6 ms·

This guys boss picked him to be on the performance improvement plan. Even if his boss was forced to pick someone because of quota, the fact that he was picked m

This guys boss picked him to be on the performance improvement plan. Even if his boss was forced to pick someone because of quota, the fact that he was picked must mean he was at the bottom of the pack in terms of performance. My advice would be to be humble enough to admit that the performance can be improved and take ownership of that fact and not make excuses like " my boss put me on notice because of a quota, i guess i should quit"

HarryHirsch 3y ago
that must mean this guy was still at the bottom of the pack in terms of performance A.E Housman had something to say about the belief that the world is generally fair: "He [Joe Public] believes that the text of ancient authors is generally sound, not because he has acquainted himself with the elements of the problem, but because he would feel uncomfortable if he did not believe it; just as he believes, on the same cogent evidence, that he is a fine fellow, and that he will rise again from the dead. "
ablatt89 3y ago
PIPs are used as tools to lay people off or get revenge often. It's not meant to be an actual "performance improvement plan." There's many stories of people hitting all requirements within the PIP to still not hit "the bar" due to a constantly arbitrary and changing PIP requirement. PIP is often a cowardice way to do layoffs or for upper management to not admit they have too many resources allocated for their own deliverables.
- HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
  Depends on the place. I was on a PIP. I met the requirements and at the end of the period, I was taken off the PIP and returned to "regular employment" status. I quit anyway, but that's a whole other story.
- haskellandchill 3y ago
  I've passed every PIP I've ever been put on (2x). But in this case it's not even a real PIP.
- aprdm 3y ago
  In my experience, having PIP'd people, that's hasn't ever been the case. It's never fun for the manager or the person or the company. In 3/4 of the cases they passed with flying colours and both sides were glad we went through it.
  - passwordoops 3y ago
    I think it really depends on the place. I was PIP'd recently and genuinely thought I was doing something wrong, until it was clear the bar kept moving even though I was meeting all requirements. A few weeks in I discovered I wasn't the only one in that situation (4 others, all expensive senior employees) and the company had a history of using arbitrary PIPs to justify firing with cause instead of having to pay out severance (I'm in Canada)
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    Interesting. I'm never been PIP'd myself, but I've seen it happen to many -- and it's never resulted in anything good, nor has it ever seemed as if the purpose was actually to improve anyone's performance. It's usually seems like just a thing that has to be done before you can fire them. Even when the PIP'd employee isn't fired, the PIP remains a scarlet letter on them for the rest of their time at that company. I'm glad there are companies where this isn't the case! I wonder how common those are.
    - HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
      I think it may be a self-reinforcing attitude. When I mentioned to a coworker that I had been on a PIP and transitioned out of it, he was amazed. He'd never heard of anyone being removed from one so he assumed that once you're on a PIP you'll eventually be fired. I think most people put on PIPs think the same: I'm going to be fired anyway, so why bother doing anything about this? That said, I am absolutely convinced that the reason for the PIP is that they were trying to get rid of a number of (expensive) senior engineers.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
- tivert 3y ago
  IIRC, PIPs are literally designed mainly to create a paper trail to avoid unlawful termination lawsuits. By the time you're on a PIP, you're manager already has decided he doesn't like your performance and wants you out.
cstrahan 3y ago
Suppose his coworkers are all working unreasonably long hours (whether out of fear, or poor work-life balance, or whatever), and he’s “only” working 40-45 hours a week. His output could be excellent, but he’d still be on the chopping block, no? I don’t think him being chosen to receive the boot necessarily means his performance was poor. I mean, maybe it was, but from the outside I wouldn’t jump to that conclusion.
JohnFen 3y ago
> the fact that he was picked must mean he was at the bottom of the pack in terms of performance. Perhaps, but the difference between the bottom of the pack and the top of the pack might be negligible. We don't know. > My advice would be to be humble enough to admit that the performance can be improved and take ownership of that fact Sure, that's fine, but I still think that the odds are he'd be better off if he quits as well.
makeitdouble 3y ago
”Performance" is always difficult to define, and you could take most average employees and frame them in a low performance light some way or another. The most frequent gripe I've seen were people late at a few meetings being marked as impacting the team. Like, sure that's not great and not polite, but would that be on par with generating 20k errors in production that need to be fixed a whole friday ?
irrational 3y ago
> the fact that he was picked must mean he was at the bottom of the pack in terms of performance Except, OP said that the boss chose him because he had the least amount of tenure (<1 year for OP versus > 3 years for everyone else).

HarryHirsch 3y ago

that must mean this guy was still at the bottom of the pack in terms of performance A.E Housman had something to say about the belief that the world is generally fair: "He [Joe Public] believes that the text of ancient authors is generally sound, not because he has acquainted himself with the elements of the problem, but because he would feel uncomfortable if he did not believe it; just as he believes, on the same cogent evidence, that he is a fine fellow, and that he will rise again from the dead. "

ablatt89 3y ago

PIPs are used as tools to lay people off or get revenge often. It's not meant to be an actual "performance improvement plan." There's many stories of people hitting all requirements within the PIP to still not hit "the bar" due to a constantly arbitrary and changing PIP requirement. PIP is often a cowardice way to do layoffs or for upper management to not admit they have too many resources allocated for their own deliverables.

HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
Depends on the place. I was on a PIP. I met the requirements and at the end of the period, I was taken off the PIP and returned to "regular employment" status. I quit anyway, but that's a whole other story.
haskellandchill 3y ago
I've passed every PIP I've ever been put on (2x). But in this case it's not even a real PIP.
aprdm 3y ago
In my experience, having PIP'd people, that's hasn't ever been the case. It's never fun for the manager or the person or the company. In 3/4 of the cases they passed with flying colours and both sides were glad we went through it.
- passwordoops 3y ago
  I think it really depends on the place. I was PIP'd recently and genuinely thought I was doing something wrong, until it was clear the bar kept moving even though I was meeting all requirements. A few weeks in I discovered I wasn't the only one in that situation (4 others, all expensive senior employees) and the company had a history of using arbitrary PIPs to justify firing with cause instead of having to pay out severance (I'm in Canada)
- JohnFen 3y ago
  Interesting. I'm never been PIP'd myself, but I've seen it happen to many -- and it's never resulted in anything good, nor has it ever seemed as if the purpose was actually to improve anyone's performance. It's usually seems like just a thing that has to be done before you can fire them. Even when the PIP'd employee isn't fired, the PIP remains a scarlet letter on them for the rest of their time at that company. I'm glad there are companies where this isn't the case! I wonder how common those are.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
    I think it may be a self-reinforcing attitude. When I mentioned to a coworker that I had been on a PIP and transitioned out of it, he was amazed. He'd never heard of anyone being removed from one so he assumed that once you're on a PIP you'll eventually be fired. I think most people put on PIPs think the same: I'm going to be fired anyway, so why bother doing anything about this? That said, I am absolutely convinced that the reason for the PIP is that they were trying to get rid of a number of (expensive) senior engineers.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
tivert 3y ago
IIRC, PIPs are literally designed mainly to create a paper trail to avoid unlawful termination lawsuits. By the time you're on a PIP, you're manager already has decided he doesn't like your performance and wants you out.

cstrahan 3y ago

Suppose his coworkers are all working unreasonably long hours (whether out of fear, or poor work-life balance, or whatever), and he’s “only” working 40-45 hours a week. His output could be excellent, but he’d still be on the chopping block, no? I don’t think him being chosen to receive the boot necessarily means his performance was poor. I mean, maybe it was, but from the outside I wouldn’t jump to that conclusion.

JohnFen 3y ago

> the fact that he was picked must mean he was at the bottom of the pack in terms of performance. Perhaps, but the difference between the bottom of the pack and the top of the pack might be negligible. We don't know. > My advice would be to be humble enough to admit that the performance can be improved and take ownership of that fact Sure, that's fine, but I still think that the odds are he'd be better off if he quits as well.

makeitdouble 3y ago

”Performance" is always difficult to define, and you could take most average employees and frame them in a low performance light some way or another. The most frequent gripe I've seen were people late at a few meetings being marked as impacting the team. Like, sure that's not great and not polite, but would that be on par with generating 20k errors in production that need to be fixed a whole friday ?

irrational 3y ago

> the fact that he was picked must mean he was at the bottom of the pack in terms of performance Except, OP said that the boss chose him because he had the least amount of tenure (<1 year for OP versus > 3 years for everyone else).