8 ms·
Performance improvement plans are on the rise
- batch12 2y agohttps://archive.is/MBxwv https://archive.is/MBxwv
- oldpersonintx 2y ago[dead]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- kareiva 2y agoThere is nothing to hate here. I have given numerous PIP's as a manager and only actually fired once. The purpose of a PIP is to improve, not to fire a person.
- JKCalhoun 2y agoNot in management so I can't argue with you on that. But it seems like at the time the PIP is summoned, the person has somehow made to fireable-grounds.
- avereveard 2y agoThere might be a selection bias at hand only people that fail a pip and are fired are eventually free from nda.
- KaoruAoiShiho 2y agoI think the PIP is hated because it ruins the illusion of camaraderie, like an ultimatum in marriage. But really, unlike a marriage you shouldn't have that illusion in the first place, you were always a replaceable cog whose only value is what service you can do for your boss. If you always had that perspective then the PIP can be seen as a helpful encouragement to improve rather than a precursor to an actual firing.
- chrisdhoover 2y agoOne should realize life is temporary. You probably will leave very little legacy. You should aspire to have a large attendance at a remembrance. My father’s funeral filled the church. An in-law’s had less than 10 people. Best you can do is have and rear good children. If hard work helps that, it will be a net benefit.
- Cpoll 2y agoA manager should be communicating expectations regularly. PIP conventionally means "we're firing you in a few months," so you're just threatening to fire people euphemistically.
- deskr 2y agoHow on earth can you be a good manager and not realize that saying "your performance is shit, we're going to fire you unless you take this course and we deem you've passed" is totally and utterly soul destroying to a person?
- stavros 2y agoA PIP should be the last chance to improve. You should have had many chances before that, with lots of clear feedback. Of course it's soul-destroying, but laying them off is worse.
- sunshowers 2y agoPeople have things going on in their lives! What if it's not the employee's performance but the manager's that's concerning — it's the manager who should get the PIP? What if it's the CEO's fault for creating an environment where many employees are demotivated — what if the CEO should be the one getting the PIP? Tech still, to this day, has a problem retaining women and URMs. Conceptions of individual performance are often shaped by unintentional (or intentional) sexism and racism. Speaking personally, at my last role at FB there was a quite marked change in how I was treated after I transitioned to ~female. The PIP process does not interrogate all this nearly as much as it should. I'm quite convinced it's absolutely the wrong way to go about things — too much falls on the IC and not enough on management.
- stavros 2y agoI feel like this conversation is "bad PIPs are bad!" "but good PIPs are good" "no, bad!". Sometimes, you can tell someone "listen, nothing else worked, and we tried for a while, so this is the last resort". Do you think it's better to fire people outright than to give them one last chance?
- sunshowers 2y agoI think most of the time, so-called underperformance is caused by the environment, not the individual. If a company cares about bringing the best out of individuals it would fix the environment. (There are certainly some individuals that end up being a negative to the team, disrupting more than contributing, and a small minority of PIPs are justified in that sense. But most PIPs I've seen are handed out to hardworking individuals who are very clearly doing their best and are enhancing the team, just because they maybe aren't as good as playing politics, or are game theoretic doves in an environment full of hawks.)
- chenmike 2y agoI’ve never heard anyone brag about giving working PIPs. PIPs are pretty demoralizing even if they “work”. Maybe you should consider giving people feedback in non-PIP form!
- therealdrag0 2y agoSometimes people are in lala land and don’t realize the stakes until the heat gets turned up so far.
- SketchySeaBeast 2y agoI've never been put under a PIP, but if I were, I'd be looking for a way out. The company has told me I suck and, even if I recovered, I'd be concerned that just having had it there would hurt any future progression I had in the company.
- fasa99 2y agoMy wife went through that at one of the FANG companies. Many years ago. At least in her case, 100% true. Many years later the PIP (which she survived) would come up, blocking her from promotions. People who witnessed the PIP still remained and still had thoughts about it, many years later. I will also mention talk of managers getting PIPped, she reports that indeed her manager got PIPed by the director above.
- dangus 2y agoThe company you worked for that allowed you to operate this way is in the minority. For 99% of companies the PIP is a documentation and CYA step to ensure that the employee goes away quietly, without things like filing for unemployment or suing the company. For most companies the purpose of a PIP is to fire a person.
- therealdrag0 2y agoWhat evidence do you have for this statistic?
- dangus 2y agoNone, sorry to disappoint your request for “source????.” It’s just common sense, finding someone who exits a PIP successfully is like finding a needle in a haystack.
- therealdrag0 2y agoThere’s multiple people in the comments of this post alone who have self exited a pip. And I know at least one in person myself. What’s common sense is that Common sense doesn’t mean much, people often draw false conclusions from narrow sample sizes among other fallacious beliefs and reasonings. Asking for a source should always be acceptable by anyone who has an allegiance to truth. Let’s be honest with each other.
- Plasmoid 2y agoThere is going to be a fair amount of selection bias in pip announcing they beat a pip. Getting fired isn't fun and so people won't brag about it. There are also other comments in this thread about people being pip'ed dishonestly. So people's experience will fall into a few categories: * People who are not doing well * People where the expectations of the job are (honestly) different between employee and employer. * Trying to create cause to fire an employee / avoid layoff news.
- kingbiz 2y agoDoes management ever get PIP'd? In my experience its lowly ICs that take the brunt of PIP culture.
- surgical_fire 2y agoNothing really bad about a PIP. You get to coast for months while you do interviews prior to being fired. Never been PIP'd myself, but I would prefer it than being fired without warning.
- autobodie 2y agoI would drastically prefer a lack of warning over a lack of reason, and I cannot help but interpret any other position as disingenuous.
- SpaceNoodled 2y agoA lack of warning can leave you in the lurch financially and career-wise. Getting the heads+up that it's time to find a new job let's you keep banking paychecks while you make a seamless transition to a new opportunity.
- surgical_fire 2y agoI suppose it depends if you value your own ego over your financial well being? I don't hold any expectations from my employer other than being an employer. Being hired is as much part of a job as quitting or being fired. All that said, I don't care what reason an employer has to wanting me out. It really does not matter to me. All I need is time to plan ahead so I come out unscathed. Who knows? I may even find a better job on my way out.
- jayd16 2y ago>a lack of warning over a lack of reason The choice is one or both...
- JKCalhoun 2y agoI saw this happen at Apple to an engineer on my team — maybe 8 to 10 years ago. Yeah, it did look like the die was already cast, they just wanted perhaps a lawsuit-proof way of showing them the door.
- ralfd 2y agoWas it justified or was your colleague wronged?
- JKCalhoun 2y agoHe was probably the smartest guy on the team. And when push came to shove, productive as hell. I think management didn't appreciate how much time he spent reading web comics though (you know, when push was not around). I imagine he'd have flourished if work-from-home had been a thing then.
- thelastparadise 2y agoLol. Wonder how often toxic teams end up PIPing the actually highest performing people on the team, leading to a salt lake effect and slowly dieing corporation.
- futuramaconarma 2y agoSlowly dying bigco is the best feature of capitalism
- amazingamazing 2y agoWith at-will employment is a pip necessary? What happens if you fire someone who is performing?
- nosefurhairdo 2y agoPeople can take you to court for anything; pip is good way to protect against claims of wrongful termination. I agree in principle that at-will should make this unnecessary, but the reality of a litigious society makes pips a good move.
- mikequinlan 2y agoThe issue is unemployment payments. In many states, if you fire someone without cause then you have to make the unemployment payments. If you fire with cause then you don't.
- lvgifirnejsjs 2y agoMost states in the United States will still provide unemployment payments for an employee terminated for performance. The company needs to prove a gross negligence level of employee conduct to deny unemployment. Things like not showing up to work or workplace sabotage.
- chrisdhoover 2y agoYes. Some at will states support lawsuits
- pkaye 2y agoI've seen a few workers take the employer to court and the company usually settles as it doesn't want the reputational damage and court costs so they just pay up. People just assume the worst of the employers when these court cases become public if even it is later dismissed.
- lvgifirnejsjs 2y agoSpecifically regarding at-will employment and the United States, you can still be sued for discrimination based on race, gender, and all other protected classes. PIPs and other similar processes are primarily created, from a legal/HR perspective, to protect against those lawsuits. So, somewhat counterintuitively, at-will employment in the United States(especially in states like California) is not actually at-will in a practical sense do to the threat of discrimination lawsuits.
- tekla 2y agoNo clue why PIP is so hated. I suspect that its from people who think they are so good that they should be immune from being fired.
- kittikitti 2y agoNo clue? Did you read the article? I think you should be put on PIP and promptly fired.
- tekla 2y agoI've done both. I rather the PIP. Bunch of people who took the ZIRP startup decade and assumed it was a permanent thing to not actually have to do work to keep your job.
- deadbabe 2y agoI don’t understand why you would PIP a person and keep them waffling around for months on end collecting paychecks when you can just severance them out and pay less in time and money?
- carlgreene 2y agoIt is to cover some of their bases in a potential wrongful termination case
- stavros 2y agoWe do it because we legitimately want them to improve, and the last resort is "if we can't work it out by X, we can no longer employ you". I don't think we've done it more than once or twice, though, because increasing the directness of the feedback that the employee is not doing well has generally worked.
- icedchai 2y agoI've never seen anyone put on a PIP where the intention was anything other than eventual firing. In all these cases, the person was doing an awful job for over a year, or in some cases, since they were hired.
- stavros 2y agoSure, but in our company, it's different. We ended up keeping the person in one or two of those cases (I forget the numbers because there were so few).
- hackable_sand 2y agoWhy would the company hire them then? That just sounds like emotional abuse.
- icedchai 2y agoBecause they did well in the interview and seemed like a good fit.
- MathMonkeyMan 2y ago> “A lot of the time, they’re done,” Gadea said of underperformers. “They’re burned out, they need a break. And now you’re asking them to work harder.” I've seen that once, most recently. Before that, it was somebody who was trying to get let go on performance grounds, thinking that it would lead to severance (didn't work out). Before that, it was somebody who got put on PIP, but I'm not sure why, and they were personally devastated and then quit. Telling somebody that they're fucking up and that they need to improve is one thing, that's just feedback. Creating a structure that's officially "if you don't do X, Y, Z, then you're fired"... just fire them.
- DragonStrength 2y agoMy experience with the system was it mostly being abused by incompetent managers who had no clue how to evaluate engineer performance.
- therealdrag0 2y agoWhy just fire them? As you showed they can “just quit” if they don’t want to play ball, and some people want to have the opportunity to play ball.
- jopsen 2y agoAlso by forcing managers to drag employees through a pip process, you: (a) reduce risk of wrongful termination suits. (b) increase likelihood that an abusive manager is discovered. I'm sure lots bad managers get away with bad stuff, even when a pip process is in place. But every bit of documentation produced by a pip could certainly backfire on a bad manager. Again obviously, not all bad managers will be stopped, not will all bad employees :)
- bsder 2y ago> Why just fire them? Legal ass covering--especially if the employee is a minority.
- therealdrag0 2y ago
- ghettoCoder 2y agoGoing through the motions of a PIP is a pain if you're management. If someone gets PIP'ed then a decent manager already exhausted all other avenues to get a team member to start contributing at the expected level and the PIP is just to provide cover. You don't PIP a lower performing staff unless they're completely useless or toxic to the environment, you just find tasks that suit them better. At least in my experience managing staff.
- zug_zug 2y ago> You don't PIP a lower performing staff unless they're completely useless or toxic Maybe this is part of the problem -- that it's called one thing (a plan to improve performance) but is used as another (legalese once you've already given up hope). But I've never quite understood why. I imagine if I was a manager people would know if they are doing 20% as much as the best team member and would either be off the team or have shaped up within 6 months. That period where you genuinely are making sure that somebody understands you think they aren't doing well and clarify expectations seems valuable and ideally would happen long before it's too late.
- riku_iki 2y ago> but is used as another (legalese once you've already given up hope). because "completely useless or toxic"(from prev comment) is manager's subjective assessment, and company wants to have stronger metric for firing people.
- chrisdhoover 2y agoMost of life is subjective. Objectivity is very difficult. You are dealing with people who are mostly wacky. I suppose a weighted decision calculation could be used. How do you measure grumpy gus, chatty cathy, or mean marvin? How do handle the unsober?
- riku_iki 2y agoYou can set robust PIP structure: * clear deliveries which are evaluated by not manager * collect peers feedback/ratings not visible to manager This structure can give much stronger metric compared to personal manager feedback.
- OutOfHere 2y agoEmployment is at-will. It's better to just fire without the PIP drama. As it is, a PIP does not provide legal cover if the employee writes back, effectively rejecting it.
- KerrAvon 2y agoIANAL, but I don’t think this is correct
- outside1234 2y agoEmployment is at-will but you can’t fire someone for non-work reasons. The PIP is there to collect the data that they are firing someone for work reasons.
- OutOfHere 2y agoWho said anything about firing for non-work reasons. One can be fired immediately for work reasons without a PIP. Note that the PIP alone does not suffice as valid supporting data if the employee contests it. It helps for there to be more data than it.
- 3eb7988a1663 2y ago
- fbriggs 2y agopaywall
- delecti 2y agoI got put on a PIP at Amazon, and even at the time I thought it was a reasonable criticism. I then worked hard, graduated out of the PIP, and stayed there a few more years. (I also opted-in to a second PIP (with my manager's knowledge and assistance) when I was leaving so I could get severance, but I don't really count that) One of my current mentees got put on a PIP a couple years ago, and she likewise has significantly improved. (She also survived a round of layoffs a year later, which should speak to that) So while PIPs might be started with the expectation that most employees won't improve, I think they're also started with the hope that they will.
- jghn 2y agoI too was put on a PIP early in my career, and worked my way out of it. It was fine. That said, I agree with the general sentiment that much more often than not the employer is not acting in good faith. Over the decades I've seen way too many colleagues get put on a PIP, I tell them to work hard because it can get better, and then they get let go anyways. Not sure what I'd do today if it happened to me. Probably a bit of both. Take it for the feedback that it is & try to improve my flaws. And also start looking around for a new employer, knowing the reality of the situation.
- FireBeyond 2y agoWorked as a PM at a well known tech company, great relationship with my director. He leaves, new director comes in and within three months I'm on a PIP. I'm given a list of work products to create for a new offering that has been discussed, which on the face of it are entirely reasonable, and the standard 30 days. 100% ghosted by my Director. Weekly 1:1s? He no-shows 2 of them. Near zero input. In "fairness", I knew what was happening, but had some tiny semblance of good faith. Hah. Final meeting, he shows up with HR. "So we've been talking about (when?) and I have just completed my final review of the documents you created (bear in mind these have had significant input from multiple stakeholders who, not for nothing, generally approved), and I am still left believing that your output is not up to the quality or depth that we expect from our PMs, so..." I pulled up the receipts, because why not? I think he may not even have known that GDocs provides good metrics on documents, including who has viewed, and when, and how many times. I did this with the HR person sitting awkwardly there. "You reviewed this document? GDocs says you've never accessed it. And this one? Never accessed. What about this deck? Never accessed." At that point he turned his cam off and clumsily handed it over to the HR person. They asked if I'd like to follow up, but that the company would support the Director's decision. Fine, didn't expect any different. They did acknowledge that they could see too that he hadn't done anything to even present a token perspective that the PIP was anything other than firing with 30 days notice. Lives and learns, we do.
- tyingq 2y ago>PIPs are intended to bring consistency and fairness to the way employees are judged and managed. That's mostly bullshit. The real purpose of a PIP is just to bolster documentation on the employer side to fend off any wrongful termination lawsuits. It probably has a side effect of looking more consistent, but that isn't the purpose. One thing that does favor the employee is that legal and HR sometimes get carried away with how much documentation is needed. So it ends up taking longer than the employer really wants. But if the employee understands the true purpose of the PIP it gives them plenty of time to job search.
- justahuman74 2y agoIt also help quell fears from other employees about their own job. "There was a process, EmployeeA didn't improve." rather than "EmployeeA was suddenly terminated yesterday"
- autobodie 2y agohttps://archive.ph/5Zn6F https://archive.ph/5Zn6F
- firesteelrain 2y agoFrom reading the comments, people must work at places who use a lot of PIPs. It is an actual documented process at my large employer but I know if anyone got put on one then they would freak out. Probably go nuclear rather than improve. Managers are afraid to put people on them.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ambicapter 2y agoSounds like a very emotionally-stable place to work lol.
- firesteelrain 2y agoI don’t think it’s good for mental health for a manager or employee to be vascillating between PIPs and not PIP. We still measure performance and do coaching. We just don’t put people under threat of firing which is what these PIPs aim to do.
- Spivak 2y agoAt the systems level it seems like a stable outcome. Workers don't want to be put on PIPs so if they react in a manner totally opposite what the manager wants and treat them as being fired then they cease to be effective. Managers now have to address performance problems without them or just fire them. The kind of professional stoicism being advocated for actually makes you easy to mistreat. I feel so bad for my Gen X coworkers who seem to be conditioned that this is the only way to be and seem to have no concept of when they deserve better.
- makk 2y agoI'm pretty happy with how PIPs work. The first and last time I was put on a PIP I went into early retirement the next day. In doing so, I caught the VP Eng who did the PIP completely flat footed. It turns out they did the PIP against the advice of their boss, the CTO. Egg all over the VP's face. The VP got canned 6 months after that and had to scramble to find another job while I was at the beach.
- throwawygg 2y agoThrowaway manager here. I tried to keep a personality hire out of a PIP. It was a huge mistake. Turns out when all other options are exhausted, a PIP can be a form of respect. In the hands of the right manager, an underperformer gets one last clear chance to show they can do the job. If they succeed, some the ugly baggage gets put behind them. And if they can't succeed, then the PIP sends a message that they are unsuited for the job at the company, and maybe even at the industry at large. The alternative to PIP'ing an incompetent (not just an underperformer) is micromanagement. That comes with pretense, hostility, and disrespect to their person for an indefinite period of time.
- makk 2y agoAn even better token of respect is to just can the person and give them a respectable severance package, so they have months (plural) to find their next thing.
- charlie0 2y agoHonest question, if someone is performing horribly, why do they deserve a severance package? Isn't that was unemployment insurance is for?
- marcusb 2y ago1. They might be a good worker, but a bad fit for their role. That’s as much on the hiring manager as the employee. 2. People, even lousy workers, talk. Treating people with respect on their way out may decrease the person’s negativity/bitterness. Consider it a marketing expense. 3. Severance packages come with legal releases attached, at least in the US. Less risk of lawsuits, frivolous or otherwise.
- triceratops 2y agoTo compensate the employee for the mistake the company made in hiring them.
- ipaddr 2y agoThe longer the years of service the longer the successful track record. If you work 25 years somewhere for those years your employer was happy with you. A new manager / business downturn / new system / new disability / personal prompting a poor performance means the employer must support the employee and that can become severance. The length of employment is the most important part of the equation.
- devmor 2y agoI have received one PIP in my entire career - it was at an employer which was recently purchased by another company, shortly after the majority of my team was replaced with offshore contractors. I was not at all surprised at receiving it, despite my performance being roughly on par with my entire tenure in that position up to that point. If anything, I was happy to receive it as it prompted me to start interviewing elsewhere earlier.
- thelastparadise 2y agoSeveral cases like this on here. These would be valid wrongful termination lawsuits.
- jaimebuelta 2y agoI see a lot of pro/con discussion about PIPs in the comments, and wonder how much is a US/Other places thing. I think that the “believe in the PIP process” is a very typical US thing, driven in part by their labor laws, that is culturally very different in other places, I’ll say EU because it’s what I know best and that is culturally much more adverse to firing
- cheema33 2y agoI am going through this with a contractor dev. Their performance dipped enough that we considered letting them go. But, eventually decided to put them on PIP. They did a 180 in a couple of days. PIP doesn't always work, but it works wonders with some personalities.
- trallnag 2y agoHow is the performance measured?
- mangamadaiyan 2y agoAny system can, and will, be abused by the powers that be. Any system that can be abused, will be abused by people with power. There is a clear disparity in power between an IC and a manager. The "oh, I totally deserved my PIP, so all PIPs must be fair" stories assume that all corporate actions are taken in good faith. If only.
- kj4211cash 2y agoIt's interesting how many commenters are defending PIPs. To me it shows an inability to think beyond the ways in which many tech co's operate today. There are so many better ways to deal with an employee who is failing to meet expectations, both for the employee and the company. Giving people more feedback, more frequently can help. Giving people flexibility to switch teams or even roles can help. Better interviewing before hiring can help. Better financial and role planning can help, especially at startups. Retraining can help. Letting people go with a decent severance is often better for everyone involved. PIPs are pretty clearly sub-optimal.
- pgwhalen 2y agoNone of the things you mention seem to be mutually exclusive with PIPs. Without commenting on PIPs specifically, I can at least say that I work at a company that has PIPs and also practices all of those things.
- taosx 2y agoOver the years we've gotten more and more technological advances, we have automated more and more labor yet the amount of labor we have to put in increases which makes me wonder, where is all that output going as I'm pretty sure it doesn't go into our pockets or our governments. For years I haven't noticed and even burned-out few times as I'm very passionate about this field and STEM in general but count me out from this, my resolution for the next 3 years is self-sustenance, self-sufficiency and gig work from time to time to pay for things like internet and other raw materials.
- __loam 2y agoPips rise and software quality stays the same or gets worse. High performers get to delude themselves into thinking they have impact.
- Ancalagon 2y agoWhat do you mean where does it all go? Isn't it obvious? We are living in a second gilded age. How else would 1 man have a third of a trillion dollars?
- penguin_booze 2y agoIf you find yourself in PIP, the only plan you need to have, is to leave ASAP. It's practically impossible to "improve" anything. And their plan is to wear you out. From what I've seen, it's most commonly deployed as a retaliatory measure. From their perspective, it's rather cheap to deploy. From yours, however, it'll prove to be very expensive, on all counts. Oh, and if you're hoping to "get justice", or fight, somehow, don't even think about it. The "justice system", by design, is in accessible. And nobody else is bothered to see justice delivered. See also: Pyrrhic Victory.
- black_13 2y ago[dead]
- IWeldMelons 2y agoCan you be PIPed, if you are self-employed?
- jmpman 2y agoI work in a prestigious group within my company. The solutions architects across the company aspire to this group. As such, the cream rises to the top, and I work with amazing engineers. Unfortunately the 6% yearly PIP quota must be met, even within this group. So, you end up with the best of the best in the company fighting to stay off the PIP list. Recently my company started forcing this 6% PIP quota to be met within each band. So now, at the principal solutions architect level, you have the best solutions architects in the company, at the highest level, working on the most prestigious accounts, who must be PIPed at 6%. On my account alone, with roughly 3 SAs, over 5 years, 3 have been PIPed. Each one would have been the top SA on a lower tier account. The management has their favorites, and bring in new SAs as backfill. Those SAs are now PIP fodder. Each time we get a new SA on the team, I have a one on one with them, and explain the history of our team. The wise ones understand the situation and jump elsewhere in the org. It’s become this revolving door of exceptional talent, who our customers adore, who keep getting PIPed. It’s not good for the customer, and not good for the company. The engineers who survive have taken an offense approach to the situation, setting other SAs up for failure. Ultimately the roles are filled with a collection of scheming back stabbers who are more skilled at politics than delivering results. In my own role, I’ve realized that getting promoted is more likely to put me in competition with a more elite set of engineers, so I continue to decline the promotion offer. I happily perform at top of band in my current role, and avoid the PIP stress. I’m likely sacrificing $100k/year for this peace of mind, but also expect to work another 7 years in this role at this level, as opposed to maybe 3 years at the higher level before getting PIPed.
- hn3er1q 2y agoIt's interesting to ponder if this is a good thing or a bad thing. The knee jerk reaction is this is all very unhealthy but I wonder if it is really. Imagine we were talking about back-up quarterbacks in the NFL. That individual is probably one heck of a quarterback and athlete, and they did excellent in lesser teams which is what got them into the NFL in the first place. But, they are a back-up quarter back in the NFL, not a starter. If they continue to remain a back-up quarterback, should they be PIP'ed or not?
- 2y ago
- black_13 2y ago[dead]
- rincebrain 2y agoI think the most telling experience I ever had, was once, I was put on a PIP because I had a period where my sleep was extremely unhinged and uncontrollable, and no matter how deliberate I was in my sleep hygiene and avoiding stimulant and adjacent intake, I would sometimes be unable to get to sleep or stay awake, and this caused significant heartburn at my employer, who had fairly rigid in-office time requirements on high, but adored my work. On my first meeting with someone in HR about it, they exclaimed in surprise "Wow, they really want to keep you. Usually when I'm talking to someone, it's because their manager wants them gone." (I was not, ultimately, let go at the end of that process.)