Content area
Full Text
The concept of progressive discipline has traditionally been communicated as a common way to address performance issues in the U. S. workforce. In practice, progressive discipline is all too often implemented as a negative, demoralizing process that leads-or is threatened to lead-to the termination of employment. This article challenges a change in the way progressive discipline is managed and communicated from a negative, threatening perspective to one that involves a series of structured achievements that are effective in helping employees meet or exceed the requirements of the job.
KEY WORDS: Performance; progressive discipline; human resources; feedback.
In his classic book The Twelve Principles of Efficiency, highly regarded management consultant Harrington Emerson described discipline in positive terms: "Discipline is not so much top-down discipline as it is internal discipline and self-discipline, with workers conforming willingly and readily to the systems in place."
Traditional discipline has typically been more negative and viewed as a process of oral and written warnings from manager to subordinate with increasingly dire consequences if behavior or performance issues are not improved. Although the end result might be the termination of employment, at a minimum the individual receiving the warning should know why he or she is being warned and what he or she has to do to remain employed.
The spirit of progressive discipline is to make the day-today work environment a positive or constructive one. The word "warning" is rarely used. The purpose is to manage through a process to improve performance or behavior issues rather than as a way to fire someone. The use of progressive discipline also has the practical advantage of reducing litigation risk. Though potentially fruitful, progressive discipline is not simple to implement. The process should involve accurate measurement and fair and just evaluation, planning, patience, and careful observation.
Sadly, we are all familiar with stories of how managers and supervisors delay in addressing performance or behavior issues among employees. I was listening to a manager describe an employee's performance shortcomings. The description clearly indicated that the performance was subpar. "How long has this been going on with your employee?" I asked. The response was, "Ever since we hired him 10 years ago!" It was obvious to me that appropriate steps should have been taken long...