performers start looking for the exit.
Development needs to be encouraged, personalized, and collaborative rather than merely directed at employees. You can have quiet cracking even if you're providing development, if that development feels entirely imposed rather than co-created with employees' actual career aspirations in mind.
At least insofar as the quiet cracking phenomenon goes, AI can be a double-edged sword. Implemented thoughtfully, it can reduce burnout by eliminating repetitive tasks and enabling focus on meaningful work. Implemented carelessly and without employee trust and the resulting buy-in, it accelerates cracking by adding complexity without removing existing responsibilities.
The data confirms most organizations are choosing door number two. According to Perceptyx's recent global study of over 3,600 employees, while 73% are either using or interested in using GenAI, the implementation is creating substantial strain. Three in four employees report their workload has changed, and 78% say the types of tasks they focus on have shifted, yet this isn't necessarily translating to relief. Eight in ten employees report having to build new skills because of GenAI, often without adequate support or time to learn.
The trust deficit makes this burden heavier. Only 64% of employees understand how decisions are made about which GenAI tools are adopted, and just 62% say their organization has clearly communicated how GenAI will affect their role. When half of employees worry about discrimination in AI-driven decisions and only 60% believe those decisions are fair, you have a recipe for resistance and exhaustion rather than adoption and innovation.
Managers are bearing the brunt of this implementation crisis. The report reveals a "manager squeeze" where 81% of managers say their workload has changed because of GenAI compared to just 59% of individual contributors, and 84% of managers report needing to learn new skills versus 67% of ICs. They're expected to adapt their own workflows while simultaneously guiding their teams through change, all while maintaining performance metrics. Though 77% of employees believe their manager is prepared to lead them through GenAI-driven change, only 64% say their manager actively helps the team adapt to these changes, suggesting managers are drowning rather than leading.
Employees aren't so much afraid that AI will replace them as they are exhausted by having to learn new systems while still delivering on unchanged performance metrics. They're being asked to transform how they work without clarity on why, without trust in how decisions are made, and often without their manager having the bandwidth to help them navigate the change.
Let's be clear about what these numbers mean:
Operational enablement is holding, for now. With 75% having necessary resources and 70% calling workloads reasonable, the basic infrastructure for work remains functional. People can still do their jobs.
But quiet cracking is brewing beneath. When only 68% feel valued, 66% lack confidence in leadership direction, and 64% don't see career opportunities, you have employees who are physically present but emotionally absent. They're delivering today's performance while actively planning tomorrow's exit.
The trap is thinking that because performance metrics look acceptable, nothing's wrong. But quiet cracking is subtle. It shows up first in engagement data, then in quality metrics, then in innovation gaps, and finally, well after it's too late, in attrition numbers.
If you're seeing these patterns in your data—operational metrics holding steady while emotional and growth indicators slip—you're likely already experiencing quiet cracking.
Start here:
Monitor the tension between expectations and enablement. Track not just whether employees have resources, but whether those resources match expanding role expectations.
Resist role creep disguised as "stretch." There's a difference between developmental stretch assignments and simply piling on responsibilities without recognition or compensation.
Prioritize clarity in times of change. Employees can handle uncertainty about tactics if they understand strategic direction. What they can't handle is feeling like leadership has no vision beyond next quarter. Stop waiting for conditions to "stabilize" before communicating long-term vision because that stability may never come.
Look at data by team and function. Cracks don't distribute evenly. Some teams may be thriving while others are fracturing. Aggregate data hides these critical differences.
Use all your listening channels. Don't wait for annual surveys. Exit interview data, pulse surveys, and stay interviews can all reveal early signs of cracking if you're looking for the right signals.
Signal that people belong in your future. Investment in development, even during tough times, sends a powerful message: we see you as part of what comes next. This is all about making growth conversations and career planning a priority even when everything else feels urgent.
Quiet cracking requires a different kind of listening. Traditional engagement surveys might catch it, but often too late. Exit interviews definitely reveal it, but by then it's an epidemic, not a warning sign.
The organizations successfully preventing quiet cracking use multi-layered listening strategies:
Real-time pulse checks that track the tension between demands and support, not just overall satisfaction.
Expectation vs. enablement indexing that identifies where role expansion is outpacing resource allocation.
Pressure-point detection that spots early erosion in trust, recognition, clarity, or growth: the four pillars that prevent cracking.
Segmented analysis that reveals which teams, roles, or functions are experiencing disproportionate strain.
The key is understanding that quiet cracking is predictable and preventable—but only if you're measuring the right things at the right cadence. Waiting for annual surveys or exit data means waiting too long.
Ready to detect and prevent quiet cracking in your organization? Schedule a demo to see how our listening platform identifies early warning signs through continuous feedback and expectation-enablement analysis. Learn how to spot the subtle signals before they become attrition statistics. For more insights on organizational health and employee experience, subscribe to our blog.
To learn more about employee attitudes regarding AI, click here to read our new report Beyond the Hype: Global Employee Perspectives on Generative AI.