Purpose: This study investigates the phenomenon of “quiet quitting” within dental education, where faculty members disengage from non‐essential duties, impacting workplace efficiency and educational outcomes. The research aims to identify authentic leadership strategies to mitigate this issue. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted, focusing on recent studies related to quiet quitting in healthcare and academia. Databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, Digital Commons Network, and DARE were searched using specific keywords. Inclusion criteria were applied to select relevant publications from the past five years. Results: The review identified seven key publications that met the inclusion criteria. Findings indicate that quiet quitting is prevalent among several healthcare service areas and academia, leading to reduced engagement in essential activities. The analysis highlights the role of authentic leadership in fostering a supportive and engaging work environment. Conclusion: Implementing authentic leadership strategies, characterized by self‐awareness, relational transparency, balanced information processing, and an internalized moral perspective, can enhance faculty engagement and workplace efficiency. These strategies are crucial for improving educational outcomes and maintaining a positive academic environment in dental schools.

Background: Clinical feedback occurs in hierarchical, time-pressured settings. Objective: This Perspective proposes relational wellness as a dyadic condition of a feedback episode and describes a brief feedback heuristic. Approach: The framework was developed before the focused, non-systematic searches used to check and align specific claims with sources. We compare SEED with established approaches and map its rationale, boundaries, and testable mechanisms. Key Propositions: In a relationally well feedback episode, learner and educator can remain respected and connected while engaging in truthful learning work. The author-developed SEED heuristic comprises See the situation and invite perspective; Explain observed performance and significance; Extend one prioritized next step collaboratively; and Dialogue to check understanding and invite response. Dignity governs all moves. Safety instructions may precede dialogue. SEED overlaps with Ask–Tell–Ask and remains unvalidated. Conclusions: Separate construct development should test the proposed level, dimensions, and discriminant validity of relational wellness using both participants’ perspectives. Co-design, technical and cultural review, feasibility work, and comparative evaluation are required before effectiveness claims.