Hacker News Reader

Comment by mrandish | Hacker News Reader

> 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.

I've seen it both ways and I think it comes down to the quality of the company and the manager - which, of course, varies widely. A good manager doesn't need PIPs because they're always communicating clearly and consistently to their reports about how they're doing. Ultimately, PIPs exist due to concerns about legal claims for wrongful dismissal which can be hard to defend if there's no clear paper trail of documentation.

As expected, a management process mandated by HR and legal concerns instead of just modeling on what great natural managers do is going to be hit or miss and sometimes go horribly awry.

View on HN

> A good manager doesn't need PIPs because they're always communicating clearly and consistently to their reports about how they're doing.

I'm not sure this is true. I'm definitely open to the idea that I was a bad manager or there were things I wasn't doing well, but not communicating my expectations clearly is not something I've ever been accused of. Or at least not once I had some experience. Management comes with a learning curve.

I have had an employee where I and their direct manager were very much communicating they weren't meeting expectations, including coaching and providing warning that their job was now at risk, that only did a 180 when put on a PIP. I think for some people there is power in putting a concrete date on things vs something that needs fixed "soon".

The employee in question continued to improve post-PIP and got promoted. I don't know what happened after I left the company, but I have no reason to doubt they continued to do well.

>A good manager doesn't need PIPs because they're always communicating clearly and consistently to their reports about how they're doing.

More generally, a good manager is someone who shields their people from surprises. A PIP should never come as a surprise to someone. Unfortunately, there are bad managers out there who fail at that. It's not the manager's fault if someone gets put on a PIP, but it's absolutely 100% their failing if it comes out of the blue.

How do you think a manager should handle the case where a company forces the manager to select one person from the team for a bogus (in bad faith) PIP?

From the view of the team the ideal manager is a shield overhead protecting them from the crap coming down from above, the manager should refuse and push back.

From the view of “is this good for the company?” the manager should push back on bogus bad faith tasks and the structures which make them exist.

I understand that from the manager’s own perspective their income might be priority one - but then I wonder if they are just a conduit for senior management crap to flow through, harming their team morale, what are they actually doing that’s worthwhile?

If it is bogus, hopefully it still won’t be out of the blue - warning to the team that it’s coming to someone - and they could try and arrange it as an encouragement to leave, with payout, with recommendation, before it’s a total surprise. The manager must know whom they would and would not fake-PIP, and from Yossi Kreinin’s assertions that employees know their managers’ minds better than they say, the employees likely know who is in favour and who isn’t.

https://www.yosefk.com/blog/people-can-read-their-managers-m...

This would almost certainly get me fired, but I would simply refuse the request. If I truly don't believe anyone on my team has earned themselves a spot on a PIP I wouldn't put anyone on one.

I have to expect the response would be either (a) threatening to fire me or (b) threatening to force my boss to make the decision with less knowledge of each of my reports' performance. In either case, though, those aren't my decisions to make and I can only take control of whether or not I'm willing to PIP reports that I don't think deserve it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com