I deal with disciplinary and grievance issues every single week; whether it’s one person falsifying their timesheets, or another where their attitude and behaviour are impacting the implicit trust and confidence of their relationship with their employer – I’ve seen it all. I’ve also supported many teams through the disciplinary and grievance process. After enough years in this work, I’ve noticed the same patterns showing up repeatedly in what makes the difference between a process that works, and one that falls apart. Here’s what I’ve learned.
Be curious
Firstly, there’s always three sides to a story. Person A’s, Person B’s and, somewhere in the middle, the truth. When Person A comes to you with their version of events, it’s important to take it with some caution. This isn’t to say distrust them but be aware that it may not be factually correct. Lean into your curiosity and be sure you have all sides of the story before making any decisions. That instinct to slow down and look properly is what most managers struggle with.
Follow fair process
Fair process is a sequence: investigate first - speak to the witnesses you need to speak to, gather the evidence, and base your findings on fact and evidence rather than on how someone's answers made you feel. The investigation must show independence and impartiality. Only once that's done do you move to a hearing. And whatever the outcome, it must survive the ‘reasonableness test’ and be justified in writing. Importantly, it needs to be written in plain English. Someone with no background in the case should understand exactly what happened and why you decided what you did.
The single most common way organisations undermine their own fairness is by skipping straight to a formal process. It's understandable, formal feels safer, more defensible, more "proper" but skipping the often but not always useful informal conversation often does more damage. It signals mistrust before you've even established what's true. And if the case is ever challenged, the absence of a genuine attempt to resolve things informally can undercut the whole process.
Balance policy with individuality
Holding policy and individual circumstance together is about resisting your own assumptions. Policy gives you consistency, which matters, but every case still needs a properly open mind behind it. I try to go into every conversation without assuming the employee is as wrong as the employer says they are, and vice versa. That means a genuinely thorough conversation about what should have happened, what did happen, and what people are willing to admit to, rather than what they say happened to someone else.
Don’t let the process drag on
Speed matters just as much as thoroughness, which sounds contradictory until you've seen what happens when a case drags on. Left too long, situations become entrenched, relationships break down, and by the time you get to a hearing, people have already dug into positions they can't easily walk back from. So, the process I follow moves quickly but doesn't skip steps: set out clear terms of reference (what the problem is, who needs to be spoken to, which policies apply), investigate, write up an impartial, factual report, decide on next steps, and only then hold a hearing if one's needed. Whoever makes the final decision must be independent and impartial from the situation. That's not a nice-to-have; it's what makes the whole thing defensible.
Being impartial is key
Impartiality is key. Being emotionally involved in a case is only going to make it harder to come to a fair decision. Of course, it’s much easier to find impartial parties in a large company but when something happens in a small company, where everyone knows everyone, there’s usually no truly neutral person left to hand a case to. My honest advice there is simple: outsource it. Bringing in someone independent protects the outcome and protects the people involved in reaching it.
Don’t go it alone
For a manager facing their first disciplinary meeting, the advice I give is always the same three things. Don't do it alone: have someone experienced with you, even if it's just to help you stay on track. Document everything, because memory is unreliable and a written record is the only thing that holds up later. And before you decide anything, pause. Go back to the facts. Decisions made in the moment, under pressure, are rarely the ones people are proud of afterwards.
Getting this right from the start is always easier than fixing it afterwards. If you're not sure your current case is on solid ground, contact us for a second, impartial opinion.