A performance improvement plan process SOP makes underperformance conversations consistent, fair and defensible. It defines when a PIP is appropriate, how goals are set and measured, what support the employee receives, and how outcomes are decided — protecting both the employee's right to a genuine chance and the organisation's position if the outcome is separation.
Every SOP generated by WorkProcedures follows the structure that auditors, regulators, and experienced operators actually expect. For a human resources procedure like this one, that means:
A clear statement of why this performance improvement plan process procedure exists and what business / safety / compliance outcome it delivers.
Which people, equipment, locations, and conditions this SOP applies to — essential for human resources operations where scope creep creates risk.
Certifications, PPE, tools, forms, and approvals that must be in place before starting the procedure.
Clear, sequential instructions that are unambiguous enough for a new hire to follow on their first shift. No interpretive language.
Industry-specific callouts — for Human Resources, that typically includes relevant regulatory references (OSHA, ISO, FDA, or sector-specific).
Who last updated the SOP and when — critical for proving currency during audits.
Before any formal plan: has the expectation been clearly communicated, has informal coaching happened and been documented, and are there external factors (workload, tooling, health, team issues) that explain the gap? A PIP for a problem management created will fail review later.
The manager brings the evidence to HR before telling the employee anything. HR checks consistency (are similar cases handled the same way?), reviews the documentation, and flags legal considerations such as recent protected disclosures, leave, or accommodation requests.
Specific, dated examples against the written expectations of the role — deliverables missed, quality standards not met, behaviours observed. Adjectives are not evidence; examples are.
Two to four SMART goals directly tied to the gap, the support provided (training, check-ins, adjusted workload), the timeline — commonly 30, 60 or 90 days matched to how quickly the goals can realistically be demonstrated — and the possible outcomes stated plainly.
Manager and HR present the plan in person, walk through each goal and the support offered, and give the employee a genuine opportunity to respond and to add context. The employee signs to acknowledge receipt — signature is not agreement, and the SOP should say so.
Weekly or fortnightly, in the calendar from day one, with brief written notes after each: progress against each goal, support delivered, any obstacles raised. Skipped check-ins are the most common way employers undermine their own process.
A formal progress read at the halfway mark, shared in writing. If progress is on track, say so — a PIP that can only end badly was never a genuine plan.
At the end date: goals met (close the plan and confirm in writing), partial progress (document the rationale for any extension), or goals not met (move to the separation or redeployment process with HR). The full file — plan, check-in notes, reviews, outcome — is retained per the retention schedule.
If the decision is already made, a sham PIP creates more legal exposure than it removes — tribunals and juries read check-in notes. Run a genuine process or make the honest decision directly with HR and counsel.
'Improve communication' cannot be passed or failed, and unfalsifiable goals read as pretext. Every goal needs a measurable output and a date.
A plan that demands improvement without training, coaching or check-ins is a countdown, not a plan — and it looks that way to everyone who reviews it later.
One team's 90-day supported plan versus another team's 2-week ultimatum for the same issue is a discrimination claim waiting for a claimant. HR review before every PIP is the control.
Long enough to genuinely demonstrate the goals — 30 days for high-frequency work, 60–90 days where output cycles are longer. The timeline should match the goals, not a default template.
Usually it's a capability process, distinct from misconduct discipline. Keep the tracks separate: performance gaps go through improvement planning; conduct issues go through the disciplinary procedure.
The signature only acknowledges receipt. If the employee declines, note the refusal, give them the document, and proceed — the process is not blocked. Make sure the SOP and the plan itself state that signing is not agreement.
The SOP should name the options: a short documented extension where trajectory is positive, redeployment where the role fit is the issue, or progression to separation where core goals were missed. What matters is the rationale is written down at decision time.
Most free SOP templates online are generic Word docs — you fill in the blanks yourself, which means 2–3 hours of research, writing, and formatting per procedure. WorkProcedures' AI SOP generator gives you a finished first draft, grounded in real human resources procedures, in under two minutes.
Popular procedures in the human resources industry — generate any of these free on the WorkProcedures platform.