This article examines how the evaluation of disciplinary appeals in nonunion organizations is affected by the use of procedural guidelines. Data were collected from 142 managers in a simulation study designed to assess the impact of procedures that are common within arbitration and judicial systems but less common within non‐union appeal systems. Procedures which allowed decision makers to evaluate the reasonableness of the disciplinary rule, which specified a stringent standard of proof, and which restricted the availability of work history information significantly increased the likelihood of affirmative responses to disciplinary appeals. It was also found that the effect of the standard of proof guideline significantly increased when the evidence against the employee was weak. The implications of these findings for the design of appeal systems and for future research are discusse