Often used, but rarely studied, discipline is a crucial element of human resources. For many years the traditional approach to workplace discipline was akin to training the family dog. The traditional behaviorist approach rewards good behavior, and punishes undesirable behavior, with the goal being the extinction of undesirable behavior. Managers of the past often refrained from punishment out of fear of potential negative consequences, like sabotage. This was relatively elementary and most adults possess cognitive abilities that are more advanced than the traditional disciplinary methods for the work place. What works for training pigeons doesn’t really work with homo sapiens. Understanding the relational context of the punisher and the punished, and justice-related inquiry into discipline and punishment has recently broadened thinking in this area. The key is to pick and choose among the available areas of focus to match dynamic and changing scenarios.
Categories of focus in disciplinary methods:
According to consequence-based methods, discipline is justified if it generates a more positive set of consequences than any other alternative. Of course this is completely dependent on what the organization deems the more positive set of consequences, and if the manager is not properly trained, they could have a subset of positive consequences that are not in line with the ethical protocol of the business itself, which can be dangerous. The consequence-based focus is aligned with the traditional behaviorist approach to discipline, and requires a broad, big-picture perspective; the best beneficial consequences for the company may not be legal or ethical. This approach is slightly manipulative. The offender isn’t treated very respectfully, as an agent capable of making moral choices; he is objectified and personal moral choices are ignored for the sake of benefiting the group. However, this method has a time and place for utilization. In situations where the offender lacks the information or ability to make adequate moral choices, for example, or in the initial phase of start up companies, a consequence-based method for discipline may be useful.
Retribution-based methods are more popular. This method, rather than being forward-looking, relies on hindsight, justifying discipline on the grounds that an offender’s past actions deserve a particular type of discipline – and discipline is framed through the past actions. This is an attempt to balance the scales. Since offenders can take advantage of those who aren’t violating the company’s behavioral standards, discipline in proportion to that unfair advantage removes the advantage. You want your staff to think like a team, and rule violations can threaten the motivation to stay team-oriented. In this method, discipline doesn’t just balance the scales, it reinforces the standards that maintain motivation to follow the rules.
Discipline is the expression of the sense that something wrong has been done, and that wrongdoing should be denounced by the entire staff. Discipline is the representation of the company’s solidarity in the face of a threat. So, expressive methods stress the entity issuing discipline more than the offender, the group itself. This is not a consequence-based method because the discipline functions through the social group, rather than the discipline as a consequence, and fulfills the purpose of punishment. Likewise, expressive discipline differs from retribution because expressive discipline justifies using forward-focus, rather than hindsight. This method pays more attention to the effects of discipline on the managers and the observers, people like stakeholders and investors, who observe the actions of the company. This method is more relational, because expressive discipline focuses on how we make sense of particular incidents as a group.
Reintegrating methods focus more on the offender and the staff. After an incident, the offender is socially isolated, a consequence of violating the behavioral code that allows the staff to work cohesively. Discipline can be a way of bridging that gulf, and re-integrating the offender back into the staff. In an almost religious sense, the discipline is viewed as some form of penance or expression of contrition, for taking advantage of coworkers, or violating the ethical protocol. Discipline can be an educational tool in this scenario, helping to prevent similar issues in the future, and reinforcing the general behavioral code of the company. Workers in loosely structured organizations are sometimes held together only by shared values.
As a business owner and entrepreneur, ask what values does your business espouse:
What kind of organization is your business?
What direction would you like to grow in?
Are you more oriented to your management, customers, stakeholders, or employees?
What weight do each of these involved parties have in the discipline equation?
These answers will help you determine which category of focus to use in all your disciplinary decisions.
Instant Employee Manual
Posted in 
Tags: 