Help me draft a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) for someone on my team. I want it specific, fair, and clearly designed for them to succeed — not a paperwork exit.
ROLE + LEVEL: {title}
TENURE: {how_long}
WHAT'S NOT WORKING in observable terms (not 'attitude' — specific behaviors / outcomes): {paste}
WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY TRIED: {feedback_conversations / coaching / change_in_assignment}
WHAT YOU'D NEED to see at the end of the PIP to remove it: {observable_goals}
WHAT YOU'D NEED to see for them to be promoted later (separate from 'no longer on PIP'): {context}
DURATION: {30 / 60 / 90 days}
HR INVOLVEMENT: {already_looped / not_yet}
WHAT YOU DON'T WANT: {to_exit_them / to_seem_punitive / to_pretend_it's_OK}
DRAFT:
1. **The opening conversation script** (5 sentences) — how I deliver the PIP in person.
2. **The PIP document itself** — sections: current state, expectations, specific measurable goals, support I'll provide, timeline, what happens at end.
3. **The goals** — 3-4 specific, observable, with metrics and deadlines.
4. **The support plan** — what I'll do (1:1 cadence, intros, training, etc.).
5. **A weekly check-in agenda** for the duration.
6. **The 'what if it goes well' path** — what 'PIP successfully closed' looks like, in writing.
7. **The 'what if it doesn't' path** — what next steps look like, with HR.
8. **A gut-check** — am I being fair? Have I given them what they needed to succeed before this?
Tone: warm, direct, no euphemisms.0 copies·0 saves·1 views
238 words·1,469 chars
Sample output
Role: Mid-level engineer · Tenure: 14 months · Not working: consistently misses sprint commitments (3 sprints in a row), code review comments stay open >1 week, hasn't initiated any technical proposal in 6 months despite being mid-level. Tried: 3 conversations over 4 months, paired them with senior eng for 4 weeks. To remove PIP: hit 90%+ of sprint commitments for 6 consecutive weeks; close code review feedback within 2 business days; write one technical proposal. Duration: 60 days. HR: looped in.
1. Opening conversation (5 sentences):
'I want to be straight with you about where things stand, and I want this to be a real conversation, not a checkbox. Over the last four months I've raised concerns about three specific things — sprint commitments, code review responsiveness, and not seeing initiation on technical proposals. I haven't seen the change I needed to see, so we're starting a formal Performance Improvement Plan today. I want to be clear: the goal of this is for you to succeed and come off the plan. I'm going to give you everything I've got — and I need to see specific changes from you.'
Pause. Let them respond. Don't fill the silence.
2. The PIP document:
Performance Improvement Plan — [Employee Name] Issue date: [date] · Review date: [date + 60 days]
Current state: Over the past 4 months, three specific patterns have been raised in our 1:1s on [dates]:
Parameters
Text generation parameters
FAQ
Always loop HR before the conversation, not after. PIPs done without HR alignment frequently get challenged later. HR isn't your enemy in this — they're your protection AND the employee's. The prompt targets Claude Sonnet and lives in the Personal & Career category on mycopyprompt.
This prompt is written for Claude Sonnet. It's a text/chat prompt — paste it into Claude Sonnet (or compatible LLMs like Claude or GPT-4) to get the expected output.
1. Click the Copy button on this page to copy the full prompt. 2. Open Claude Sonnet. 3. Paste the prompt into a new conversation. 4. Replace any {placeholders} with your specifics, then send. Most prompts produce the right output on the first try; complex ones may need 1-2 iterations.
Yes — every prompt on mycopyprompt is free forever. No paywall, no signup wall for browsing or copying. You can use it for personal or commercial work, just don't redistribute the entire mycopyprompt library.
Absolutely — most prompts are templates. Look for {placeholders} (curly braces) and swap them with your own values. You can also reword sections, add constraints, or chain it with other prompts.
See the "Sample output" panel above — that's a real example of what Claude Sonnet returns when this prompt runs. Your output will vary in wording but should follow the same structure and depth.
Similar prompts
Matched against every prompt in the catalog by title.
Expectations going forward (60 days):
Support I'll provide:
Timeline:
Outcomes:
3. The goals (extracted into a tracking table):
| Goal | Measurement | Target | Deadline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sprint delivery | % committed points delivered | ≥ 90% for 6 weeks | Week 6 |
| PR review response | Avg business days to close | ≤ 2 | Weekly |
| Technical proposal #1 | RFC published + reviewed | 1 | Day 30 |
| Technical proposal #2 | Idea brief + scope | 1 | Day 60 |
| Communication on blockers | Raised before sprint end | 100% | Ongoing |
4. Support plan (what I owe them):
5. Weekly check-in agenda (30 min):
Documented in writing at the end of each session, sent within 24 hours.
6. What 'PIP successfully closed' looks like:
On day 60, in a 1:1, I say to them: 'I've reviewed the goals. You hit 90%+ sprint delivery for 6 consecutive weeks, you've closed all PR feedback within the 2-day window for the last 5 weeks, and the dunning RFC you wrote is what's now driving our Q3 work. The PIP is closed. We're done with the formal process. I want to acknowledge — what you did the last 60 days was hard, and you did it. Let's talk about what's next.'
Written confirmation sent within 24 hours.
7. What 'not met' looks like:
At day 30, if early signals are negative (still under 70% sprint delivery, PR cycles still 7+ days, no RFC started), HR and I have a conversation about whether to extend, restructure, or move to separation. The employee is not blindsided — they know by week 4 whether they're trending toward success.
If at day 60 the goals are not met:
8. Gut-check questions for ME: