BLUF: Is it pretty much normal for HR to insist on being involved before disciplinary action?
All managers in my company got an email today with HR's "Progressive Coaching/Discipline" policy and the statement, "It is now necessary for HR to be involved PRIOR to any disciplinary action being taken."
I had to laugh at the beginning of the procedure.
"Management is expected to utilize our 'Progressive Discipline' process to improve performance and job satisfaction. The process includes the following:
"1. verbal warning
"2. written warning
"3. final written warning
"4. decision making leave/termination"
Yep, that's sure to increase job satisfaction!!
Anyway, I get the feeling this is a reaction to some manager just up and firing someone, although I don't really know.
That's pretty much how it
That's pretty much how it works for me at our org.
Gluteus maximus coverage assurance.
It takes at least a year and a half to fire someone in this process--usually longer. On the one hand, we do give everyone a good long time to turn their performance around, and use a coaching model. It's very fair, and no one can be fired for trivial reasons or just because of their personality.
On the other hand, I'm stuck with a poorly performing and resentful employee during a fairly uncomfortable process that goes on and on and on.
If someone does do something that is way over the line, we do have the option to jump straight to #4 and fire them. But it has to be pretty big.
This is common
Remember - feedback and coaching aren't warnings. By the time you get to the point where you're ready to move to late stage coaching, then the verbal warning is built atop a pile of evidence. And the process can move pretty quickly. You let HR know how things have progressed, and how they're not making progress, and that you're moving to late stage coaching (ie, "discipline")
HR is typically relieved when you've done your homework and are willing to have the hard conversations yourself. They're protecting the company against rogue managers. When an improperly fired employee sues, HR (and the legal dept) can turn to the manager and say "you didn't follow the process, YOU'RE fired, and we'll make this case all about you, because you broke our rules."
An M-T manager doesn't have any problem here.
John
"And the beatings will continue until morale improves..."
Terri - I get your point. Made me laugh too. Oh yeah, THIS is surely the path to performance and satisfaction....
Sometimes, you just gotta chuckle...
-Hugh
A sad commentary
It's clear that MT feedback and coaching aren't even on the radar of this policy. And when I first got promoted to a supervisory position, I put in for training--including the M-T Conference when it was in Chicago--only to be turned down with the statement, "We're going to be bringing in some training for everyone." Which has never materialized.
So, no training, but surprised when people don't know how to supervise people properly?
Never mind, I'll train myself with M-T.
Most HR departments have a
Most HR departments have a similar policy. I have never been in a management role without such a policy.
And John hit the nail on the head: this policy has nothing to do with coaching or feedback. You do that without HR. When you engage HR is when you have a pile of O3 forms where you gave feedback, you gave systemic feedback, you set short-term goals, they missed the goals over and over again, and you finally went to them with all of the records and say, "I need your help."
They will think you are God's gift compared to most managers who call them out of the blue with no records, no missed measureable goals, and no recorded feedback or coaching and ask throw people out of the bus without even being able to ID a behavior. You will not have much problem here.
Roll with it.
-Rob Redmond
http://www.strugglingmanager.com/
Sounds perfectly normal, or
Sounds perfectly normal, or even slightly better implementation of normal than normal. It also sounds like HR actually doing their job, keeping the company out of court on employment matters.
In the coaching casts Mark and Mike several times make reference to the coaching model being similar to many corporate disciplinary models. As others have said, if you've been doing and documenting your coaching you shouldn't have any problems.
Processes like this are there to mitigate the damage caused by 'Dictator Manager' types who think that they should be able to fire directs because they want to or similarly spurious reasons. If you're implementing MT then you're already ready to go to HR to get your decision rubber stamped.
Stephen