Why Performance Improvement Plans Need a Rebrand
Let’s be honest: “Performance Improvement Plan” has become a dreaded phrase in many organizations. For employees, hearing “You’re going on a PIP” can feel like a death knell—the new “Final Written Warning.” For managers, it can feel like an administrative hurdle imposed by HR to ensure legal coverage before firing someone.
This grim reputation isn’t because PIPs are inherently flawed. It’s the way they’ve been used. Performance Improvement Plans often fail because they don’t address underlying issues such as unclear expectations or insufficient support. As noted in Action Strategies’ article on why PIPs don’t improve performance, the lack of root cause analysis can prevent these plans from delivering meaningful results. While many managers make many good-faith efforts with clarity and structure to support their employees in making necessary changes, too often PIPs are a last-ditch effort, rolled out only after multiple warnings, frustration, and dwindling hope for improvement. By this point, everyone involved—employee, manager, and HR—is already exhausted, despite the manager’s prior efforts to address concerns through conversations and informal feedback. No wonder PIPs don’t yield transformative results.
But it doesn’t have to be this way. Some organizations use PIPs properly, but many don’t because of the anxiety managers feel about holding people accountable. Rather than digging in to properly diagnose root causes and support employees in making difficult changes, some organizations have developed a culture of avoidance, and in those places the PIP has become a box-checking activity on the path to termination.
The Problem with “Last Resort” Thinking
The core issue with last-resort PIPs is that they come too late in the game, too long after initial efforts like 1:1 meetings and feedback sessions haven’t produced the desired improvements. When PIPs are used only after a performance problem has spiraled, they’re perceived as punishment rather than opportunity. Employees often become defensive, demoralized, or disengaged, assuming that no real path to success exists.
This “check-the-box” mindset erodes trust and destroys any remaining motivation. Worse, it signals to other team members that performance issues are handled with bureaucracy and fear, not support or fairness.
A New Approach: Early Intervention and Clear Expectations
Imagine if we used PIPs (or a plan with a new, less intimidating name) the way they were intended: as tools for structured support, introduced sooner after informal conversations to assess temporary factors that may have caused a dip in performance have failed. PIPs are often perceived as punitive measures that demoralize employees and fail to inspire improvement. As noted in Betterworks’ article on rethinking performance improvement plans, shifting to a developmental approach can yield better results by encouraging growth and engagement. Structured coaching and support can foster a culture of growth and prevent performance issues from escalating.
A Psico-Smart article on ‘Alternatives to Termination,’ states that early intervention through coaching plays a vital role in addressing performance challenges before they worsen. By using a PIP at the first signs of ongoing struggle after informal conversations and short-term monitoring, managers can prevent small issues from becoming crises. As the Action Strategies article says, early conversations to identify root causes can make PIPs more effective by fostering transparency and trust.
A well-designed plan includes:
- Clear milestones for improvement.
- Specific target dates for checking progress.
- Ongoing feedback and encouragement to keep motivation high.
- Engaged management that’s invested in providing reasonable support for helping the employee develop.
Echoing Zensai’s recommendation to adopt a strengths-based approach in performance management, I advocate for early intervention and clear expectations in PIPs to support employees proactively, preventing minor issues from escalating. When implemented early, such an approach demonstrates a manager’s commitment to their employee’s success. The focus shifts from “getting rid of low performers” to “building capacity and fostering growth.” This shift also fosters greater trust within the team, as employees see their peers being treated with dignity and fairness.
This approach helps reduce turnover, which can be costly and destabilizing for organizations. Retaining employees by investing in their growth preserves institutional knowledge, reduces the time and expense of hiring and training replacements, and boosts team morale. Employees are more likely to stay engaged and loyal when they know their leaders are committed to their success.
The Case for Rebranding the PIP
Given its reputation in some companies, the term “Performance Improvement Plan” might be beyond redemption. For many employees, hearing “PIP” triggers anxiety instead of hope. “As highlighted in Zensai’s article on performance management rebranding, addressing the negative perceptions of performance evaluations is crucial. Building on this idea, I propose rebranding PIPs to focus on growth and development, fostering a more positive and constructive approach. That’s why organizations might consider introducing a new name that emphasizes growth and opportunity—something like a “Success Strategy,” “Performance Growth Plan,” or “Development Roadmap.”
This isn’t just about semantics. As noted in Lattice’s article on Performance Improvement Plans, words shape perceptions. A rebrand signals a cultural shift: performance challenges need not be something to fear but offer a chance to grow with support.
Empathy and Accountability: The Winning Combination
A key ingredient in making performance plans effective is empathy, which becomes most impactful when paired with consistent accountability. PIPs should be used to engage employees by demonstrating belief in their potential, fostering trust and commitment. As Betterworks emphasizes, this developmental approach is far more effective than treating PIPs as a punitive last step. The importance of balancing empathy with structured accountability has been noted by others in the field, including Psico-Smart, who emphasize coaching as a way to build resilience and drive growth. As Lattice highlights, showing belief in an employee’s potential can foster engagement and commitment during the improvement process. Together, these elements drive lasting improvement by ensuring both support and clear expectations are in place. Empathetic leaders understand that life happens. Health issues, family challenges, or even just the need for better training can affect performance.
But empathy doesn’t mean lowering standards. It means collaborating with employees to ensure they understand expectations, have the resources to succeed, and receive regular encouragement as they work toward their goals.
Here’s what this looks like in practice:
- Start with clarity: Define exactly what success looks like. Ambiguity breeds confusion and frustration.
- Provide structured support: Break down goals into manageable steps and provide resources, mentorship, or training as needed.
- Offer frequent feedback: Celebrate small wins and address setbacks early, before they compound.
- Balance compassion with accountability: Employees must own their growth journey. A supportive environment empowers them to meet high standards, not evade them.
Real Success Stories
Organizations that adopt this approach can see remarkable turnarounds. Underperforming employees often improve to meet or exceed expectations. Teams become stronger as trust and communication improve. And managers themselves gain confidence in handling performance challenges without sacrificing empathy or fairness.
For example, one of my clients was compelled by senior leadership to place an underperforming employee on a PIP in order to manage the employee out. Rather than viewing it as a one-way ticket, however, my client chose to use the PIP as an opportunity to support and potentially save the employee’s role. The plan she developed included clear, measurable goals and regular audits, but she demonstrated her commitment to success by maintaining close involvement. She arranged for and monitored feedback to ensure fairness, and consistently provided encouragement. Over time, the employee responded positively, improving both productivity and quality. This example underscores how a manager’s dedication to using a PIP as a true developmental tool can lead to successful outcomes even when there’s pressure to manage the person out.
This isn’t a silver bullet or an overly optimistic perspective. Not all employees will respond positively to the support and structure provided. Their active participation is a critical ingredient. But a manager who does the work to provide such a developmental roadmap can know they did their part. Beyond that, you have to accept the decisions the employee makes.
A Call to Action for Leaders
The time to reclaim the purpose of performance improvement is now. Leaders must move away from using PIPs as “check-the-box” formalities and start seeing them as strategic tools for growth. By introducing these plans early, focusing on collaboration, and perhaps giving them a new name, organizations can transform how they handle performance management.
When done right, performance improvement isn’t a dreaded process. It’s a moment of possibility—a chance to celebrate transformation and growth.
