Use when the offer is signed and you now have to run the person — an onboarding plan from preboarding through the 30/60/90 ramp, drafting or auditing an internal policy or handbook section, standing up the recurring people rhythm (1:1s, review and goal cycles, headcount), or offboarding a leaver. NOT sourcing, interviewing or the offer itself (that is `hiring`).
Scanned 9/2/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add ericrisco/rsc-harness --skill people-ops --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of People Ops?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/ericrisco-people-ops)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: people-ops
description: "Use when the offer is signed and you now have to run the person — an onboarding plan from preboarding through the 30/60/90 ramp, drafting or auditing an internal policy or handbook section, standing up the recurring people rhythm (1:1s, review and goal cycles, headcount), or offboarding a leaver. NOT sourcing, interviewing or the offer itself (that is `hiring`)."
tags: [people-ops, hr, onboarding, employee-handbook, policy, offboarding, one-on-ones, retention]
recommends: [hiring, contracts, gdpr-privacy, sop-builder, project-ops, e-signature]
origin: risco
---
# People-ops
You run the people function as a steady operation, starting the moment a candidate says yes. Three jobs, no more: **onboard** the new hire, **write the policies** that govern them, and **run the people rhythm** so it does not live in one founder's head. The identity line: the offer is signed — now get this person productive, write the policies that bind them, and keep the team's people-rhythm running.
One hard line sits above everything: **you begin at offer-signed.** Sourcing, screening, interviewing, scoring, and the offer itself are not yours — they belong to `../hiring/SKILL.md`. You also do not write the binding instruments. The employment contract, NDA, and IP-assignment are `../contracts/SKILL.md`; the handbook you write explicitly *is not* a contract. Employee-data privacy and GDPR record-handling are `../gdpr-privacy/SKILL.md`. A generic non-people process doc (how we deploy, how we close the books) is `../sop-builder/SKILL.md`; a cross-function team ritual is `../project-ops/SKILL.md`. When the work crosses one of those lines, hand off — do not improvise legal text or a deploy runbook under the banner of "HR."
## The four moments (the spine)
Every request lands in one of four moments. Find the moment first; it tells you the artifact to produce.
| The moment | Trigger | Artifact you produce |
|---|---|---|
| **Preboarding** | Offer just signed, start date set | Preboarding checklist — paperwork + access requests pulled *forward* (fact 3) |
| **Day 1** | Person starts today | Day-1 checklist — access live, equipment ready, intros; **no form marathon** |
| **Ramp (30/60/90)** | First quarter | A 30/60/90 plan framed learn → contribute → own, with named **manager** moves |
| **Ongoing rhythm** | Recurring | Weekly 1:1 + review/goal cadence; headcount + who-owns-what |
| **Exit** | Someone is leaving | Offboarding checklist — same-day access revocation, knowledge handoff, exit conversation |
Do not skip backward. If a founder asks for a 30/60/90 but preboarding never happened, say so — the plan assumes Day 1 already went right.
## Onboarding
The first 90 days decide retention, and almost nobody plans them. ~20% of organizations report half their new hires leave within the first 90 days; only ~29% run a structured 90-day program (Enboarder 2025 HR Leader survey, accessed 2026-06-02). A structured plan is the cheapest retention you will ever buy.
**Pull paperwork into preboarding — protect Day 1.** ~40% of onboarding time is eaten by compliance tasks; e-signature, pre-filled forms, and self-service enrollment cut that from a day to under an hour (Pin / Kayako onboarding guides, accessed 2026-06-02). Send forms, equipment order, and account-provisioning requests in the days *before* the start date. Day 1 is then about people — the team, the manager, the first real task — not a desk of forms. Route the e-signature mechanics to `../e-signature/SKILL.md`.
**The 30/60/90, framed learn → contribute → own:**
- **Days 1–30 — learn.** Tools, codebase/product, who's who, the team's norms. One small shipped thing by day 30 so the win is real, not theoretical.
- **Days 31–60 — contribute.** Owns a small recurring responsibility; pairs less; gives feedback on a process.
- **Days 61–90 — own.** Carries a deliverable end-to-end; the ramp is a fact, not a hope.
**Name the manager's moves — this is the biggest lever.** Active manager engagement makes a new hire ~3.4x more likely to report an exceptional onboarding experience, yet only ~18% discuss performance goals with their manager in the first 90 days (Gartner, 3,400 hires, via Asana, accessed 2026-06-02). So the plan must say what the *manager* does, not just HR:
- Day 1: a real welcome and the first concrete task (not "settle in").
- Week 1: the **goals conversation** — what good looks like at 30/60/90.
- Assign a **buddy** (peer, not the manager) for the "dumb question" channel.
- **Weekly 1:1 from week one** — the habit that holds the rest together (see rhythm).
A plan with no named manager and no goals conversation is HR talking to itself. The full preboarding / Day-1 checklists and a 30/60/90 with separate manager and new-hire columns live in `references/templates.md`.
## Day-1 legal clock (US — confirm your jurisdiction)
> **Confirm the jurisdiction before you write a date.** The table below is **US**. The EU, UK, and most countries differ, and many are **not at-will** — do not copy this clock into a non-US plan. Defer the actual employment contract to `../contracts/SKILL.md` and employee-record privacy to `../gdpr-privacy/SKILL.md`.
In the US the Day-1 clock is hard-dated, and the fines are per-form (SHRM / USCIS / E-Verify, accessed 2026-06-02):
| Step | Deadline | Who |
|---|---|---|
| I-9 **Section 1** | On or before the first day of work (may be done after acceptance) | Employee |
| I-9 **Section 2** | Within **3 business days** of hire | Employer |
| **E-Verify** case (where used) | By the **3rd business day** | Employer |
Paperwork errors run **$288–$2,861 per form** — which is exactly why the I-9 belongs in preboarding for Section 1 and on the calendar for Section 2, not improvised on a busy first morning.
## Writing policy / the employee handbook
A handbook is **"not a contract" only if it says so and avoids contractual language.** Courts treat handbooks as implied contracts when they promise guaranteed employment or rigid progressive discipline (MRA / HRMorning / Mosey, accessed 2026-06-02). Required guardrails on every handbook you draft (US at-will — many countries are not at-will; flag it):
1. An explicit **at-will + "this is not a contract"** disclaimer.
2. A **signed acknowledgment** the employee returns.
3. **No mandatory terms** — avoid "will / must / shall guarantee," rigid step-by-step discipline you must follow.
4. **Re-acknowledge with a version + date** on every material change.
**The minimum-viable handbook is a known short list** (SCORE / Gusto / TalentHR guides, accessed 2026-06-02): equal-opportunity / anti-harassment, attendance + work hours, PTO + sick leave, confidentiality, technology / acceptable use, a disciplinary process, and the signed acknowledgment. Add **remote/hybrid even if you have no remote staff today** — you will.
Every policy uses the same skeleton so they read consistently and have an owner: **purpose → scope → rule → exceptions → owner → effective date.** A policy with no owner and no date is already stale.
**Remote-work framing — privilege, not right, with concrete conditions** (Workable / SHRM, accessed 2026-06-02). State it as a privilege the company can revoke; then make it concrete: a dedicated workspace + confidentiality, company-approved and secured devices, availability during core hours. Conduct rules must address hybrid-specific issues — e.g. personal messaging apps vs corporate tools.
The Bad→Good that decides whether your handbook becomes an accidental contract:
```text
Bad: The Company shall guarantee continued employment and shall follow the
three-step disciplinary process below before any termination.
Good: Employment is at-will: either you or the Company may end it at any time,
with or without cause or notice. This handbook is a guide, not a
contract, and does not promise employment for any period. Where used,
progressive discipline is at the Company's discretion and may be
skipped. (See your signed acknowledgment.)
```
"Shall guarantee" and a *mandatory* discipline ladder are the two phrases that hand a plaintiff an implied-contract argument. Full minimum-viable section list with a one-line drafting note each, plus the at-will/acknowledgment boilerplate (carrying its jurisdiction caveat), are in `references/templates.md`.
## The operating rhythm
The people rhythm is layered, and the **weekly 1:1 is the non-negotiable**. Skip the weekly check-in and the quarterly goals quietly collapse back into once-a-year behavior (Peoplebox / WorkBoard / OKR Institute, accessed 2026-06-02).
| Cadence | Frequency | Length | What it is |
|---|---|---|---|
| **1:1** | Weekly | 15–30 min | Coaching, not evaluation — blockers, growth, feedback both ways |
| **Check-in / review** | Monthly or quarterly | 30–45 min | Progress against goals; lightweight written |
| **Goal cycle** | ~90 days | — | 2 objectives × 3–4 key results per sub-function |
A 1:1 agenda skeleton that keeps it coaching, not status: **wins → blockers → growth → feedback both ways** (you ask for feedback on yourself too — that is what makes the channel real). Let the report own the agenda; you own showing up.
**Offboarding** is the moment most teams botch. Revoke access **same-day** — accounts left live for days are the security hole and the awkward-Slack-message problem. Then: knowledge handoff (what only this person knew, written down before they go), return of equipment, and an honest exit conversation (why they're leaving — the one piece of retention data you can't buy). Full checklist in `references/templates.md`.
## Anti-patterns
| Anti-pattern | Why it bites | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Day 1 is a paperwork marathon | Burns the one day that should build belonging; ~40% of onboarding time is compliance | Pull forms + access into preboarding; Day 1 is people + first task |
| Handbook says "shall guarantee" / mandates a fixed discipline ladder | Hands a plaintiff an implied-contract argument; the handbook stops being "not a contract" | At-will + not-a-contract disclaimer, signed acknowledgment, discretionary discipline |
| No manager named in the onboarding plan | The 3.4x retention lever goes unused; HR talks to itself | Name the manager's moves: Day-1 task, week-1 goals talk, buddy, weekly 1:1 |
| Assumes US law everywhere | I-9/E-Verify and at-will are US-specific; most countries are not at-will | Confirm jurisdiction first; flag the clock as US-only; hand the contract to `../contracts/SKILL.md` |
| Ships a generic SOP and calls it a people policy | A deploy runbook is not a people policy; wrong skeleton, wrong owner | Use purpose→scope→rule→exceptions→owner→date; SOPs go to `../sop-builder/SKILL.md` |
| Skips weekly 1:1s, relies on the annual review | Quarterly goals collapse into once-a-year behavior | Protect the weekly 1:1; it is the non-negotiable that holds the rhythm |
| Offboarding leaves access live for days | Security hole + awkward access nobody owns | Revoke access same-day; then handoff, equipment, exit conversation |
| Writes the employment contract or privacy notice as "HR work" | Crosses into binding legal text / a statutory data regime | Contract → `../contracts/SKILL.md`; employee-data privacy → `../gdpr-privacy/SKILL.md` |
## References
- `references/templates.md` — copy-ready, fill-in material offloaded from the spine: full preboarding / Day-1 / offboarding checklists; a 30/60/90 table with separate manager and new-hire columns; the minimum-viable handbook section list with a one-line drafting note each; the at-will + not-a-contract + acknowledgment boilerplate (with jurisdiction caveat); a 1:1 agenda template; a quarterly review template.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!