Capability/Performance Improvement

Hmm...It does sound like he's had some performance issues mentioned to him or raised somewhat informally over a few years and then all of a sudden been hit with a PIP which does normally suggest that if you don't improve to an acceptable standard then you'll be dismissed. 

He does also seem to have a better grasp on the process than the manager that's running it which is unfortunate. 

A PIP should be focussed on areas of performance where the employee is falling short of the expectations for their role, he's absolutely right that they shouldn't include 'stretch' goals. What does his job description say? The PIP should align with that. 

Regarding the areas that have not been raised before, but are apparently major and detrimental to the business' success - why on earth have they not been raised before now? If they're that major? If they're impacting the business' success then I'm afraid in my opinion that's the manager's failure for never mentioning them before! 

Regarding the legality of the process - a PIP has no legal standing, in and of itself, but if you're intending to use it as part of a capability dismissal process then, yes it does sound like you've skipped quite a few steps. What's the goal of the PIP if he doesn't improve? If he fails to meet the expectations outlined in it, what are you going to do? 

Verbal warnings were 'abolished' c 20 years ago.

Gone but by no means forgotten.

As mentioned by Helen, why on earth have they not been raised before now? If they're that major? If they're impacting the business' success then I'm afraid in my opinion that's the manager's failure for never mentioning them before! 

This will change a lot and will be detrimental to the organization, Also the verbal warning needs to be documented as verbal to avoid discrepancies and informal communications.

For proper understanding and avoiding this challenge the organization need to review all staff goals and performance matters.

Agree on the verbal warning being abolished and "gone not forgotten". No verbal warning has been given to the employee so far - its the employee who is requesting that instead of a PIP, They are "told what to do -> given verbal warning -> final written warning" 

Some issues have been raised prior to now but its also a mix of not all being mentioned as they critical concerns contribute to a major project that failed, and in addition the employee simply not doing their job and given that the difficulty in having more informal improvement expectations. 

The only concern here in terms of steps missed is that not all concerns have been documented or discussed only until this point. We have agreed to be reasonable in our approach with the PIPs objectives set. 

To be very honest, the employee is valued, it is just a shame with the recent events and the policy states that after informal stage, with no improvement we move onto a first written warning, then final warning, dismissal is last resort. 

I think its up to you to decide what to do - and what to call it.   If he doesn't want to be put on a PIP, then simply tell him:-

a)  What he did wrong

b) what he needs to do next time/s  - a target  (smart - specific, measurable, achieveable and to a time scale.

c) discuss what he might need in terms of meeting that target - training,coaching, reading etc.,

d)  possible outcomes if he can't meet the standards you set. This can include possible disciplinary or capability procedure depending on what your policies state.

You can call the above whatever you want - its what good managers do, or should do whenever someone's performance declines or is simply not up to standard.

You've some great feedback already. I'm wondering if the concerns about the PIP are to do with it being seen or felt or experienced in the company as a route towards dismissal rather than as a means of formalising, agreeing, supporting and facilitating an improvement to meet the expectations of the role. If both parties are coming to this with an open mind, it will likely still be a shock to have a formal meeting to discuss performance but the manager needs to coach, support and put the right conditions in place and the other person needs to play their part to openly discuss their performance and what's need to help improve it. 

I don't see a PIP as the last resort, it certainly is something more formal when other conversations on performance, whether that's at objective setting, review or development planning are not getting the results required of the role. The manager of this person might need some coaching and support to sharpen up their feedback and coaching skills with this individual so they can help them turn things around and also know what to do if performance does not improve. 

I agree, I always cringe a bit when I see people insist that a PIP is clearly the start of exiting someone regardless of how we dress it up - and I wonder if I need to take off my rose-tinted glasses. But I much prefer to take the approach that we should all always be on "PIPs". A PIP is just a formal recording of targets, expectations and support. Yes, at each review you could move a step closer to getting a formal warning or exiting - but that is true every month, every day, for all of us. And it is far more likely to go in that direction if we don't formally document these targets and expectations in some way. A PIP and a PDP are essentially the same - just one is when you are slightly below par and one is when you are above par.

This individual needs to understand and feel that the PIP is just giving them clear expectations

Sadly there will be plenty of people (managers and people in HR) who will see PIPs as a means to an end and if they view these as done deals to manage exits then this is a signal to all of their team about how they will be treated and it will undermine trust, psychological safety and set the culture and tone going forward. If people see them as a means to change course, that exits aren't inevitable and that sometimes people need extra support to change and develop, then they can be a good tool.