How to write a defensible performance improvement plan

A performance improvement plan is meant to do two things: give someone a genuine, fair chance to improve, and
create a clear record of that chance being given. Done well, it often works and people improve. Done badly, it
becomes the thing a tribunal points to when it decides a dismissal wasn’t fair. The difference is mostly
in the detail, and in the record.

Be specific about the gap

Vague plans fail. “Improve attitude” can’t be measured, met or defended. Name the specific
behaviours or outputs, the standard expected, and how it will be assessed. The person should be able to read
it and know exactly what success looks like.

Make it genuinely achievable

A plan designed to be failed is obvious to everyone, including a tribunal. Set a realistic timeframe, provide
the support and training you’d expect to give, and make the targets reachable. Fair process means the
chance to improve has to be real.

Record every step

• The plan itself, agreed and dated.
• Each check-in along the way, and what was said.
• Support provided.
• The final assessment against the original standard.

A plan with no record of the conversations in between is a document, not a process. The interactions are the
evidence that the process was followed.

Hold the interactions, and keep them

Most plans fall over not because the plan was wrong, but because the check-ins weren’t recorded. Three
weeks of coaching happened, none of it was captured, and on paper it looks like nothing was done. Capture each
interaction as it happens and the plan tells its own story.

Where Note It fits

Note It captures the interactions a plan depends on, the check-ins, the coaching, the support, as they happen
and against the person they relate to. The plan and its evidence stay together, so the record is whole.

This is general information, not legal advice.