1. RECOGNIZING THE NEED FOR DISCIPLINE

Let’s begin with a hypothetical situation. Jim, a manager in accounting, is proud of one of his hires, Susan. She has been nothing short of excellent since he hired her 10 months ago. Jim decides she has performed so well, he’ll promote her to a new position. Two months pass, and now he wonders if the promotion was such a good idea. Her work has not been error free, and in accounting, perfection is a must. He can’t understand it. He mentioned the problem to her over coffee a while ago, and her response was “Don’t worry, I’ll get it.” But her work hasn’t improved. He decides to meet with her again. Perhaps discipline is the answer. Here is how their conversation goes:

Jim is glad he had the conversation with Susan. Discipline was not the answer. He had totally missed the signals that she simply didn’t know how to do the job correctly, and he could have made the situation deteriorate further with discipline. He now knows his time is better spent in training his employee.

This case underscores the importance of learning how to recognize the need for discipline. It also highlights two basic rules of thumb:

•   Never administer discipline unless you know the employee is choosing not to do the job or after appropriate training still cannot perform the job adequately. Discipline is not an option if the employee cannot perform because of a lack of training or skills—a gap in comprehension—and is willing to learn and is capable of learning.

•   Pay attention to your employees: be a coach first, a disciplinarian second. Consider the everyday influences that factor into your own behavior, such as the company rumor mill or your relationship with coworkers; keep in mind that similar influences factor into your employees’ behavior too!

A Gap in Comprehension—or a Gap in Execution?

When confronted with an employee’s performance problem, a manager first needs to determine whether the employee is experiencing a gap in comprehension or a gap in execution. Here’s the difference:

•   Gap in Comprehension: Lack of knowledge, understanding, or skill that interferes with an employee’s ability to do the job as expected. A person with a gap in comprehension usually wants to perform well but cannot do it. He or she is in the “don’t know zone.” A gap in comprehension should not be treated as a disciplinary issue unless the employee is unwilling or refuses to learn the appropriate skills for the job.

•   Gap in Execution: Lack of desire to do the job as expected; lack of interest in performing well. A person with a gap in execution usually has the ability to perform well but chooses not to do it. He or she is in the “no zone.”
An employee with a consistent gap in execution requires disciplinary action.

Whatever gap you are dealing with, you should consider the everyday influences that factor into people’s behavior, and should be certain the gap is not a brief episode, before you take serious action.

FIGURE 1. Influence Factors

Everyday Influence Factors

It is normal for employees to have occasional gaps in comprehension and execution. The everyday influences on a person’s work behavior are many and varied (see Figure 1), and they can have a significant impact on that behavior. Understanding them can help you better identify problems and resolve work issues in a timely manner.

FIGURE 2. Managing the Gap

Remember: we all have “bad-hair days.” Empathy will often go a long way in giving an employee a “lift” and setting behavior back on the routine course. Again, be a coach! When in doubt, ask an employee what’s going on. It will save time and effort and help you identify a “behavioral link” to targeted change.

Managing Gaps in Comprehension and Execution

Normal, occasional gaps in comprehension or execution represent the “optimal” state of employee behavior. You can expect the employee to work out most issues on his or her own. However, this does not mean abdication of responsibility on your part. As a coach, you may play a role in helping the employee through praise (to keep the employee “on track”) or minor constructive criticism (to put the employee “back on track”). You might also find it worthwhile to use training so these infrequent periods become authentic rarities.

Gaps of comprehension or execution that remain for extended periods represent the “actual” state of problem behavior. These “actuals” signal the need for direct supervisory action, with the use of discipline or training as interventions. Figure 2 shows the optimal state of employee behavior and the actual states of problem behavior.

Diagnosing Problem Issues

The following flow chart (Figure 3) will help you diagnose the problem at hand, pointing you in the right direction of discipline or training. Let’s take a close look, moving question to question.

“Does it matter to you?”

We tend to miss this question in the discipline equation, for we often let emotions dictate our actions. We leap head-on into “fixes,” not questioning or weighing the problem’s relative importance. Do not let emotions prompt you to act on a trivial issue, or you will likely regret the action.

FIGURE 3. Diagnosing Performance Issues:

Gap in Comprehension vs. Gap in Execution

That said, it is important to remember this word of caution: triviality is in the eye of the beholder; what is trivial to you may not be trivial to someone else. As the chart warns, be aware of precedent if you answer “No” to the question and decide to do nothing. For example, if you allow a worker to return from lunch late for day-care reasons, others may view that practice as tacit approval for them to mirror the same behavior. It’s difficult to argue with that logic. Also, your approval of an issue may have organizational impact if other departments point a finger and ask, “Why are they allowed to do that, but we’re not?” The best way to alleviate this concern is to talk about it with your managerial associates and ask them questions. A little conversation at staff meetings can work wonders toward organizational harmony.

If the issue does matter to you, you need to resolve the issue. It can be accomplished simply enough by asking, and answering, the next question.

“Can the employee do the job?”

This inquiry leads us to the heart of discipline versus training. If you answer “Yes,” it’s time to discuss your expectations with the employee and to fully explain, through constructive criticism, the consequences of non-compliance. If you answer “No,” and the job cannot be performed without the intervention of training, do not discipline. It is the manager’s responsibility to provide the employee with the necessary tools for success before such action is considered.

“Behavior/performance corrected?”

If the employee has met your expectations, praise the behavior and continue providing the tools for change, whether they involve information giving, coaching, mentoring, or skills enhancement. If your expectations have not been met, begin the disciplinary counseling process, but always be on the alert for changes—look for a positive response to counseling. If you get it, be prepared to offer positive feedback to reinforce the positive change or response you expected. You may very well have worked your way out of the need for further disciplinary action.