Punishment


I believe that punishments can have their place here or there, but I often find that people take these a little too far sometimes.

From what I recall, the president of my fraternity reprimanded our vice president of finance for losing track on some of our funds that we had allocated for our formal dance that was upcoming.
The person in authority did appear to be a little hostile towards the member while disciplining them. The president had raised a voice quite a bit and was practically yelling. The receiving member just stood there, quite unsure of what to say in the moment and seemingly not wanting to make the other person more upset by talking. They did show how the problem was to be fixed though, just in an angry demeanor. The president frequently described it as unacceptable and unbecoming of him and things of the sort. I thought his words were a little harsh, and did not accept the way he was taking care of the problem. It definitely was not the most productive way to handle the situation from an outsider's perspective.

Personally, I would have handled the situation quite differently. For instance, I would not do it in front of other members, and rather take the person aside and calmly explain to them what they were doing was wrong. I believe it is more constructive and frankly more reasonably if we have a discussion about the situation rather than just berating the person. By yelling at some in front of others, it creates an unpleasant experience fror everyone and people may be less inclined to open up to you about any potential issues they may have. The relationship I believe is no longer productive and efficient as it can be, and also people may no longer have respect for you. In the end the person wasn't exactly punished for his actions, unless you view the public humiliation as one. If I did have to discipline him though, I would bar him for an event or too as that seems like a fair but firm punishment and not one that is excessively hostile.

I did have a chance to discuss this with person receiving discipline and they were a little distraught. He claimed that happened was honest mistake, and though I do view it as somewhat negligent of him, it is still better to talk with him on how he can rectify the situation and how to prevent it from happening again. Sure maybe what he did was an honest mistake, but not everything deserves a punishment. Not everything we do may be the right thing and that is a fact to be accepted.
I truly do not think that strict discipline does make a person's work any better. In fact it might even harm it. That is not to be said that mistakes should be forgotten and overlooked, rather we must help each other over come the problem as focusing on the problem and not the solution can be counterintuitive. People in higher positions may view compassion as a sort of weakness and not useful in a workplace setting, but I would argue that it may be more beneficial to have it here.
At the end of day, we all make mistakes, whether they were intentional or not and I feel as if this forgotten by authority figures somewhat. Intimidation and aggressiveness make work a few times here and there, but it is far from creating a good working relationship with another person. The "draconian punishments" will harbor resentment amongst indivuduals against the authority figure, and they will not be productive as they maybe once were.

Comments

  1. As I have commented on many other posts, sometime people react in anger, too closely to when they've become aware of the transgression. When very angry there is a lot of venting, which may be a way to release the tension. But as you noted, it is rarely good for the person on the receiving end. In some situations, it might serve as a deterrent against future transactions by others. It sounds, however, that in this particular case the others in your fraternity didn't have the ability to make this sort of mistake.

    I do want to note that reading the story as you told it, "losing track of funds" sounds pretty fishy to me. Since you didn't report how much was lost, it becomes harder for a reader to make a judgment on the matter. Embezzlement is a serious crime. If that's actually what happened, I would be on your President's side in this.

    Many of your classmates are down on making a thing about a transgression in a public session visible to others, because it taints the atmosphere for everyone. I want to observe, that assumes the original transgression was not so bad and things can return to norma afterwards. But if there was a serious crime, the situation was already tainted. Expecting to repair it in a way that returns to how things were before the crime was committed may then be unrealistic.

    So I'd ask you, did you talk with your President after this incident and after he had a chance to calm down? Did he think he overreacted or handled the situation correctly. It would be good to know his perspective as well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would not necessarily say he overreacted as the situation you said may be quite serious, but I believe there are other methods in solving a problem than being in anger. He realized he got caught up in the heat of the moment but still didn't budge his stance on the matter.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Group Dynamics

Income Risk