In workplaces across the world, executives are grappling with a crisis that doesn't show up in traditional HR metrics.
While they can easily track absenteeism rates and calculate turnover costs, a more insidious problem is eating away at their workforce from within: "quiet cracking".
This phenomenon goes far deeper than the widely discussed "quiet quitting" trend. Where quiet quitting saw employees simply doing the minimum required, quiet cracking represents complete mental disengagement while maintaining the facade of productivity.
Employees show up, perform basic duties, but have fundamentally checked out, and the primary driver behind this workplace epidemic is the rapid, often poorly managed implementation of AI across organizations.
Indeed, employees' fear of being replaced by AI, and the increased performance expectations that come with AI-enhanced workflows, is leaving many worn out.
The statistics paint a stark picture. About 54% of employees report feeling unhappy at work, with the frequency ranging from occasionally to constantly, according to a 2025 report from TalentLMS.
This widespread disengagement translated to a cost on the global economy of approximately $438 billion in lost productivity, according to Gallup.
But how does quiet cracking manifest? And how can team leaders spot it before it is too late? To find out more, UC Today spoke with Caz Brett, Senior Director of Product at Smartsheet; Pedro Andrade, VP of Artificial Intelligence at Talkdesk; and Art O Gnimh, General Manager for Core Personal Workspace Solutions at Logitech.
An AI-Driven Crisis?
The relationship between AI implementation and quiet cracking is not coincidental, it's causal.
Organizations rushing to deploy AI tools are creating a perfect storm of workplace anxiety that directly leads to employee disengagement.
The first major factor is existential fear. When organizations frame AI implementation as efficiency drives or cost-cutting measures, employees naturally interpret this as a threat to their job security.
This isn't temporary stress, it fundamentally alters how employees view their value within the organization. Brett identifies how this manifests: "When it's introduced as a surveillance or cost-cutting measure, it naturally fuels fear."
Employees begin to feel monitored rather than supported, leading them to withdraw emotionally while maintaining the appearance of productivity.
The fear runs so deep that it's changing behavior patterns across organizations. O Gnimh reveals that "29% were using it secretly, driven by fear or competitive pressure."
This hidden usage pattern indicates employees feel they must choose between staying competitive and being transparent with their employers – a situation that breeds exactly the kind of disconnection that defines quiet cracking.
The second major factor is the dramatic increase in performance expectations that accompanies AI deployment.
Once AI tools are introduced, organizations often expect employees to handle more work, work faster, or achieve higher quality outputs – essentially using AI as a productivity multiplier rather than a stress reducer.
This creates additional pressure layers where employees struggle with new systems while simultaneously being expected to outperform their previous capabilities.
In contact center environments, Andrade observes how this pressure manifests in measurable terms:
"One of the biggest factors behind quiet cracking is workplace stress: specifically, stress caused by the pressure to resolve things quickly."
When AI is introduced without considering its impact on employee wellbeing, it amplifies existing pressures rather than alleviating them.
The combination is toxic. Employees fear being replaced by AI while simultaneously being expected to achieve more with AI assistance. This creates the perfect conditions for quiet cracking, workers who feel overwhelmed, undervalued, and uncertain about their future.
Why AI-Driven Disengagement Goes Undetected
The AI-fueled nature of quiet cracking makes it particularly difficult to identify through traditional management approaches.
Unlike obvious workplace issues such as absenteeism or turnover, quiet cracking operates in the shadows of everyday workplace interactions, especially when employees are managing AI-related anxieties.
"Quiet cracking is tricky because it's almost invisible,"
explains Brett.
"Absenteeism and turnover show up in reports, but disengagement creeps in silently with very subtle signs – slower replies, less energy, lacklustre output – all of which signal an employee is fading."




