I know about several colleagues that got a PIP, sometimes entirely out of the blue, without apparent reason, while the definition of a PIP is that it is a last resort for underperforming people. There should have been a series of "red signs" before someone gets a PIP theoretically. And it should all start with the definition of "performance", lacking mostly. Some sources say that management has an MBO/KPI that incites them to distribute PIP's ... sounds perverse. Often, including HR, it is sold as "an exercise wherein you will be helped to improve", your manager will help to make it a success ... and other nonsense. Also saw a particular colleague who was fired at the end of his PIP, did not get 100 % of sales target, only 95 %. I consider this whole PIP as just being an instrument, if you want to beat someone, then use the PIP-process. As another reaction already mentioned, you may have annoyed someone above you, willingly or accidentally, which makes the PIP useful to blacken someone. Objectives are defined into it, often aspects where you do not have control about, so there starts the easy exercise for the supervisor. You're out of control and hence are entirely surrendered to the will of the one judging about the fulfillment ... This company talks a lot about "ethics", "honesty" and "integrity" and other nice terms ... I'd say : walk the talk instead.
An excellent post from @3owb+1j1YTkV4, bumped for visibility.