Leadership capability is a serious concern. Many senior leaders (VP) function as glorified sales engineers, promoted for technical or commercial ability rather than people leadership competence. This results in poor conflict handling, ego-driven decision-making, and an inability to manage strong, independent performers. Performance Improvement Plans (PIP)are frequently used against high-performing employees, particularly those who challenge decisions or expose weaknesses in leadership. These PIPs often appear manufactured—with retrospective justifications, shifting benchmarks, and objectives disconnected from historical performance or commercial reality. In practice, they feel less like development tools and more like pretextual exit mechanisms driven by manager insecurity. HR does not operate as an independent control function in these cases. Instead, HR routinely aligns with and defends the manager, even where evidence or prior results contradict the performance narrative. Once a PIP is initiated, outcomes commonly feel predetermined and frequently end in contract termination under the appearance of “process compliance.” The EthicsPoint reporting system is particularly concerning. While marketed as a safe, independent channel, in practice it appears to work against the employee. Reports are often redirected back into the same management and HR structures being complained about, leading to defensiveness, reputational harm, or escalation rather than protection. Employees quickly learn that raising ethical or people concerns increases personal risk rather than resolving issues. The overall result is a culture where psychological safety is largely performative, high performers learn to self-censor, and poor leadership behaviour is quietly protected.
