The 1-on-1 Template for a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP)

Published on July 29, 2026

A PIP check-in is not a regular 1-on-1 with extra paperwork attached. The stakes are higher for both people in the room. Your report is likely anxious walking in, wondering whether this conversation is really about improvement or just a formality on the way to a decision that's already been made. You're trying to be fair, accurate, and clear, often while also worrying about saying the wrong thing.

That tension is exactly why a PIP check-in needs more structure than a normal 1-on-1, not less. A vague, softened conversation is unfair to the person on the plan, because it leaves them guessing at where they actually stand. A purely mechanical, box-ticking conversation is unfair in a different way, because it stops being a genuine chance to improve and starts being a script that leads to one outcome no matter what happens in the room.

This isn't legal advice, and your company's HR process should always take precedence over anything here. What follows is a structure for the conversation itself: what to actually cover in a weekly PIP check-in, and why each piece matters.

1. Say Where They Actually Stand

Managers soften language to be kind, and it usually backfires. If the check-in opens with hedging, your report leaves not knowing whether they're actually behind or whether you were just being gentle. Being direct in the first few minutes isn't cruelty. It's the only version of this conversation that respects the person enough to tell them the truth plainly.

What to actually cover:

• State plainly whether they're on track against the plan so far, before anything else gets discussed.
• If they're behind, name the specific gap. "Behind" attached to nothing concrete isn't information, it's just anxiety with no direction attached.
• If they're on track, say that plainly too. On track doesn't need three qualifiers to sound sincere.

2. Review Progress Against the Specific, Written Goals

The assessment has to trace back to the goals that were actually written into the plan, not a general impression of how the week felt. Otherwise the process starts to feel unfair, because the goalposts seem like they can move depending on the manager's mood that day, and that's exactly the kind of thing that undermines trust in whether the process is being run honestly.

What to actually cover:

• Go through each goal from the written plan one at a time, not as a single rolled-up summary.
• For each one, name the specific evidence you're looking at. A concrete example beats a general impression every time, for both of you.
• If a goal turns out to be genuinely unclear or hard to measure in practice, say so out loud and note it. Don't quietly reinterpret it on your own and let them find out later.

3. Leave Room for Them to Respond

A PIP that's run entirely in one direction tends to fail, and not because the person didn't try. Real obstacles, workload conflicts, unclear expectations, a dependency that never got resolved, often never surface if the manager is the only one talking. Making space for a genuine response isn't softness. It's how you get an accurate picture instead of a partial one, which matters if you're going to make a fair call at the end of this.

What to actually cover:

• Ask directly what's making the goals harder to hit than expected.
• Take the answer at face value in the moment. You can weigh how much it explains afterward, on your own time. Treating it as an excuse in real time just teaches them to stop bringing anything up at all.
• Ask if there's support or a resource that would genuinely change the outcome, and be honest about what you actually can and can't provide.

4. Write Down What Was Actually Said

A contemporaneous record matters for reasons that go both directions. It protects your report from a manager's memory of the conversation drifting unfavorably over the following weeks. It also protects the organization by showing the process was actually followed, consistently, session to session. This isn't about building a case against someone. It's about making sure both people can rely on an accurate record instead of two different memories of the same conversation a month later.

What to actually cover:

• Write down the specific examples discussed, not just a summary conclusion like "needs to improve."
• Note anything they raised as a blocker or contributing factor, in their own words where you can manage it.
• Share what you wrote with them, or at minimum confirm it out loud before the meeting ends, so nothing about what's on record comes as a surprise later.

5. Close With Concrete Next Steps

Ending a PIP check-in on a vague note is probably the single most common way these conversations go wrong. If neither person leaves the room clear on what happens next, the following check-in starts from confusion instead of from progress, and that confusion compounds every week it's allowed to continue.

What to actually cover:

• Set the exact date of the next check-in before the meeting ends. Not "we'll figure out timing."
• State plainly what "on track" would look like by that date, and what "not on track" would look like, specific enough that neither of you could reasonably disagree afterward about which one happened.
• If the plan itself needs adjusting based on what came up in the conversation, say so and note exactly what's changing, rather than letting it drift silently.