PIP’n Ain’t Easy

If only every employee had excellent performance. Even very good, good, or (gulp) average might suffice. But alas, this is not always the case.

Photo by Goh Rhy Yan on Unsplash

As a result, the dreaded performance management process kicks in. This normally starts with verbal admonishments, followed sometimes by written warnings. The last step tends to be a final warning. This could be a simple stern letter alerting the employee that the next mistake will be the last, but other times it is a more engaging or interactive process. This is what we call the PIP or Performance Improvement Plan. When done well and with an intention of rebuilding performance, it can be a valuable tool to strengthen an employee and, by extension, the department and workforce. However, when done in a hurried or poor manner, it leads to frustration, the potential for unfair treatment, and increased legal risk for the employer.

A well-done PIP tends to be very detailed, outlining the precise areas of performance deficiency, very specifically explaining what the employee needs to do to improve the performance to at least a satisfactory level, and imbedding weekly check-ins with the direct supervisor to monitor the employee’s progress and provide feedback and ongoing expectations. Most importantly, a PIP should be developed with a positive intention. This means giving the employee between 90–180 days to improve. Failure to improve within the allotted timeframe will almost assuredly result in termination. For better or worse, this is about as fair of a process that an employee with a perpetual performance challenge can expect.

However, some employers take a much more abbreviated approach. They give the employee less than 90 days to improve — some even giving a mere 30 days! 30 days in particular is not usually a good-faith effort to rebuild the employee. The supervisor wants the employee gone and is attempting to rush the process. This might be lawful, but it screams that the termination was predetermined and, if the employee might otherwise have a counter-argument for the reasoning for termination (such as harassment or discrimination based on age, religion, sex, race, etc.), a short 30 day plan will not be overly helpful documentation for the employer. Indeed, the PIP should be a documentation strengthen for the employer, showing a termination was due to poor performance and nothing more. But when an employee is given little to no chance to improve, such as with a short plan and/or a plan where the supervisor provides virtually no check-ins to monitor ongoing performance and possible improvement, the PIP can be yet another indicia that something other than performance was the real reason (or pretext) for the termination.

When looking to separate an employee, take the time to do it right. Better yet, ensure that a bit of dignity and compassion are infused into the process. This way, if an unfortunate termination results, at least the PIP will help and not hurt if litigation later ensues.