3 ms·

So you think if someone doesn't improve with a PIP, they should fire the manager. That's quite an idea, and I don't know how else to interpret: > These manager

So you think if someone doesn't improve with a PIP, they should fire the manager. That's quite an idea, and I don't know how else to interpret: > These managers should be the first to go in a layoff or a PIP I'm not sure what to do with a truly unqualified employee, but implying a manager should be fired if, eg. an employee refuses to work, seems a little much.

nine_zeros 3y ago
> So you think if someone doesn't improve with a PIP, they should fire the manager. A PIP should be used only for project failures in the first place, not for people failures. And, a manager should be responsible for allocating the right amount of resources and tools to get a project done. They should not be able to abscond from this responsibility by Pipping ICs. If a truly unqualified employee doesn't work, they can just fire them.