I don't know what the motivations for the bosses in this story were, but in corporate America personal improvement plans are fundamentally about gearing up to fire someone more than any actual improvement. When defending yourself against a wrongful termination lawsuit, it looks good to courts to say, "Look, we met every week, we had these conversations, and things didn't get better enough."
In the story linked, it seems like the author was prioritizing family or health over work at times (me: Good! We need more of that!). The employer can't just fire you for that as it looks a lot like wrongful termination. So they need to build up a paper trail.
Honestly to me it seems that the author was extremely unprofessional.
He just disappeared for whole days without letting anyone know.
In all the companies that I worked it was explicitly mentioned in the contract that such behaviour was subject to disciplinary actions up to dismissal.
I think that is a somewhat cynical view of the matter; I appreciate that "American Work Ethics" are highly flawed and mostly theatrics (I say this as an American expat who has experienced work from all over the globe), but as much as there is management theatrics in the US, there's also a lot of "woe is me" from employees when they're disciplined.
I'd really hate to see how the author of the piece would have reacted to the Russian Managers at the company I'm with at the moment, as the managers certainly don't sugar coat when they're unhappy; it's not abusive, it's just very to the point. Having been a manager when I still worked in the US, it was incredibly difficult to correct inappropriate behavior because virtually every time you did, you did it wrong to whoever you were correcting. Try to be gentle? You were unclear. Try to be polite but to the point? You were curt. This sort of dance suggests to me that we just don't handle criticism well professionally in the US. I'm sure this is just observer bias, but I see a tendency to avoid confrontation at any cost, with too many places hoping it just "works out".
I do think it's from both sides of the employer/employee line. I have been at places that were more interested in just removing people who had some bad habits or needed to have a line drawn for some behavior while otherwise being model employees. I have also seen employees who were absolutely resistant to any criticism for a multitude of reasons, and ultimately the just continued with bad behavior until they were fired or left the company out of frustration with the constant meetings.
The author touches on some very true feelings in the article - no one likes being reprimanded. It's harsh, it's embarrassing, and it saps your ego for many reasons. But like others have commented, I do think that they acted unprofessionally - I imagine the story would have been much different had the author simply PM's a manager or boss "hey, family issue, going to be incognito today, I'll try to get an update by X" or just anything to keep them in the loop. The author also seemed unaware of the expectations of their bosses before hand, so maybe that's the fault of the company or the fault of the author. The age disparity I appreciate the uncomfortableness of, but it's going to be something that is more and more of a reality. (Ageism in tech is very real, so not discounting that, but the reality of the world is that there are going to be many young tech managers; staying out of management is great, but it needs to come with the understanding that eventually you'll be older than your bosses on average).
Yep. U.S. "improvement plans": Accumulate actions and documentation to justify and CYA the action already planned.
If you ever face one of those, and you have the option to walk away and start something else / somewhere else, go. Just like the B.S. in the name, "improvement plan", anything they say that sounds positive about the action is most likely just being disingenuous.
I'll take all this back a step further: If you are not happy with the job, or have a lot of friction with your management, walk away. The sooner you get out, the better -- for your peace of mind, career, and reputation.
Real improvement is sadly lacking from many workplaces, these days. The HR ideal, again contrary to what they say and the ideals they "paint" in their rhetoric, is the completely fungible employee.
If you haven't experienced real improvement in the workplace and in your own career before seeing an "improvement plan", you certainly aren't going to see it, after.
Well, I guess there are the occasional exceptions. Don't count on being one.
Trust your gut. Even when the resulting action you need to take is "hard". Neglecting your intuition -- real intuition; you usually know it when it hits -- ends up being much harder, in the long run.
This is very true in corporate America. They are NOT really interested in improving your work performance. They are simply starting the process of letting you go while building up the necessary paper trail to show employment lawyers (in case they show up) that the management did their best to try to help the employee improve performance but that it just didn't work out. They are just covering their butts.
So if you ever get called in for performance improvement meeting by your manager, you should just start looking for a new job. Or at least start saving your money for unemployment.
And as for the original poster, I'm sorry that it happened but he should've been up front about his schedule so that his managers know what's going on.
If occasionally you have to do something for your family during hours you have to work, you at least owe your coworkers/manager a quick "I'll be offline for a few hours". He didn't do that.
There was no indication from the article that the company demanded unreasonable hours.
The key to being a successful remote worker is a foundation of trust. Its unfortunately Human Nature to assume the worst when a remote contact is unreachable when you need them . Therefore it's crucial to establish a reputation where your co-workers trust you to do the right thing connected or not. The moral of the story is not about abusive bosses or misaligned corporate goals. It's just about maintaining that crucial level of trust in the team. And it's a two-way street . Both manager and employee play a an active part. Personally I would never hire a remote worker I could not confidently trust nor would I work for a place that didn't implicitly trust me
Edit - I've been a remote worker for over 10 years and will likely continue as long as I possibly can
I find managing upwards is the best way to deal with these situations. I've had micromanagers before and no one enjoys that random "hey wheres X at?" question so what I do is give status updates every so often. I avoid the stressful question entirely this way.
It makes your managers life easier and yours as well and allows you to give updates on your time instead of theirs.
This works remotely and in person. I work my face off a lot of times so it's valuable to turn the tables and not get caught in the middle of something with a question that can take me out of work flow.
At the end of the day, managing people is very hard. Transperency works very well for me.
> and I had been taking advantage of the freedom to prioritize family needs when they came up. To the degree that sometimes my bosses were left hanging, waiting for a day or more on my work.
> From my biased perspective, it is difficult to see how these “personal improvement programs” for a disappointing employee can ever be a constructive force.
I completely and intuitively understand what this employee is reacting to, and I think the it is hard to articulate why the approach his managers took is not great.
In this situation the managers could have gotten the same exact result without making the employee feel humiliated. Something along the lines of "stuff is falling through the cracks, let's do a meeting to touch base once a week so we can make sure everything is going well."
In those once a week meetings, the managers could provide positive and negative feedback in a balanced way.
However, once you've told an employee they are being "a prima Donna" and basically you need fixing, every meeting is another denigrating experience. That whole PIP idea makes sense for a paper trail justifying termination, but is otherwise terrible for morale.
Edit: in all relationships, professional or personal, try to keep your feedback specific and impersonal. "We need a reply to emails within 24 hours" is much better than "you have a communication problem." "Don't yell at John during meetings." Is way better than "you lose your temper too often."
I agree that PIPs are mostly just HR covering themselves in firing an employee, but this just reads like a long list of excuses for a person not performing their job. Its at-will employment for both sides, the company isn't obligated to care about your personal issues. If your work output isn't good, it kinda doesn't matter if you have kids and your manager is younger -- theyre giving you money for your work not because theyre your friend.
I think people that fall into this mindset should realize that most of the kumbaya things companies say are pleasantries. Employment is a business situation and its healthier to not get confused about that.
I had a contract with a household name theme park company that is known for treating its employees like disposable widgets. It made headlines a while back by laying off tons of people and only keeping some on to train their offshore replacements. That kinda place. So while I was there, there was this one guy in the department who was almost never at work. He was always "working from home." Occasionally he would turn in some work, but there was no way to really justify his position. I came to find out that his wife was having serious medical problems and he had been spending most of the last year at the hospital 24/7. Everyone on the team, including the manager, just picked up the slack and not one word was ever said about him or his (lack of) productivity.
I'm not sure I really had a point here, because this isn't about a company's false kumbayas. However, even at a big megacorp people will sometimes take care of one another when the going gets rough.
Leaving aside the clear miscommunication that led to the "needs improvement" state first, it seems to me the management did just fine after that:
1. They quickly and clearly told the employee of the problem.
2. They proposed a course of action
3. Their proposal worked (at the end they were happy with his work).
It was not pleasant for sure (for both sides, I bet), but would it be worse to say nothing and terminate him for non performance in a couple of extra months. My 2c.
>It was not pleasant for sure (for both sides, I bet), but would it be worse to say nothing and terminate him for non performance in a couple of extra months.
Those aren't the only choices, though. I think the point of contention (which isn't clear in the article), is whether they had any conversations about it before initiating a formal process. If not, I completely agree with the author even if the author was irresponsible with his work ethic.
Think of the asymmetry. If I'm dissatisfied with my manager, can I start a formal process against him? Generally not. My only option is to have a conversation (be it with him or with his superiors).
"1. They quickly and clearly told the employee of the problem."
As a general rule, if you wish to keep the employee, you should start with an informal warning that their behavior is unsatisfactory rather than a formal procedure.
I've been on both ends of the spectrum, from being PIP'd out the door to never hear from them again -- after burning bridges to be there and dedicating years to the mission -- to getting multiple base salary increases in a year and "keep doing what you're doing, you're definitely getting noticed".
Getting fired is definitely not the end of the world. In fact, I'd say it's more a measure of the employer/employee compatibility. The hardest part of the interview is determining "do I want to count on this guy/gal/team/company every day?" and sometimes it takes getting shown the door to realize that the answer was "no" all along. From my perspective, if you've never been fired, you've never tested the boundaries of your employability.
Unfortunately, the hard part of every subsequent interview with other employers is "So what happened at company X? You were fired, right?"
I've been through what the author is describing, but in an on-site office position. It's horrid. They're exactly right on how these processes poison all other interactions. My boss would call me in to ask if I was going to the company picnic, but the history meant that every "Hey, can you see me in my office real quick?" was a gut-wrenching terror moment, certain that I was getting fired or told off again, or something.
OK I've being working remotely for close to 10 years, most places were very flexible about hours and taking time during the work day for family things etc. But one things none was ever flexible about is remote employees dropping off com. channels for days. I think that is clear abuse of trust and the main fear why so few jobs are remote in the first place.
Yes. Whenever I work remotely I make an effort to be very clear about when I'll be available and when not. I also make an effort to respond quickly to E-mails and other things just to signal that I am actually working during the times I am claiming to work.
When managing remote workers I hate it when somebody disappears and I don't know what's going on.
Remote work requires a high level of trust and responsibility from both sides so act accordingly.
It's kind of common sense right? (Or maybe not). If your employer trusts you to work remotely, theres an obligation to be responsive, or at the very least be clear about times when you're going to be unavailable. To me, that's just basic professionalism. These people are paying significant money for your services, you can't treat that casually.
That would depend on the level of trust and whatever agreements you made. There are jobs like that, some people aren't into owning slaves but still need outside expertise. Which is nice, since some of us are more into living than being slaves.
I feel like many of the commenters here are missing the point of the post.
> My takeaway from pondering this today is pretty straightforward:
> Talk to your people. Don’t wait. Do it now, and never stop. If they are meeting expectations, thank them regularly. If they aren’t meeting your needs or the needs of others in the company, tell them now. Don’t wait until you find yourself identifying “patterns”.
and then a little later:
> If you can identify an incompatibility like this early enough, it doesn’t even have to be rancorous. Incompatibility happens. Nobody needs to feel like a failure over it.
When the author is relating his own experience, he's not saying there was no problem to be addressed. What he's saying is he thinks that situation (and many others like it in our industry) can be handled better, and he wraps up the post by taking about what some of those ways might be.
Agreed. I am learning something called "crucial conversations" right now. These are conversations where opinions vary, stakes are high, and emotions run strong. People have an aversion to having these conversations. It usually ends in silence or violence.
The book I am drawing this from claims that handling it is a skill that is teachable and learnable. I have been trying to apply what little I have learned so far and it had been working way better than what I have been using.
If you get to the point that you're on a personal improvement plan, you should immediately look for other work. There are no circumstances in which it will turn around.
If it gets to the point of a PIP, you're in very hot water at most places. But that does not necessarily mean you are going out the door.
If you care about keeping your job, step one is to ascertain whether your management is truly willing to invest in working it out, or simply going through the motions. It's time to level with them and have some very probing conversations on what's going on to get all the cards on the table.
Most managers do not want to fire their reports, if they can help it. But a PIP is often the last breakpoint before they have to do the deed. And to be honest, even managers that want to make the PIP work often don't really know how to. So, yes, it's hard for both sides, but it's not hopeless.
If you decide management is being sincere about their desire to keep you, here's my advice:
- Stop whatever it is you think you need to do to do your job, listen to what they're asking of you, change your behavior, and ask for feedback when you think you've done well. A PIP is a sign that implicit expectations and communication have failed, so you need to fall back on being unnaturally explicit.
- Prepare for a rift in your personal relationship with your manager that is going to take some time to repair. It's likely a very awkward situation for both of you, and you are going to feel attacked. No easy way around that. Even if you succeed at getting out of the doghouse, the rift will persist until you start to rebuild the 2-way trust.
It's a bad spot to be in, and it's only going to work out if both parties believe it can work and are truly committed to doing some hard reflection and behavioral change.
About 15 years ago I was put on one, and it wound up working out. I've known a couple of other people who have beat the PIP as well. In the vast majority of cases though you are right. As time has gone on I've realized that the chances are so low it's not worth someone trying to beat it.
Years ago I was put on a PIP. A year later at the same company I was promoted. The things I learned about managing my time while working towards the PIP goals still serve me well today.
I know others who have had similar experiences.
Whether or not it will turn around depends both on management's sincerity in providing the PIP and the employee's willingness to accept that he or she actually needs to change something.
When an employee isn't working out, it's almost always because the role is a bad fit and not because they have deficiencies as an engineer or as a person.
That's why performance improvement programs are so degrading and insulting. The person doesn't need to change, they need to be in a role that's better suited to their abilities, temperament, or whatever is causing the mismatch. Often that role is in a different company and if so then great because everyone is better off and that's a good thing.
I honestly think your employers have been super generous already, one ought to know what is expected of him/her and realise they shouldn't leave themselves open to criticism by abusing the trust of the employer, always be in a positive balance, put in more than you take out and make sure it gets visibility.
I wouldn't keep someone who is not performing for whatever reason, because by the time I lose trust in that person, in my mind he's pretty much out of the door. Because this is business , it's not a charity , one is responsible for their own life.
As for those who say ' company culture and fairness ' I say your competitors are already eating your lunch
At this point in my career I've realized that if you're told your performance "needs improvement" and someone isn't assigned to mentor you and help you perform better then you should start looking for a new job.
Not apprenticing you is like saying "you suck, fix yourself". No. That's not the culture you want to be a part of.
I've been that guy. There have been times someone helped me and I grew and it was awesome. There have also been times I wasn't helped and there was a ton of unnecessary thrashing. It's just bad leadership. My guess is the work environment is maybe a little toxic in other ways too.
When I was 20, I was a lead engineer on a project with an upcoming deadline. There was a disagreement on how to implement something. As the lead engineer on the project, it was my job to break these "ties" so to speak, especially in the wake of a deadline.
I thought about and made my decision. When the next meeting about this disagreement occurred, I informed them of my decision. I expressed my frustrations in the decision in solidarity with my team (there was no perfect solution), but said we don't have any more time to budget for this issue.
I was calm, but assertive. I also express myself whilst talking by using my hands. Apparently, the older engineer was upset and informed my manager about my "tone". My manager was in the meeting and disagreed that my tone was bad and said it was up to me if I wanted to apologize.
So I did. Even though I felt I was perfectly fine, I apologized. The reason why I did was for team cohesion. If it means that I can work well with that engineer again and not have them hold something over me, I'll suck up my pride and apologize for something that I feel I didn't do.
I find that PIPs tend to compensate for bad management in general. By that I mean I know where everyone is on their projects and weekly checkups are a norm, if not more than once. I know a few people who have been on PIP at work, I have don't know how many don't complete it but it does tend to correct their manager as well since HR follows through with insuring that the program is followed. It is a program, HR has a check list of items that must be met each week by both manager and employee. This tends to remove some of the stress on the employee as they do see both sides have to play ball.
that being said there have been a few put on PIP I think would be better separated. I guess from this standpoint it does serve to protect company interest.
I do know that working remote introduces all new problems, the hardest I had to learn was to not let myself be distracted and I actually ended up with a personal check list that became natural after a time. I now understand how to make sure those who get more than one WFH effectively use this privileged and keep it.
What we're all missing is how these things were presented - were the managers being unreasonable dicks in the way they talked about
"Mismatched expectations" about availability aside, what does the author expect when they're supposedly letting their team down?
I've had a number of conversations with managers were they've told me I'm letting them down and I'm always incredibly grateful for them. Sure, they're sometimes hard to hear, but I would much rather to receive feedback early so I can act on it and be better at what I do.
Also not to mention how incredibly valuable I find regular peer-review cycles (last 2 companies I've been to do these every 6 months). They've always found it super helpful to be told what I should continue doing well and what I need to improve on. Does everyone want to be the best at what they do?
That's not what happened though. Obviously we only see one side of it, but this reads like they suddenly accuse him of being bad, and instead of letting him self-correct, humiliate him by letting juniors micro-manage him. And gang up on him, 2 against one.
I'm not sure what this post is complaining about. Whatever is advocated at the end seems to be exactly what the managers at this company did.
How can the author say that they don't see the point in these plans what it appears that they were able to correct their behavior and stay at the company until it went under?
"By the end, they were quite happy with my work." Looks like the author is building this whole drama out of nothing.
One thing I wish that I had been prepared for out of university is that there is just a lot less feedback on how good of a job you're doing. Nobody grades your work and there is a skill to getting specific feedback on your performance.
Asking "how am I doing?" at a weekly or fortnightly 1-on-1 isn't going to get you anything useful. You need to ask someone you're working with directly and frame a question in terms of situation-action-?impact?. So "When you submitted that PR and I pointed out two cases that I thought could use additional tests, was that useful?"
It's important to know what parameters they use to determine who or what needs improvement. There have been times when a manager told me there was a problem and it turned out he had inaccurate information. The manager was looking at the wrong version, branch or had 3rd hand information. Managers have claimed to be unaware of what I was working on even with daily standups, task tracking and working a few desks away. Some managers are terrible.
[+] [-] humanrebar|8 years ago|reply
In the story linked, it seems like the author was prioritizing family or health over work at times (me: Good! We need more of that!). The employer can't just fire you for that as it looks a lot like wrongful termination. So they need to build up a paper trail.
[+] [-] tigershark|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] csydas|8 years ago|reply
I'd really hate to see how the author of the piece would have reacted to the Russian Managers at the company I'm with at the moment, as the managers certainly don't sugar coat when they're unhappy; it's not abusive, it's just very to the point. Having been a manager when I still worked in the US, it was incredibly difficult to correct inappropriate behavior because virtually every time you did, you did it wrong to whoever you were correcting. Try to be gentle? You were unclear. Try to be polite but to the point? You were curt. This sort of dance suggests to me that we just don't handle criticism well professionally in the US. I'm sure this is just observer bias, but I see a tendency to avoid confrontation at any cost, with too many places hoping it just "works out".
I do think it's from both sides of the employer/employee line. I have been at places that were more interested in just removing people who had some bad habits or needed to have a line drawn for some behavior while otherwise being model employees. I have also seen employees who were absolutely resistant to any criticism for a multitude of reasons, and ultimately the just continued with bad behavior until they were fired or left the company out of frustration with the constant meetings.
The author touches on some very true feelings in the article - no one likes being reprimanded. It's harsh, it's embarrassing, and it saps your ego for many reasons. But like others have commented, I do think that they acted unprofessionally - I imagine the story would have been much different had the author simply PM's a manager or boss "hey, family issue, going to be incognito today, I'll try to get an update by X" or just anything to keep them in the loop. The author also seemed unaware of the expectations of their bosses before hand, so maybe that's the fault of the company or the fault of the author. The age disparity I appreciate the uncomfortableness of, but it's going to be something that is more and more of a reality. (Ageism in tech is very real, so not discounting that, but the reality of the world is that there are going to be many young tech managers; staying out of management is great, but it needs to come with the understanding that eventually you'll be older than your bosses on average).
[+] [-] rev_null|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pasbesoin|8 years ago|reply
If you ever face one of those, and you have the option to walk away and start something else / somewhere else, go. Just like the B.S. in the name, "improvement plan", anything they say that sounds positive about the action is most likely just being disingenuous.
I'll take all this back a step further: If you are not happy with the job, or have a lot of friction with your management, walk away. The sooner you get out, the better -- for your peace of mind, career, and reputation.
Real improvement is sadly lacking from many workplaces, these days. The HR ideal, again contrary to what they say and the ideals they "paint" in their rhetoric, is the completely fungible employee.
If you haven't experienced real improvement in the workplace and in your own career before seeing an "improvement plan", you certainly aren't going to see it, after.
Well, I guess there are the occasional exceptions. Don't count on being one.
Trust your gut. Even when the resulting action you need to take is "hard". Neglecting your intuition -- real intuition; you usually know it when it hits -- ends up being much harder, in the long run.
[+] [-] dba7dba|8 years ago|reply
So if you ever get called in for performance improvement meeting by your manager, you should just start looking for a new job. Or at least start saving your money for unemployment.
And as for the original poster, I'm sorry that it happened but he should've been up front about his schedule so that his managers know what's going on.
[+] [-] scarface74|8 years ago|reply
There was no indication from the article that the company demanded unreasonable hours.
[+] [-] pweissbrod|8 years ago|reply
Edit - I've been a remote worker for over 10 years and will likely continue as long as I possibly can
[+] [-] codyb|8 years ago|reply
It makes your managers life easier and yours as well and allows you to give updates on your time instead of theirs.
This works remotely and in person. I work my face off a lot of times so it's valuable to turn the tables and not get caught in the middle of something with a question that can take me out of work flow.
At the end of the day, managing people is very hard. Transperency works very well for me.
[+] [-] darawk|8 years ago|reply
> From my biased perspective, it is difficult to see how these “personal improvement programs” for a disappointing employee can ever be a constructive force.
> By the end, they were quite happy with my work.
...sounds pretty constructive to me?
[+] [-] peteretep|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] whiddershins|8 years ago|reply
In this situation the managers could have gotten the same exact result without making the employee feel humiliated. Something along the lines of "stuff is falling through the cracks, let's do a meeting to touch base once a week so we can make sure everything is going well."
In those once a week meetings, the managers could provide positive and negative feedback in a balanced way.
However, once you've told an employee they are being "a prima Donna" and basically you need fixing, every meeting is another denigrating experience. That whole PIP idea makes sense for a paper trail justifying termination, but is otherwise terrible for morale.
Edit: in all relationships, professional or personal, try to keep your feedback specific and impersonal. "We need a reply to emails within 24 hours" is much better than "you have a communication problem." "Don't yell at John during meetings." Is way better than "you lose your temper too often."
Etc.
[+] [-] overgard|8 years ago|reply
I think people that fall into this mindset should realize that most of the kumbaya things companies say are pleasantries. Employment is a business situation and its healthier to not get confused about that.
[+] [-] Consultant32452|8 years ago|reply
I'm not sure I really had a point here, because this isn't about a company's false kumbayas. However, even at a big megacorp people will sometimes take care of one another when the going gets rough.
[+] [-] ptero|8 years ago|reply
1. They quickly and clearly told the employee of the problem.
2. They proposed a course of action
3. Their proposal worked (at the end they were happy with his work).
It was not pleasant for sure (for both sides, I bet), but would it be worse to say nothing and terminate him for non performance in a couple of extra months. My 2c.
[+] [-] BeetleB|8 years ago|reply
Those aren't the only choices, though. I think the point of contention (which isn't clear in the article), is whether they had any conversations about it before initiating a formal process. If not, I completely agree with the author even if the author was irresponsible with his work ethic.
Think of the asymmetry. If I'm dissatisfied with my manager, can I start a formal process against him? Generally not. My only option is to have a conversation (be it with him or with his superiors).
Conversations should happen clearly before a PIP.
[+] [-] mcguire|8 years ago|reply
As a general rule, if you wish to keep the employee, you should start with an informal warning that their behavior is unsatisfactory rather than a formal procedure.
[+] [-] ggambetta|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bitshepherd|8 years ago|reply
Getting fired is definitely not the end of the world. In fact, I'd say it's more a measure of the employer/employee compatibility. The hardest part of the interview is determining "do I want to count on this guy/gal/team/company every day?" and sometimes it takes getting shown the door to realize that the answer was "no" all along. From my perspective, if you've never been fired, you've never tested the boundaries of your employability.
[+] [-] hiddenkrypt|8 years ago|reply
I've been through what the author is describing, but in an on-site office position. It's horrid. They're exactly right on how these processes poison all other interactions. My boss would call me in to ask if I was going to the company picnic, but the history meant that every "Hey, can you see me in my office real quick?" was a gut-wrenching terror moment, certain that I was getting fired or told off again, or something.
[+] [-] qaq|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] maxxxxx|8 years ago|reply
When managing remote workers I hate it when somebody disappears and I don't know what's going on.
Remote work requires a high level of trust and responsibility from both sides so act accordingly.
[+] [-] overgard|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andreasgonewild|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] curtis|8 years ago|reply
> My takeaway from pondering this today is pretty straightforward:
> Talk to your people. Don’t wait. Do it now, and never stop. If they are meeting expectations, thank them regularly. If they aren’t meeting your needs or the needs of others in the company, tell them now. Don’t wait until you find yourself identifying “patterns”.
and then a little later:
> If you can identify an incompatibility like this early enough, it doesn’t even have to be rancorous. Incompatibility happens. Nobody needs to feel like a failure over it.
When the author is relating his own experience, he's not saying there was no problem to be addressed. What he's saying is he thinks that situation (and many others like it in our industry) can be handled better, and he wraps up the post by taking about what some of those ways might be.
[+] [-] hosh|8 years ago|reply
The book I am drawing this from claims that handling it is a skill that is teachable and learnable. I have been trying to apply what little I have learned so far and it had been working way better than what I have been using.
[+] [-] empath75|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] acjohnson55|8 years ago|reply
If it gets to the point of a PIP, you're in very hot water at most places. But that does not necessarily mean you are going out the door.
If you care about keeping your job, step one is to ascertain whether your management is truly willing to invest in working it out, or simply going through the motions. It's time to level with them and have some very probing conversations on what's going on to get all the cards on the table.
Most managers do not want to fire their reports, if they can help it. But a PIP is often the last breakpoint before they have to do the deed. And to be honest, even managers that want to make the PIP work often don't really know how to. So, yes, it's hard for both sides, but it's not hopeless.
If you decide management is being sincere about their desire to keep you, here's my advice:
- Stop whatever it is you think you need to do to do your job, listen to what they're asking of you, change your behavior, and ask for feedback when you think you've done well. A PIP is a sign that implicit expectations and communication have failed, so you need to fall back on being unnaturally explicit.
- Prepare for a rift in your personal relationship with your manager that is going to take some time to repair. It's likely a very awkward situation for both of you, and you are going to feel attacked. No easy way around that. Even if you succeed at getting out of the doghouse, the rift will persist until you start to rebuild the 2-way trust.
It's a bad spot to be in, and it's only going to work out if both parties believe it can work and are truly committed to doing some hard reflection and behavioral change.
[+] [-] jghn|8 years ago|reply
About 15 years ago I was put on one, and it wound up working out. I've known a couple of other people who have beat the PIP as well. In the vast majority of cases though you are right. As time has gone on I've realized that the chances are so low it's not worth someone trying to beat it.
[+] [-] GrinningFool|8 years ago|reply
I know others who have had similar experiences.
Whether or not it will turn around depends both on management's sincerity in providing the PIP and the employee's willingness to accept that he or she actually needs to change something.
[+] [-] crusso|8 years ago|reply
Note that you used the passive voice, as though the circumstances are completely out of the employee's control.
[+] [-] paulsutter|8 years ago|reply
That's why performance improvement programs are so degrading and insulting. The person doesn't need to change, they need to be in a role that's better suited to their abilities, temperament, or whatever is causing the mismatch. Often that role is in a different company and if so then great because everyone is better off and that's a good thing.
[+] [-] throwme_1980|8 years ago|reply
I wouldn't keep someone who is not performing for whatever reason, because by the time I lose trust in that person, in my mind he's pretty much out of the door. Because this is business , it's not a charity , one is responsible for their own life.
As for those who say ' company culture and fairness ' I say your competitors are already eating your lunch
[+] [-] mattmanser|8 years ago|reply
If an employee veers off course and you wait until you're ready to terminate them before you say anything, you're a bad manager.
And it's not always them, it's sometimes you. Have you never thrived under one manager, been reshuffled and then suffered under another?
[+] [-] ryanmarsh|8 years ago|reply
Not apprenticing you is like saying "you suck, fix yourself". No. That's not the culture you want to be a part of.
I've been that guy. There have been times someone helped me and I grew and it was awesome. There have also been times I wasn't helped and there was a ton of unnecessary thrashing. It's just bad leadership. My guess is the work environment is maybe a little toxic in other ways too.
[+] [-] tuxxy|8 years ago|reply
I was calm, but assertive. I also express myself whilst talking by using my hands. Apparently, the older engineer was upset and informed my manager about my "tone". My manager was in the meeting and disagreed that my tone was bad and said it was up to me if I wanted to apologize.
So I did. Even though I felt I was perfectly fine, I apologized. The reason why I did was for team cohesion. If it means that I can work well with that engineer again and not have them hold something over me, I'll suck up my pride and apologize for something that I feel I didn't do.
[+] [-] blowski|8 years ago|reply
You need to use them for positive feedback as well as negative, and general chats about progress and ideas.
[+] [-] Shivetya|8 years ago|reply
that being said there have been a few put on PIP I think would be better separated. I guess from this standpoint it does serve to protect company interest.
I do know that working remote introduces all new problems, the hardest I had to learn was to not let myself be distracted and I actually ended up with a personal check list that became natural after a time. I now understand how to make sure those who get more than one WFH effectively use this privileged and keep it.
[+] [-] jmull|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] madeofpalk|8 years ago|reply
What we're all missing is how these things were presented - were the managers being unreasonable dicks in the way they talked about
"Mismatched expectations" about availability aside, what does the author expect when they're supposedly letting their team down?
I've had a number of conversations with managers were they've told me I'm letting them down and I'm always incredibly grateful for them. Sure, they're sometimes hard to hear, but I would much rather to receive feedback early so I can act on it and be better at what I do.
Also not to mention how incredibly valuable I find regular peer-review cycles (last 2 companies I've been to do these every 6 months). They've always found it super helpful to be told what I should continue doing well and what I need to improve on. Does everyone want to be the best at what they do?
[+] [-] mattmanser|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dudul|8 years ago|reply
How can the author say that they don't see the point in these plans what it appears that they were able to correct their behavior and stay at the company until it went under?
"By the end, they were quite happy with my work." Looks like the author is building this whole drama out of nothing.
[+] [-] unfocused828|8 years ago|reply
One thing I wish that I had been prepared for out of university is that there is just a lot less feedback on how good of a job you're doing. Nobody grades your work and there is a skill to getting specific feedback on your performance.
Asking "how am I doing?" at a weekly or fortnightly 1-on-1 isn't going to get you anything useful. You need to ask someone you're working with directly and frame a question in terms of situation-action-?impact?. So "When you submitted that PR and I pointed out two cases that I thought could use additional tests, was that useful?"
[+] [-] tiredwired|8 years ago|reply