Inscrivez-vous ou connectez-vous pour rejoindre votre communauté professionnelle.
"Traditional corporate performance reviews are driven largely by fear of litigation. The theory is that if you want to get rid of someone, you need a paper trail documenting a history of poor achievement. At many companies, low performers are placed on “Performance Improvement Plans.” I think they’re fundamentally dishonest: They never accomplish what their name implies." -- in a general perspective, do you agree? If not, why?
You are right that they are usually just part of the firing process. If there is a genuine problem, and both the management and employee want to sort it out, then improvement is usually pretty rapid.
Although it is often the case that it's just to get rid of somebody (for example because they are better than the boss, who doesn't like it), it is also often the case that the employee is under-performing and doesn't care.
Sometimes there is good intent on both sides but the management fail to explain clearly enough what is required.
