It’s mid-morning in a corner office, and a manager scrolls through Slack as the familiar chime ricochets against the tightness in her jaw. Her calendar is jammed to the edges, and she moves from a video call to a flood of email replies, while the strategy deck she promised for next week remains untouched in another window as a reminder that the work that matters most keeps being pushed aside. She has never been so visible, and never felt more overwhelmed and uncertain that her work matters.
Sound familiar? If this resonates with your own life and career, you’re not alone. This is what corporate survival mode looks like in 2025. Many argue that disengagement or the complexities of remote work are what threaten progress, but perhaps it’s the cult of productivity and the fixation on visibility and measurement that reduces work to performance. We mistake constant exposure for contribution, and the result is motion without momentum and busyness without value.
Survival mode has deep evolutionary roots. It sharpens our attention in emergencies, flooding the body with stress hormones, and narrows our focus until the threat has passed. That vigilance kept our ancestors alive when they heard a rustle in the bushes. In modern organizations it corrodes, as what was once lifesaving in rare bursts has become a constant hum, turning our days into a string of micro-emergencies where fears about the future bleed into present reactions. The mind collapses into repetitive loops of thought and behavior, like procrastination or irritability, that may promise safety in the moment but over time drain creativity and the capacity to thrive. The human nervous system isn’t designed for permanent alertness, and yet that is precisely what many workplaces now demand.
Evolving workplace trends continue to reflect this toxic sentiment and culture. Quiet quitting emerged in 2022 to describe employees who meet expectations but refuse to continue surrendering their nights and weekends. Quiet cracking has recently been used to describe employees who outwardly appear to be present but are actually fracturing inside, feeling stretched thin and withdrawing energy from the work that once animated them. Microsoft added its own phrase, productivity paranoia, to describe leaders who mistrust their people despite data showing that activity levels are rising. Each phrase is a window into the same problem: a culture obsessed with hyper-alertness at the expense of meaning and engagement. No wonder the American Dialect Society called lock in the most useful term of 2024. Popularized by the “Great Lock In” TikTok challenge, the phrase reflects a craving for intentional focus in an age of constant distraction and signals how hungry we are for language and habits that restore attention to what matters.
The data screams what employees already whisper to one another in hallways and private chats. One study found that knowledge workers now switch tasks every three minutes, and when attention is broken, it can take nearly half an hour to return, which means the day is spent in constant recovery. The result is an entire workday experienced in fragments, and a constant resetting of focus that leaves people feeling depleted and strangely unaccomplished, as if time itself were slipping away even while their calendars and inboxes insist they’ve been busy. Atlassian’s latest report estimates that wasted time accounts for nearly a quarter of the workweek. Gallup’s 2025 survey found global engagement slipping to 21%, with manager engagement falling even lower, translating to $438 billion in lost productivity.
Instead of questioning the system, many leaders are tightening their grip. Return-to-office mandates have been justified in the name of collaboration and accountability, even if MIT Sloan’s research suggests that they increase attrition and depress engagement with little evidence of performance gains. The assumption that physical presence guarantees productivity ignores Google’s own Project Aristotle, which found that psychological safety, not co-location, is the strongest predictor of team effectiveness. Employees pursue excellence when they feel safe enough to take risks and surface mistakes.
Accountability in too many organizations has transformed into surveillance. Dashboards proliferate, but they illuminate activity rather than outcomes. Goodhart’s law captures the trap: once a measure becomes a target, it stops being a reliable measure. What was meant to guide performance has instead become a stage for productivity theater.
If survival mode is the challenge, what is the alternative? Journalist Lesley Alderman introduced the idea of quiet thriving as a way to rediscover engagement by making small, intentional shifts that give work back some meaning. At its core, quiet thriving is an expression of agency, the recognition that we are reacting to demands but also choosing how to respond and designing our days to reflect what we value. Agency can look like guarding an hour for deep focus or investing in the relationships that offer connection and safety in a week of storms. Research on job crafting by Amy Wrzesniewski and Jane Dutton shows that these kinds of micro-moves increase engagement and also strengthen resilience and the capacity to contribute.
Self-Determination Theory tells us that humans thrive when they feel autonomous, competent, and connected. Nonetheless, too many workplaces are organized around extrinsic rewards such as money, titles, team size, and proximity to power, which can spark effort in the short run but rarely sustain it. We all need to pay our bills and feel our contributions recognized, but when those external levers dominate, they create a cycle of chasing rather than a rhythm of innovating.
Quiet thriving asks for balance so that achievement is fueled as much by curiosity and agency as it is by compensation and recognition. Amy Edmondson’s work at Harvard on the learning zone suggests that high performance is often born from the balance of psychological safety and clear standards. Safety without standards can slip into comfort, while standards without safety create fear. It’s only when the two come together that people feel free to take risks and stretch into new challenges. Quiet thriving grows strongest in environments where people can admit what they do not know, ask for help, and experiment without fear that a single misstep will erase their worth.
For employees working on their end of year reviews and leaders drafting their 2026 roadmaps, the real question is no longer whether to respond but how. They can double down on measurement theater, clinging to rituals of visibility, or they can begin to design cultures where outcomes and learning matter more than appearances. The choice will determine whether organizations remain suspended in survival mode or find the conditions for thriving.
That shift often starts with something small, like retiring a ritual that has outlived its purpose, perhaps a meeting that serves performance more than dialogue. The time reclaimed can be used to ask different questions: What did we learn this week? Where did we see genuine progress rather than just movement?
Quiet thriving can also show up through job crafting, where employees are invited to modify even a small portion of their role to align with their strengths and the value they bring to others. These modest adjustments over time accumulate into energy where fatigue once ruled. Even the structure of hybrid work can be reimagined in this way. When treated as a compliance problem, it reduces to badge swipes and head counts, but when treated as a design choice, it becomes an opportunity to articulate clear standards and extend trust, to recognize that presence alone is not performance. The healthiest organizations measure what strengthens contribution instead of what generates noise.
Picture again the manager in her office, Slack pulsing in the background and her calendar stretched to the edges with obligations, the work that matters most still waiting. Now imagine the culture around her began to shift from measuring motion to cultivating meaning. Perhaps an hour of focus was protected, or the conversation turned toward what had been learned rather than what had simply been completed. These small adjustments, almost invisible at first, can become like roots spreading underground and creating the conditions for something sturdier to grow.
Quiet thriving is unlikely to arrive with fanfare at a town hall meeting, but its presence becomes unmistakable. As trust grows where performance once felt staged, energy returns and the experience of work moves from merely surviving to something closer to thriving, the possibilities for what people can build together expand far beyond what surveillance or status reports could ever capture.
For leaders, the invitation is simple: What might change if we measured work not by how visible it appeared, but by what was learned and created? How can you begin to cultivate that environment and mindset to motivate your team towards more meaning?
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.
The post The cult of productivity is killing is appeared first on Fortune.
