> This practice seems pretty common in California, but given California is an at-will employment state, I'm not even sure why.
Because sometimes it's a genuine desire for someone who is a good cultural fit to improve.
> If you're ever put on a PIP, get out -- it's a sign someone in the company doesn't want you there.
I've put folks on PIPs before (we don't call them that and we're much more straightforward about it than some employers I hear about who do), and had positive outcomes. The correct way of thinking about a PIP is:
1. We rely on people to work adequately-to-well by themselves
2. If they can't, we tell them they aren't and expect them to improve,
3. If they can't, we get more specific in our feedback and meet more often to discuss course corrections
4. If that doesn't work, because the continued presence of performance problems means we can't work productively as an employer/employee, we try to meet on a MUCH more regular basis than 1, 2, 3 in order to track and improve performance.
The best and most effective feedback is given in the moment: you are doing [x], here's how it has an impact on [y], here's what we think would be a better way. A PIP basically means you get more refined and structured feedback way more often.
I'm not saying that a PIP is a hugely positive or stress-free thing for anyone, but we try to assume positive intent and treat it as a great opportunity to help someone constructively get over a block to being a better contributor to our company.
Well put -- I suppose these sorts of things are largely kept between manager and employee, so people don't end up hearing about them unless the employee decides to disclose.
You're right. It's also something employers can't dress up often for legal reasons. E.g. you can't be vague/fluffy/nice about the reason for putting someone onto a PIP. So if your company culture is kind/gentle, then it can seem like a HUGE abrasive shock to have one appear.
There are of course some people who are a) actively assholes and b) genuinely oblivious to the rules applying to them. But you gotta believe they're in the tiny minority in the world.
Because sometimes it's a genuine desire for someone who is a good cultural fit to improve.
> If you're ever put on a PIP, get out -- it's a sign someone in the company doesn't want you there.
I've put folks on PIPs before (we don't call them that and we're much more straightforward about it than some employers I hear about who do), and had positive outcomes. The correct way of thinking about a PIP is:
1. We rely on people to work adequately-to-well by themselves 2. If they can't, we tell them they aren't and expect them to improve, 3. If they can't, we get more specific in our feedback and meet more often to discuss course corrections 4. If that doesn't work, because the continued presence of performance problems means we can't work productively as an employer/employee, we try to meet on a MUCH more regular basis than 1, 2, 3 in order to track and improve performance.
The best and most effective feedback is given in the moment: you are doing [x], here's how it has an impact on [y], here's what we think would be a better way. A PIP basically means you get more refined and structured feedback way more often.
I'm not saying that a PIP is a hugely positive or stress-free thing for anyone, but we try to assume positive intent and treat it as a great opportunity to help someone constructively get over a block to being a better contributor to our company.