pip-responder
GitHub辅助用户应对绩效改进计划(PIP)。提供客观评估、双轨策略（执行+求职）、证据归档系统及沟通模板，帮助用户理性决策并最大化职业利益。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills --skill pip-responder -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "pip-responder",
"description": "Respond to a performance improvement plan strategically — decode what the PIP really is, decide fight-vs-land-softly with clear eyes, build the evidence file, and run the parallel job search the situation demands. Use when asked I was just put on a PIP what do I do, help me respond to a performance improvement plan, is my PIP survivable, or write my PIP check-in updates. Produces the honest read of the PIP, the two-track plan (perform + search), the documentation system, and templates for check-ins and the written response."
}
PIP Responder Skill
A PIP is sometimes a genuine turnaround offer and often paperwork for a decision already made — and the response strategy is nearly identical either way: perform visibly against the letter of the plan, document everything, and run a job search in parallel starting now. The mistake is choosing between hope and search; survivors of PIPs did both, because the search costs nothing if the turnaround works and everything if skipped. This skill builds that two-track plan without pretending to know which ending this one has.
What This Skill Produces
- The honest read — signals this PIP is recoverable vs. scripted, stated as probabilities not verdicts
- The two-track plan — meeting the PIP's letter visibly, and the search timeline mapped against the PIP clock
- The documentation system — what to save, where (never only on employer systems), from day one
- The templates — the measured written acknowledgment, weekly check-in updates, and the achievements file
Required Inputs
Ask for these if not provided:
- The PIP document — goals, metrics, duration, review cadence, and whether the goals are things a human can actually do
- The backstory — surprise or long-signaled? relationship with manager? recent org context (new manager, layoffs-by-another-name season)?
- Their honest self-assessment — is the criticism partly fair? (changes the perform-track, not the search-track)
- Financial runway and constraints — visa status especially, which changes the timeline math entirely and needs an immigration-aware plan
Framework: The Two-Track Rules
- Read the metrics for winnability: measurable goals a person could hit in the window = possibly genuine; vague goals ("improve communication"), moving targets, or metrics needing others' cooperation = likely scripted. Either way, both tracks run.
- Respond in writing, temperature zero: acknowledge professionally, ask clarifying questions that pin vague goals to measurable definitions ("so we agree success on #2 looks like X by [date]?"), correct factual errors flatly without adjectives. Never sign anything that says "I agree with this assessment" without noting disagreement is allowed — and that a lawyer exists for exactly this review.
- Make the perform-track visible: hitting goals silently doesn't count. Weekly written updates against each PIP item, sent to the manager, saved externally — they're simultaneously your best shot at surviving and your evidence file.
- The search-track starts today, quietly: update materials this week; the PIP clock (30/60/90 days) is the search deadline. Interviews are easier to explain from employed-and-searching than from terminated.
- Know the endgame options: some PIPs come with (or can be negotiated into) an exit package as an alternative — leaving on agreed terms with references intact is a legitimate win. Severance-agreement review belongs to a lawyer.
Output Format
PIP Response Plan: [role, clock length]
The Honest Read
[Recoverable-vs-scripted signals present here · what the metrics' winnability says · stated as a read, not a verdict]
Track 1 — Perform (visibly)
[Each PIP goal → its pinned-down measurable definition → the weekly proof artifact]
Track 2 — Search (starting now)
[Week-by-week against the PIP clock · materials, outreach, interview pacing]
Documentation System
[What to save · external storage rule · the weekly update template, ready to send]
The Written Response
[Draft: professional acknowledgment · clarifying questions pinning vague goals · factual corrections, flat tone]
A PIP has legal dimensions — signatures, discrimination/retaliation angles, severance offers, visa timelines. This is strategy, not legal advice; an employment lawyer reviewing the documents is money well spent.
Quality Checks
- Both tracks present — never hope alone or panic alone
- Every vague PIP goal has a clarifying question pinning it to something measurable
- Documentation lives outside employer systems, starting day one
- The written response is temperature-zero — no grievance, no groveling
- The lawyer line appears, and visa holders are routed to immigration-aware advice
Anti-Patterns
- Do not treat the PIP as pure formality OR pure good faith — plan for both endings simultaneously
- Do not respond emotionally in writing — every sentence may be read by a lawyer later, in either direction
- Do not skip the search because "the goals look hittable" — that's the most expensive optimism available
- Do not advise signing away disagreement or rights — flag signature moments for legal review
- Do not draft accusations of discrimination/retaliation — if the pattern smells like that, that's the lawyer's brief, not a check-in email
Version History
- 54fad50 Current 2026-07-19 13:35
