UPI Study › Courses › Principles of Management › Free lessons › Lesson 13.9 Free with a free account
Ending the Relationship: Termination Procedures and Best Practices
Principles of Management · Chapter 13: Human Resource ManagementSection 13.9 · lesson 91 of 11712 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Principles of Management.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Principles of Management
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: Measuring Performance: Appraisals and the 360-Degree Feedback Approach →← Playing by the Rules: HR Laws, Regulations, and Hostile Work EnvironmentsNext lesson: Measuring Performance: Appraisals and the 360-Degree Feedback Approach →
In this lesson
Termination procedures and best practices.
- Distinguish the types of separation
- Describe progressive discipline and a defensible termination process
- Explain why most performance terminations are decided months earlier
- Identify the procedural risks in a described termination
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,583 words). Read along, or search it.
Human Resource Management
Ending the Relationship
How an employment relationship ends says a great deal about how it was managed. This section covers termination procedures, and the practices that make them defensible. We'll distinguish four types of separation, each with its own process. We'll look at progressive discipline, and why its stages exist. We'll cover the hot-stove principles, and the one that gets examined most in any later dispute. We'll walk through a proper investigation, and the sequence that decides most performance terminations. We'll use just culture reasoning to tell error from recklessness. We'll cover layoffs, the termination meeting itself, and its effect on everyone who stays. And we'll meet a manager who wanted to fire someone, with nothing on file.
Types of Separation
4 Types, Distinguished by Cause
A separation from employment falls into one of four types, distinguished by cause. Each type requires a genuinely different process. Termination for misconduct ends employment because of a violation of expected conduct. Termination for performance ends it because of a sustained failure to meet a legitimate standard. We'll develop that one fully later in this section. Redundancy, or layoff, ends employment for economic or structural reasons. Those reasons are unrelated to the individual's own conduct or performance. And voluntary resignation is initiated by the employee herself. Getting the type right comes first, because the type determines the process.
Progressive Discipline
Escalating Stages, and Why They Exist
Progressive discipline moves through escalating stages. Informal counseling. A verbal warning. A written warning. A final warning. And then, absent correction, termination. The important question is why these stages exist at all. They exist to give a genuine opportunity to correct the underlying problem. This connects to the law of effect, from Subchapter eleven point six. Each stage is an escalating consequence, intended to actually change behavior. What the stages are not for is building a file, to justify a termination already decided in substance. A process used as a documentation exercise, with no real intent to let correction succeed, has abandoned its purpose. Here's a useful test. If the employee improved, would anyone be pleased? If the honest answer is no, the process has become paperwork.
The Hot-Stove Principles
Discipline That Teaches Without Ambiguity
Effective discipline follows four hot-stove principles. They're named for the way a hot stove teaches, without any ambiguity. Warning means the consequence is known in advance. A stove's heat is visible before you touch it. Immediacy means the consequence follows closely after the behavior. A burn follows contact instantly. Consistency means the same behavior brings the same consequence, every time. A stove burns every hand, without exception. Impersonality means the consequence attaches to the behavior, not the person. A stove burns whoever touches it. Each principle removes a source of doubt about what the consequence means. Remove any one, and discipline starts to look arbitrary, or personal.
Consistency and Its Exception
The Comparator Question and Gross Misconduct
Of the four principles, consistency is the single most examined feature in any later dispute. So before acting on a disciplinary matter, a manager should ask the comparator question directly. How was a comparable case handled before? Suppose the manager can't answer. Or suppose the answer shows a similar case was handled more leniently. Either way, the organization is exposed to the disparate treatment concern from Subchapter thirteen point eight. Inconsistent discipline is one of the most common forms of comparator evidence a later claim relies on. Gross misconduct is the exception to the progressive sequence. It's conduct serious enough to bypass the earlier stages, and move directly to termination. One requirement governs it. It must be defined in advance, in policy, specifying what conduct qualifies. It can't be applied after the fact, to whatever a manager judges serious enough in the moment. Defining it only after an incident invites exactly the inconsistency the comparator question is designed to catch.
The Investigation
Before Any Decision of Real Consequence
Before acting on any disciplinary matter of real consequence, an investigation should cover several elements. Promptness. The matter is addressed without unreasonable delay. An impartial investigator, someone with no personal stake in the outcome. The employee's opportunity to respond. She gives her own account before a final decision is made. Evidence gathering, which collects what's actually relevant, not just what supports a predetermined conclusion. Findings, stating what the investigation actually concluded. And a written record documenting the entire process. That continues the documented-record pattern from Subchapters thirteen point two and thirteen point five. Notice the theme. Each element protects against a decision made first, and justified afterward.
Figure 13.9.1
The Performance Termination Sequence
Now the observation worth stating plainly. Most defensible performance terminations are determined months earlier, not on the day itself. Three questions decide them. Were standards set clearly? Was feedback given along the way? And was support offered, to help the person actually meet the standard? Subchapter thirteen point ten develops that performance management fully. Figure thirteen point nine point one shows the full sequence. Standard set, feedback given, support offered, a formal warning, and finally the decision. Each stage creates its own documentation. A documented expectation, documented conversations, documented assistance, a documented warning, and a documented rationale. Here's the counter-intuitive part. The decision, the stage most people picture, is the last and least consequential link. A termination with that history behind it is defensible largely because of the history. Without it, the termination is exposed, however carefully the meeting itself is handled.
Just Culture Reasoning
Error, At-Risk Behavior, or Recklessness?
Just culture reasoning corrects a specific bias before a disciplinary response is chosen. It connects to the attribution error, from Subchapter ten point seven. It distinguishes three kinds of behavior. Human error is an unintentional slip that anyone might make. At-risk behavior is a conscious choice that increased risk, often without full awareness of how much. Reckless conduct is a conscious disregard of a substantial and known risk. Treating all three the same way fails in both directions. It over-punishes genuine human error, and under-punishes genuine recklessness. So why do managers skip the distinction? Their own attribution error makes it easy, especially under pressure. They over-attribute an outcome to a person's character, rather than to the situation. Asking which of the three actually occurred is the corrective.
Redundancy and Layoff
Selection Criteria and Notice
Redundancy and layoff carry their own considerations. The first is selection criteria, meaning who is actually let go from a larger pool. Those criteria must be job-related, not arbitrary. If a selection process disproportionately affects a protected group, it raises the disparate impact analysis from Subchapter thirteen point eight. And that's true regardless of the layoff's legitimate economic rationale. A sound business reason for cutting jobs doesn't protect a flawed way of choosing whose jobs. The second consideration is notice. For larger layoffs, the notice framework comes from the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act. It requires advance notice of covered plant closings and mass layoffs that meet the statute's specific size thresholds.
Table 13.9.1
4 Separation Types: Process and Principal Risk
Table thirteen point nine point one brings the four separation types together. Termination for misconduct requires an investigation, an opportunity to respond, and proportionate action. Its principal risk is inconsistency with how comparable prior conduct was handled. Termination for performance requires standards set, feedback given, and support offered, documented over time. Its risk is an undocumented history, which leaves the decision looking sudden, or arbitrary. Redundancy or layoff requires job-related selection criteria, and compliance with the notice framework. Its risk is selection criteria that disproportionately affect a protected group. Voluntary resignation requires confirming the employee's intent, and handling transition logistics. Its risk is a resignation later disputed as having actually been coerced. And some terminations call for qualified counsel before the decision is finalized. That means any termination involving a protected characteristic, a recent complaint, a contested performance history, or a larger layoff with notice requirements. The timing matters. Counsel belongs before the decision, not after a dispute has already arisen.
The Termination Meeting
3 Practical Decisions, and Who Is Watching
The termination meeting involves three practical decisions. First, who attends. Typically, the direct manager, and an HR representative, for support and as a witness. Second, what is said. It should be clear, factual, and brief. Avoid an extended justification, which invites debate. And avoid a vague explanation, which leaves the employee confused about why. Third, the logistics. Timing, location, final pay, and the return of company property. These should be planned in advance, not improvised in the moment. Then there's an effect that's consistently underestimated: the effect on the remaining workforce. Colleagues watch how a termination is handled. If it's careless, inconsistent, or poorly explained, they draw direct conclusions about how they might be treated themselves. And that conclusion shapes their trust and engagement. Its reach extends well beyond whatever working relationship they had with the person who left.
Case Vignette
A Manager Wants to Terminate With No Prior Documentation
Here's a composite case, constructed for instruction. A department manager at a fictional insurance company asked HR to process an immediate termination. The employee was long-serving. In the manager's account, the employee's performance had been inadequate for well over a year. She expected the request to move quickly, given how long the problem had apparently persisted. HR reviewed the file, and found essentially nothing. There was no documented standard specific to the manager's concerns. No record of any feedback conversation about them. And no evidence that any support had ever been offered. The year-long problem existed only in the manager's memory, with no record made at the time. By this section's performance termination sequence, the determining moment had already passed. It came months earlier, when she should have set a clear standard, and started documenting feedback. Terminating now would leave the decision looking sudden and arbitrary, even if her concerns were accurate. The problem wasn't whether she was right. It was that nothing on record could demonstrate it. Next, Subchapter thirteen point ten turns to performance appraisal, the measurement system whose absence so often decides these cases.
About Principles of Management at UPI Study
Principles of Management (Business 101) is a self-paced online course of 117 video lessons in 17 chapters, from the classical schools and the four management functions to leadership, motivation, change, human resources, strategy and ethics. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus Every course with PRO →
Why take it here
Why students take Principles of Management with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Principles of Management carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About Ending the Relationship: Termination Procedures and Best Practices
What is progressive discipline?
What is the hot stove rule of discipline?
How do you make a performance-based termination defensible?
What is just culture in employee discipline?
About the Principles of Management course
How many college credits is Principles of Management?
How much does Principles of Management cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Principles of Management take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Principles of Management.
117 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →