In a good relationship, neutral acts are seen as neutral. In a struggling relationship, neutral acts are interpreted as negative. They don't exactly come out and say it, but to an extent your problems with another person are all in your head, and there are things they can do about it but it's a lot of work, because any time you're not actively being awesome you might be getting construed as a shithead.
Just focus on developing your own set of qualities that you want from people. If people meet those qualities then great but if they don't then just move on. All you can do with people is sit down and shut up, and let them do what-ever they want to do, and then you get to decide if you want to participate in it or not.
But I don’t know how you construe performance reviews as anything other than external validation/invalidation.
My bank account cares if I give a shit what my boss thinks about my work.
I am happy to accept that the majority of cases where you’ve gotten a formal PIP that HR is involved with will end with the employee’s termination. I don’t have industry data on this but it would match both my actual experience and the experience of my peers as has been relayed to me over the years. But someone in that situation should be open to the possibility that they can truly succeed if the dominoes fall correctly. There are many signals along the way that will also inform you what your manager in turn believes and even HR sometimes gives themselves away despite the legal risks they are trained to avoid.
Finally, there’s a spectrum of how people use the term PIP. At the far end is what you’ve described, a written document that exists to provide evidence in the event of litigation and is largely HR driven. However a manager can absolutely use the same structure and terminology and never involve HR and hopefully we both agree those are more likely to result in win-win outcomes. In fact the trend in this space is towards a continuous performance management environment where expectations are formally defined and updated and checked in on at least quarterly if not more frequently.
On that note, the article "The Set-Up-To-Fail Syndrome" by the Harvard Business Review[1] covers similar ground and was discussed on HN[2].
It was a few days before my first day at elementary school. He told me that teachers very quickly put people into little boxes. “The good students” vs the “troublemakers”. If you end up in the first basically no matter what you do they will see your output in a more positive light. They will forgive your mistakes as “momentary lapses”. If you are in the second category no matter what you do they will see your work in a negative light. If you do well that will be because you got lucky, or because you cheated. Or so they will think. And how they feel about you will affect your grades, your everyday, and your opportunities. And this is completely and utterly unfair, but this is how it is. You can’t change it, but you can learn to use it to your advantage.
So i put in some extra effort to the first few days of elementary school and coasting on that ever since. ;)
Later as i got older i learned that managers work the same way. Obviously it doesn’t mean that one can completely neglect the actual work, but one’s manager’s (and manager’s manager’s) perception is paramount.
My favorite clip that encapsulates this thread is from Suits[0]. Mike hates it, but first impressions matter.
If the manager likes you, they will see the things you do in a positive light.
If the manager doesn't like you, they will see the things you do in a negative light.
So obviously, the solution is to optimize for always keeping the manager happy... except that that is a little dehumanizing.
It's basically like any relationship coupled with confirmation bias. Basically, if you get onto the shit-list of your partner or friend or manager, it is difficult to get off it. People seem to automatically polarize their opinions about other people (probably due to confirmation bias) and then just apply post-hoc justification.
If nothing else, I have gotten very good at noticing the change of tone when the point-of-no-return is reached (perhaps because I feel like I am terrible at avoiding it). You'll feel some queasiness/nausea after a conversation that went from friendly to critical based on something you perhaps flubbed... you'll start blaming yourself (even though you probably didn't actually have a ton of control over the outcome). Something will feel "off." Things won't feel as harmonious anymore. Details will be off- you didn't get invited to an important meeting that you are pretty sure you would have been invited to months prior. A new hire will get approved, but without anyone checking in with you first. You will feel like you are on the defensive and are working "defensively"- you're struggling to complete work or put presentations together or whatever- you're not sleeping well- those are all the feel of the ring ropes against your back, because you're actually on them, and you're in denial. It's hard not to take personally; has anyone actually ever been put on a PIP that made it back to "stellar performer", or are PIPs purely just lip-service to a CYA for the inevitable layoff?