PIPs are window dressing for judges and juries; they are not plans to jolt an employee back into long-term strong to superb contribution (‘it’s a marathon, not a sprint.”) I have over a third of a century at IBM and spent over a quarter century in IBM management. Despite what HR claims, almost no one passes a PIP. PIPs fail by design at IBM. Senior management and HR review every word of every plan. They wordsmith repeatedly until failure is the foregone conclusion of a seemingly reasonable plan.
The trap is fully set and personalized before the employee hears the news of the PIP. Management has already been penning an intricate paper trail of superficially valid but highly selective evidence for over a year at this point. This trail specifically includes a summary, but not the verbatim text, of the intermediate negative feedback the employee was given with verifiable timestamps. Argument to the jury: this paper trail shows that we warned this critter repeatedly months and months ago; he did not change; then, out of mercy, we gave one final chance in the form of a PIP. Much later when the PIP trap is sprung, it is almost impossible to contest this paper trail. One party has a fictionalized account in writing; the aggrieved has only his unverifiable recollections from a distance of months.
I know of two PIP survivors, and I have initiated or advised on far, far more PIPs than that. Within 3 years, senior management had found other ways to force the two survivors out. Life during a PIP is far from pleasant. And if one does survive, the powers on high strive to make the next stage of one’s IBM career even less pleasant.
PIPs are window dressing for judges and juries. They greatly reduce legal costs and court-ordered damages arising from disputed involuntary employee separations. This is a big cog in IBM’s financial engineering machine.