Discussion questions for new topics

Business Management -- Human Resource Issues -- Post Responses

Sentences per topic by customer request)

Discussion 1 Response

I agree with you about the distinctions between corrective action and disciplinary action and I also agree with you about the general benefits and pitfalls of each; however, I would add that one of the most significant pitfalls of the systematic or formal process-based approach is that it often requires corrective action as a strict prerequisite to any disciplinary action in many instances where some form of disciplinary action would be appropriate. My suspicion is that a seasoned HR manager could cite many cases where the nature of the initial incident or issue already indicated that corrective action would be ineffective but was required by policy. In my opinion, that is one reason why at-will employment with explicit documentation of the mutual understanding of that arrangement can be preferable to bilateral binding employment contracts. Corrective action may often be very useful but should not be mandated by policy where a disciplinary approach might be more appropriate in specific circumstances.

Discussion 2 Response

I completely agree with you that performance appraisals must be objective to be useful. On the other hand, I don't necessarily think that there is no value to subjective data, especially in a field (like firefighting) where there are so many other possible factors and components that can contribute to the quality of a team. Even if entirely subjective performance appraisals are useless, I would expect that there is a way to incorporate both objective and subjective elements. I would also agree that in-service training is even more important than performance appraisal, but I see no reason why any agency would have to make a choice of one or the other.

Discussion 3 Response