The one piece of advice I always give managers who are facing the tough task of terminating a team member is this: “Don’t make it harder on the employee than it already is.”

Certainly losing a job is usually painful on many levels. Loss of face, loss of income, loss of relationships — all those things really hurt and can’t be avoided no matter how gracefully a manager exits someone. But sometimes companies make things worse than they need to be and, as a result, the terminated team member often gets angry and tries to fight back. And this is where things can get ugly.

Sometimes managers deliver the news poorly by choosing the wrong method or words. When this happens, fired employees often feel blindsided or stung or humiliated, and they lash out in response.

Other times organizations don’t plan for a smooth aftermath. Instead of immediately communicating the decision to the people who need to know about it, they keep quiet and let the word seep out slowly and often inaccurately. Or they don’t think through the logistics and have to scramble to handle the details after the fact.

I’ve been thinking about the right way to fire people while listening to all the debate over the past week regarding the termination of Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz. Interestingly, the conversation has focused primarily on how she was fired, not whether she should have been (most agree she wasn’t getting the job done). One of the biggest topics of discussion is the e-mail Bartz sent to company employees right after she was let go. It read:

To all,

I am very sad to tell you that I’ve just been fired over the phone by Yahoo’s Chairman of the Board. It has been my pleasure to work with all of you and I wish you only the best going forward.

Carol

Sent from my iPad

She was obviously insulted that she was ousted via telephone and took the opportunity to get a dig in at Yahoo’s chairman. Many people have argued that she’s right to think he owed her the courtesy of a face-to-face termination given her position. But even worse, she promptly began speaking out to various news sources by giving interviews in which she railed against how she was treated and criticized the “doofuses” on Yahoo’s board. And plenty of people question why no one thought to disable her ability to send all-company e-mails before she was terminated, which is pretty standard procedure in most organizations of any size.

Would Bartz’s behavior have been different if her firing had been handled better? Who knows, given her reputation for being outspoken and a bit of a hothead? Maybe she would have come out swinging no matter how they sacked her.

But I’ve personally noticed that more often than not, when a company (and, in particular, a manager) exhibits classy behavior in firing, employees generally show some class in receiving the news. Even if it’s painful, it doesn’t have to be ugly.

What are your thoughts on the right and wrong ways to fire employees? Share your thoughts in the comments section.

Janna Mansker is vice president of client services for Berke, a human resources consulting firm, where she leads the company’s education initiatives and advocates for clients. She can be reached at janna@berkegroup.com.