TEACHING DISCIPLINE TO EMPLOYEES

The root word for both discipline and disciple is discipulus. A disci­ple learns self-discipline by observing a disciplined teacher. Similarly, employees learn about discipline from their supervi­sors. What the supervisor chooses to teach them is a choice; he can model respect, compassion and responsibility, or he can behave in an arrogant, demeaning and insulting manner. Either way, the supervisor is similar to a parent who teaches through example far more than with inspirational slogans and cliches affixed to the walls of the workplace.

When stated from a teaching perspective, disciplinary action is only one of many tools for teaching employee disciples. Employees also learn through a myriad of teaching techniques, i.e. delega­tion, training, corrective actions, performance feedback and effective communication. An employee can learn from the boss

tnat he is a "Dad person" who has failed and therefore deserves to be punished, or the supervisor could help them learn from mistakes to improve in the future.

Keep in mind that disciplinary action occurs within the context of an unequal power relationship that exists between boss and employee. Co-workers do not discipline each other (even though they often try). Thus, disciplining "subordinates" is a key responsibility of supervisors/managers.

However, it is not a responsibility that most managers enjoy. "Coping with disciplinary problems is one of the most difficult and stressful, yet essential parts of any supervisor's job." 'The discipline process involves more than just managerial intuition to resolve workplace per­formance problems. Most organizations in the United States have objectives or union agreements in place to protect employees' rights from arbitrary dismissal and lack of feedback.г In Germany, restric­tions on management right to discipline or lay off employees has even been a reason for companies moving to less restrictive coun­tries, i.e. Portugal, Slovakia and elsewhere.

Disciplinary models

Organizations generally endorse one of the following three models for imposing disciplinary action:

Punitive model. One of the least effective goals and yet all too common reasons for disciplinary action is to punish the person who makes mistakes or performs poorly.

Many managers (and parents) believe that disciplinary action is needed to punish a person for failing and punish subordinates who are less than perfect, which, of course is everyone. This view is typified when an employee (or child) asks, "Why do I have to do it that way?" and the response is "Because I say so, I'm the boss (parent)!" There is increasing evidence that the punitive approach to discipline instills fear and anger, but not increased productivity or changed behavior.л

There is also evidence that gender may be a factor in how severely employees are punished. A study found that decision makers - both males and females - will be more likely to enforce discipline upon a culpable woman than a man, in what they refer to as a "Garden of Eden" effect. - This effect suggests that women displaying out-of-role behavior warranting discipline may be seen as temptresses who have provoked the punishment.

SAYING

Conscious discipline: is this not real freedom?

Nicholas Roerich

There are several reasons why a punitive approach has not led to more self-disciplined workers. Firstly, new "Generation X" employees resist rules they consider to be unreasonable; they are also likely to adversely react to an abrasive supervisor with his threats of punishment. Secondly, punitive discipline, which stresses intimidation and punishment, fails to address the root causes of misbehavior or poor performance; instead it address­es symptoms. !> For example, under the punitive model, habitu­ally tardy employees may be disciplined without questioning by management, regardless of the reasons for lateness. A purely punitive disciplinary approach attacks outward behavior rather than creating incentives or rewards for positive behavior.

I hirdly, punitive approaches assume employees are motivated by a strong work ethic. The behavior of many younger employees suggests that they act otherwise. Employees once entered an organization and stayed there throughout their careers; that is no longer true. Often, today's worker lives from paycheck to paycheck, is rule-resistant and will jump from organization to organization throughout a career. These workers are not com­pliant types who respond well to punishment.

Fourthly, the punitive disciplinary model is largely ill suited for cor­recting workplace problems that occur in litigious societies. Employees are more willing to fight disciplinary actions they believe to be unfairly imposed. '

Finally, the punitive model assumes the boss is always right when disciplining employees. However, if bosses want to be respect­ed, they must admit to employees that they also make mistakes by dropping the mask of perfection. The goal is to reinforce self-discipline, so that employees learn from mistakes and grow into more disciplined individuals.

Progressive discipline model. The progressive discipline model was developed in response to the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) of 1935, which extended job protections to unionized employees. This model typically follows four progressive steps to address offenses committed by an employee. First, an oral warning is issued as an infor­mal reprimand that is simply noted in the record. The second step, a written warning, is more official and summarizes the previous oral attempts. This written feedback is discussed with the employee and then placed in the personnel file.e The third step is suspension with­out pay; its purpose is to emphasize the seriousness of the offense and necessity of change. The final step is discharge and is used only when previous steps have failed to change unacceptable behavior.J

This progressive discipline model has six disadvantages. и

• Management may feel they are obligated to address every perform­

  ance flaw and assign an appropriate punishment.

• Management may focus solely on the problem employees at the

  expense of the good performers, thereby consuming too much of a

  manager's time.

• It dwells on an employee's past mistakes, rather than recommitting

  to improved performance.

• It may encourage adversarial relations.
• Progressive discipline treats the employee as a child, rather than as

  an adult with responsibility to improve his performance.

• It may create managerial resistance to perform the disciplinarian role

  and thus allow toleration of poor performance, rather than assume

  an adversarial role.

The progressive discipline model has two advantages for managers:

• Progressive discipline impresses upon the employee the serious­

  ness of repeated violations;

• It allows the employee additional opportunities to correct his per­

  formance prior to discharge. "

Positive discipline model. Osigweh and Hutchison studied the effects of a positive discipline program implemented on a trial basis at Union Carbide. This approach includes participation as "each employee has the right to correct problems that arise in the workplace and be allowed the time required to return to fully acceptable perform­ance." "" Each step in the system recognizes this employee right. "

The first step of positive discipline is an oral reminder, requiring the super­visor to discuss the problem with the employee informally, and remind him to meet performance standards. No handwritten memo notes are placed in the employee's personnel file, thus hopefully serving as an incentive to improve performance.

If the performance problem persists, the next step is a written

reminder. Another meeting is held with the employee and a writ­ten memo of the meeting is placed in the employee's personnel file. If the first two steps fail, the final step of positive discipline is to place the employee on paid leave for a day. he purpose is to give the employee time to reflect on his future. Upon returning to the office, the employee informs the manag­er of his decision. If positive, manager and employee jointly identify changes to occur 1J.

Constructive disciplinary techniques

'ositive discipline is a major improvement over punitive and even pro­gressive models of discipline to encourage employee self-discipline. Additional techniques that retain the progressive model's reliance upon increasing documentation, along with the positive model's del­egation of responsibility to the employee to make a commitment, include the following constructive techniques:

Discipline held in abeyance: An employee receives a disciplinary action, but it will not be imposed until a future date, and only if there is a repeated infraction.

Working suspension with pay: Rather than being suspended from work and losing pay, the employee reports to work and a work­ing suspension is entered into the personnel file for progressive disciplinary purposes.

Expunging personnel files: Rather than leaving disciplinary actions in an employee's personnel file forever, supervisors may be granted authority to remove minor disciplinary actions from the file following a 1 -2 year period of positive performance and behavior.

Employee initiated discipline: Prior to a final decision by manage­ment, the employee proposes an appropriate disciplinary action to management. Management can either accept or reject the employee's proposal.

Last chance agreement (LCA): An LCA is a negotiated, written agreement between an employer and employee, sometimes represented by a union, whose behavior or performance merits employment termination ' . Many times, the impact of an LCA "will have sufficient shock value to rehabilitate an errant employee." " An LCA settles a grievance by allowing the employee to continue employment by setting strict conditions. In order to retain employment, the worker agrees to give up cer­tain employment rights, such as the right to appeal any future disciplinary action within a specified time period.

Performance Improvement Plan (PIP); Employees whose perform­ance has been below expected standards in critical job ele­ments, as recorded on performance evaluations, may be per­mitted to "demonstrate acceptable performance" by a "reason­able chance to demonstrate acceptable performance in critical element(s) at issue." " This generally means being placed on an intensive performance-monitoring program for a period of time, usually about three months. Goals for improvement are agreed to and the employee and supervisor typically meet on a weekly basis to chart performance progress. If performance fails to improve, the employee is automatically terminated.

These constructive disciplinary techniques may not replace traditional disciplinary tools entirely. For example, an employee whose actions are a threat to the health and safety of others, i.e. shooting a gun in the workplace or assaulting another employee, would be fired on the spot! However, these constructive techniques are additional options available to managers who want to try compassion and respect as an incentive for a motivated employee to voluntarily improve perform­ance or change unacceptable behavior. Why not? The track record could hardly be any worse than punitive techniques.

GLOSSARY

Discipline: conscription, obedience, subordination, respect for rank;

servility, military justice, reprisal.

Vladimir Dahl, Explanatory Dictionary of the Russian Language (1880-82)

Discipline: (1) the practice of training people to obey rules or a code of behaviour; (2) controlled behaviour resulting from such training; (3) a branch of knowledge, especially one studied in higher education.

Oxford English Dictionary

See other my article