So if someone is too good for your team, you put them on pip. They are going to leave anyway, so putting them on pip does the least damage to your team.
The other pathological result is hiring dummies just to put them on pip, again protecting the core team from it.
This sounds like a lie people tell themselves after being PIP’d.
Engineers have an average tenure of 1.8 years. You can’t guarantee you’ll hold together anything. No manager PIPs someone for just being TOO good. It’s already difficult enough to find competent people.
Contrary to some other comments, the folks I’ve seen PIP’d did have performance issues. And I doubt they were hired to be fired. Teams are consistently understaffed and fighting for head count is a blood sport.
During review, PIP candidates come from all managers under a section of an org. There could be 3 from one team and 0 from another. The incentive is then to hire people who are actually good and defend your team’s performance.
Engineers lack visibility into cross team performance and this leads to thinking this system works differently.
Source?
The original source from Paysa seems to be down (the entire site looks down).
Edit: It's all employees, not just engineers, but I don't think engineers would differ too much.
The original point was tenure is short, and no manager can guarantee that their “core” team will remain together, for any number of reasons. So letting go a “too good” engineer to keep this team together makes little sense not that PIP isn’t happening.
Know the rules of the game you're playing deeply or you'll keep losing.
OTOH, I think I'd be insanely stressed about being judged unfairly for things outside my control (or even being made into a sacrificial lamb) in an environment like that. Even if they kept telling me everything was fine, I'd feel like I had the sword of Damocles hanging over my head all the time.
Eh, in my company, I've seen managers that will use tools to prevent people from leaving. Fortunately, they have tools other than PIP. But if they didn't, I'm sure they would wave the PIP wand.
One guy was senior and core to the team. When he wanted to move, his manager bluntly told him he needed him for another year so he would not let him leave.
One of the orgs in my company famously classifies all employees as "essential" (nothing to do with the pandemic). Because of that, any time someone wants to leave for another org, it has to be approved by the top staff of the org (this org has thousands of employees, BTW). Although they don't prevent everyone from leaving, they do often prevent people - to the point that during internal interviews some of them were dropped by the interviewing team as soon as they discovered the org they were currently with: "We've been burnt too many times going through the interview loop only to have your org block the transfer - we just won't hire from your org any more."
So yeah, I totally can believe someone would use PIP to keep a good performer in a team, if that's the only way they have.