HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Article: Discipline without punishment- at last

Submitted to: Prof. Ranjeet Nambudiri Due Date: 4th Marcg 2014

Prepared By: Group 1, Section F Abhishek Raj 2013PGP011 Aditi Singh 2013PGP017 Amit Kujur 2013PGP033 Ishan Loya 2013PGP161 Mohit Sahni 2013PGP224 Sayak Mitra 2013PGP357

ARTICLE SUMMARY
The article talks about the punitive and non-punitive approach for maintaining discipline in an organisation. It is clear that the traditionally followed punitive approach has never been a viable option but still there has been a resistance in accepting it. It finally mentions the ways of implementing nonpunitive approach for discipline and the rationale behind it. Reasons for late acceptance of the non-punitive approach 1. No perceived need- In technical and professional sector, managers avoided confronting sophisticated work force for any disciplinary action whereas in industrial sector they did not want to bring a behavioural change among employees and were comfortable with punitive action. But today pressure for quality and productivity demand from workforce has forced companies to implement non-punitive system to gain their commitment. 2. Understanding corporate culture- Discipline was not considered as a reflection of culture of the company but rather a mean to tackle misbehaviour. But today it is recognised that it defines the relationship between managers and workers. 3. Lack of effective implementation process- There was no proper implementation process as it required restructuring of entire approach to performance management. Though with experience managers have been able to switch to the new system. 4. Changing work force value- The work force consisted of self-discipline, hard-working, obedience to authority and diligent people. But the current youth work force had different values and was permissive, against authority figure and demanded participation in decision making. 5. Changing Perceptions- Disciplinary system perceived as distasteful task was not administered by senior managers but was left to line managers but due to increase in wrongful termination and challenges to disciplinary action it has become a significant corporate agenda. Senior managers have realised that traditional discipline system is not the right way to manage human resource.

The drawbacks of traditional punitive approach:

For fostering discipline, the organisations enforce rules in the work force that turn out to be preventing self-discipline. Traditional approach to discipline cannot produce employees who are committed to the companys goals, policies and rules. Supervisors themselves suffer the pain that they cause to their employees. Some supervisors follow the practice of using disciplinary action to build a case against an individual in order to terminate him. Workers who have been punished in the past do not feel the bound to give good performance.

Nonpunitive System:
It involves 3 steps: Oral reminder: Private meeting between the manager and the employee where in manager reminds him of his personal responsibility. If problem persists then written reminder: The manager discusses the employees failure to abide by the agreement and together they come up with an action plan to achieve desired performance. The company is in a position to terminate the employee.

Decision making leave: If the disciplinary discussions fail to produce the desired result, the employee is granted a days paid leave to think over and decide whether to change and stay or to quit. Its a paid leave to demonstrate that the company wants him to stay. The final disciplinary step is suspension of the concerned employee to demonstrate the gravity of the situation, gives him time to reflect and that way the company proves that it means business and the jobs are at risk. Its a paid suspension because otherwise if the employee returns back he could behave anti organizationally. The nonpunitive approach to discipline is important because it represents that the company cannot make career decision of an employee. The decision is vested in the employee.

Implementation of nonpunitive approach to discipline:

The organisation needs to develop a complete human resource system that integrates the nonpunitive disciplinary method with all its other human resources programs. A major organizational effort is needed to have its philosophy and values aligned with the nonpunitive approach. Formal policies and informal daily practices must be reviewed. Supervisors have to be trained in the new approach. Management must link the system with the existing human resource programs and policies such as performance appraisal, attendance management, grievances and appeal procedures. The approach must be installed in an open, collaborative, and honest way.

The organizations that have adopted the nonpunitive approach to discipline have reduced absenteeism, dismissals, disciplinary actions, grievances and arbitrations significantly.

Critique:
1) Contradicts Herzberg Motivation-Hygiene theory
Herzbergs motivation-Hygiene theory emphasizes on negative KITA factor as motivator for employees. Articles nonpunitive model contradicts this theory . Article suggests to implement a nonpunitive approach while dealing with the employee who is involved in the act of misconduct or undisciplined behavior. But it might not be as effective KITA in some cases.

2) Biased towards Organization

The method portrayed in the article though acts as a chance for an employee to change his behavior subtly, it acts as a method of preparing a strong case against the misbehaving employee before actual termination. So that chances of third party decision reversal or wrongful discharge suit are reduced.

3) Fear of Punishment
The article is based on the assumption that punishment such as suspension won't improve the behavior of an employee. This in fact may not be the case. The fear of punishment rather than actual punishment is more or less sufficient to direct the employee towards desired behavior.

4) Behavioral training
Non punitive model explained in the article is built on the assumption of desired behavior from employees. Examples given the article are from manufacturing sector or job floor where behavioral skills do not hold much importance and hence professional behavioral training is usually not provided to the employees. However after first reminder and warning, managers expect sudden change in employees behavior to meet professional standards. Trainings and counseling sessions can give effective results in such situation. But it is nowhere mentioned in the article.

5) Giving chances not always possible

Article talks about giving few chances to employee before taking any further strict action against him. But in some cases where a small misconduct of an employee can lead to high decline in productivity or quality of the product, it is not possible to give second chance. In some of the cases where in the work is critical and deadlines sacrosanct ignorance on the part of an employee may cost huge amount of money to the firm. The article fails to differentiate between the degree of impact each undisciplined behavior would have on the desired outcome.

6) Power and Politics

The influence of power and office politics on the behavior of an employee is not addressed in the article. 3

7) Time Frame
The time frame is not clearly defined to differentiate between a first and the second misconduct. An employee may stop misbehaving after the first oral reminder but may behave in undesired manner after certain time limit. Dealing with such an employee through oral reminder or written reminder in not defined clearly.

8) Procrastination of punishment
Also if the employee behavior is not improving through the implementation of nonpunitive method, it only leads to the procrastination of punishment. Procrastinating punishment at times may prove to be costly for a organization.