PIPs aren't primarily meant to fire you
There’s a strong assumption in the industry (or at least on blind and a few other social networks) that being put on PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) means that you will be fired – and that the PIP is just to create a paperwork trail. This is not true.
I have personally witnessed and helped two Googlers overcome their PIP – both permanently addressed the issues behind their PIP.
PIPs are meant for two purposes:
- Give a strong signal that the employee is not meeting their position’s expectations. This is especially important as quite a few engineers need a very crisp signal that they aren’t doing well. They wouldn’t get the message if it was sugar coated in any way
- Create a standard and fair process to make sure everyone has a shot at improving before being fired for performance reasons. Firing can’t be fully decided by just one manager (same as for a promotion)
If PIP is genuinely a process to fire you with no chance for you to improve, then it’s not a PIP – it’s a firing plan. In that case you are in a toxic environment and you should probably leave regardless.
PIP shouldn’t come as a surprise too – before reaching this state, managers should have been given feedback that the engineer needed to improve on specific aspects. Being put on PIP is like being given a low performance rating, it shouldn’t be a surprise – it should just be a snapshot of your performance at a specific date.
What are your experiences/stories with PIP? I’m curious to hear if things in the industry are different than they were at Google during my tenure there – I heard harsh stories from Meta/Amazon but could never figure out how true they were.