not giving a shit leads to severe software vulnerabilities, data leaks leading to identity theft, compromised systems, etc. Real disruption to the lives of normal people.
Meh, I'd question how much that is actually true. Generally, when people talk about "not giving a shit", it's not literally about half-assing everything. Instead, it's about only doing what you have capacity to do while balancing work with the rest of life....
Boss give's you 60 hours worth of info-sec tasks to complete this week.
You have a social engagement Friday night through Sunday (siblings wedding, and you put it on the on-call calendar months ago).
You remind boss "I can do 2/3 of that list, the rest needs to go to someone else, because 5pm Friday, I'm offline for the weekend".
You do the 40 hours worth of stuff, do it properly, and go to the wedding.
If your boss drops the ball, that's his problem. You did everything properly. Working through your sibling's wedding only justified your boss's under-resourcing of work.
What you describe sounds more like setting healthy boundaries.
But I've worked with a frustratingly large number of people who do literally half-ass everything, and clearly work hard to find the line where they can just barely get away with it. Usually this involves other team members picking up the slack.
The "quiet quitting" movement is a prime example, with people regaling each other with stories of their efforts to do just enough not to get fired, which is something entirely different than finding a proper balance with one's boss and setting reasonable boundaries.
Are you sure the people you work with don't half ass everything because they lack skills and aren't getting proper training, or are trying to do too many tasks and fail at all of them as a result? I'm tempted to assume they bragged about it maybe, based on the rest of your comment, but it's easy to assume wrong.
Quiet quitting reminds me of "greve du zele" (zeal strike) where workers do exactly what their contract requires / work by the book. It is nothing new. Often to protest employers lack of flexibility, to show that the book is absurd or to highlight that all that extra work should be compensated appropriately. I guess the main difference is one is an organised protest while the other is individual decisions.
That said, everything I've read about quiet quitting sounds to me like a marketing ploy to give setting healthy boundaries a bad rep.
I'm sure there is a range from folks who simply stop being proactive to people who put more work into doing the least amount of work they can get away with than they would if they just worked. And sure, that may already mean others need to pick up the slack, but really it means there's probably a systemic issue with that employer.
If quiet quitting is a pain in the workplace, it probably means employers rely too much on employee zeal. Employers fully count on teams picking up each other's slack. Toyota (iirc) first figured out that bonding between team members improved productivity via slack pickupery and peer pressure. (Also that teams could find their own efficiencies and felt more motivated to work if they came up with or were involved in their own exploitation optimizations).
I'd love to see a proper study done to identify causes of quiet quitting, if it is linked to burnout, I wouldn't be surprised.
A simple solution to quiet quitting would be improving the workplace or giving out employment insurance when people quit, so they don't feel trapped in a bad situation. Not everyone can simply move to another job at will.
Meh, I'd question how much that is actually true. Generally, when people talk about "not giving a shit", it's not literally about half-assing everything. Instead, it's about only doing what you have capacity to do while balancing work with the rest of life....
Boss give's you 60 hours worth of info-sec tasks to complete this week.
You have a social engagement Friday night through Sunday (siblings wedding, and you put it on the on-call calendar months ago).
You remind boss "I can do 2/3 of that list, the rest needs to go to someone else, because 5pm Friday, I'm offline for the weekend".
You do the 40 hours worth of stuff, do it properly, and go to the wedding.
If your boss drops the ball, that's his problem. You did everything properly. Working through your sibling's wedding only justified your boss's under-resourcing of work.