1. I’m a bit distracted. My (awesome) company just granted me access to the HR Policy Association and I can’t stop reading all the great links / articles. …Short post today. 1
I just want to share a realization I’ve come to as of late:
The best HR people tend to be fantastic (objective) listeners.
It is very easy as an HR professional to approach a contentious employee situation with preconceived notions around the case facts. To this point, when dealing with discipline / dismissal (where an employee’s history may have some predictive value) the easy thing to do is to assume that performers with a history of poor behavior are guilty as charged, while giving others the benefit of the doubt.
2. If it walks like a duck etc. Schemas 2 are often useful in this way, but where employee discipline is concerned using them as a heuristic is typically a bad idea. The reason for this is because even if an employee’s past behavior is strongly correlated with future actions, in the long run using a kangaroo court approach to administering discipline will cause one to lose credibility in the eyes of the employee population one supports.
Start off assuming the best about people and let them prove you wrong.
Or am I too trusting?
As always, please share your thoughts in the comments section below.
If you have questions about something you’ve read here (or simply want to connect) you can reach me at any of the following addresses:
SomethingDifferentHR@gmail.com OR firstname.lastname@example.org