5 minute read
ELIMINATE POOR PERFORMANCE AT WORK
Eliminate poor
PERFORMANCE
Hospitality employers can’t a ord to retain poor performers, however dismissal on these grounds is often di cult. So why not think about deploying a Performance Improvement Plan? Dr Gerry McMahon gives the lowdown on PIPs at work
As far back as 2005, the Irish Business and Employers’ decision to dismiss a long serving operations manager who failed his PIP. Confederation (IBEC) warned its members that the He concluded that the procedures used were fair and the rules of natural chances of being deemed to have fairly dismissed justice were followed. Likewise, in 2017 the employer’s decision to dismiss an employee on the grounds of poor performance a supervising pharmacist after he failed the PIP was upheld, as the adjudicator were slim; it’s a long drawn out process with little noted that the employer provided the complainant with ongoing mentoring guarantee of a successful outcome. Recent research and support throughout the PIP period and that it had even extended the at Technological University Dublin confirms plan’s duration on his request. She also noted that the employer’s procedures IBEC’s warning. From a representative sample of 400 “were clear and detailed and were available at all times to the complainant” dismissals contested before third parties in recent years, performance was and the pharmacist had been informed of his performance issues, what was relevant to the judgement in just over 5% of cases and even expected of him and the consequences of not achieving his PIP. then, not all of the judgements went in the employer’s At around the same time another adjudicator at the WRC favour. In an effort to address this issue, the practice of found an employer’s dismissal of an accountant to be deploying a Performance Improvement (or fair, where the process included the application of a Expectation) Plan (PIP) has now emerged as a PIP in a process that was deemed reasonable and means of addressing underperformance. in line with procedures. The AO recorded that the
According to the Society for Human Resource employer had used PIPs with other employees Management, a PIP “is a great way to give and had tried to use one with the accountant who struggling employees the opportunity to succeed didn’t cooperate, as he claimed that it was “rigged” while still holding them accountable for past for him to fail. performance”. IBEC also recently reported that PIPs “are an increasingly common tool utilised by REAL COMMITMENT employers to manage cases of poor work Dr Gerry Of course to succeed in a contested dismissal case, performance”. For example, the Irish civil service now McMahon it’s important for the employer to be able to show that applies PIPs to those “who have not improved following they also committed to the PIP process. Otherwise, it may interventions made through regular performance be held that they “produced no evidence ... to show that management processes” and is “built on principles of natural training was made available to the claimant to address his justice and closely reflects good HR practice in other sectors”. Under their shortcomings....”. A similar deficiency in such scenarios surfaced in the Irish PIP scheme, underperformance issues are initially handled informally but Wheelchair Association’s case which found that they should have “engaged if unresolved and performance has not improved, the employee can be more constructively” with the claimant around the implementation of the (fairly) dismissed. performance improvement process. However, where it can be shown that the employer implemented a PIP and THE LAW AND PIPS as held by the State’s workplace adjudication service, “behaved reasonably Significantly, the PIP process now frequently features in dismissal cases at all times and did its utmost to support the claimant ... affording him every coming before third parties. For example, last year an Adjudication Officer opportunity to adapt to the particular requirements of the respondent’s (AO) at the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) upheld the employer’s business”, the decision is likely to go in the employer’s favour. Google (Ireland)
Ltd has also relied heavily on its PIP (or Performance Expectation Plan) in a case where it successfully defended a discriminatory dismissal claim at the WRC.
PERFECT PIPS
However, research confirms that a significant obstacle to effective PIPs is that managers are often neither interested in nor capable and confident enough about the practice. This has significant implications for the organisation attempting to tackle underperformance. So to maximise the prospect of a successful PIP, the following guidelines should be applied:
STEP 1 – BEFORE THE PIP MEETING
1. Assemble and review all of the relevant evidence relating to the employee’s past performance 2. As part of the information gathering process the following questions should be asked: • Is the problem attributable to the employee’s performance and/or attitude? • At what point did the employer become aware of the problem? • What was done about it? • To what extent have the employee’s Specific, Measurable, Agreed,
Realistic and Time bound (SMART) objectives been achieved? • Did the employee fully understand what they were expected to achieve? • Did the employee get sufficient support from their manager and colleague(s)? • Has the employee the ability to bridge the gap and perform effectively in the role? • How have/are others in equivalent roles performing? • In the course of previous exchanges, has the manager been successful in obtaining agreement on the cause of the problem(s) and what will be done about it? What happened? • Is this a problem warranting external help (eg counselling)?
STEP 2 – DURING THE PIP MEETING
1. Encourage the employee to diagnose and prescribe in respect of the problem performance 2. Ensure that the employee understands the reason(s) for devising a PIP 3. Set and confirm the SMART (performance and development) objectives 4. Ensure that the employee understands the implications of continued underperformance vis-à-vis the organisation’s disciplinary/dismissal procedure 5. Confirm the required support actions\resources 6. Agree the improvement time-scale cum review schedule and diary it 7. Keep a (signed) record of the meeting and the agreed actions/ outcomes and furnish the employee with a copy.
PHASE 3 – AFTER THE PIP MEETING
1. Follow up and deliver on the promises made at the PIP meeting (i.e. support actions/resources, reviews) 2. As part of the review process, give specific feedback vis-à-vis the
SMART objectives 3. In the event that no progress has been made under the PIP, confirm and diagnose the persistent performance gaps and determine whether new or revised SMART objectives or an updated PIP is required. The consequences for the employee of continued underperformance should also be confirmed. It may also be decided to progress matters via the disciplinary procedure 4. In the face of persistent underperformance, convene a meeting under the organisation’s disciplinary procedure.
