In any workplace, one of the most debated topics is how to judge performance fairly. Is it purely about what someone delivers, or does how they present themselves and engage with the team hold equal weight? This becomes especially important during performance reviews when a balance between results and visibility can sometimes tip unfairly.

1. Work is the Star of the Show

Person A represents what many would consider an ideal employee—someone who consistently gets the job done and does it well. Results are the foundation of any role, and in many positions, if the tasks aren’t being completed efficiently, nothing else matters. At the end of the day, output is what moves the needle forward.

Person A’s approach may be quieter, but their contribution is undeniable. They focus on what they were hired to do: work. Their lack of visibility doesn’t diminish the fact that they’re the top performer in terms of productivity.

2. Visibility ≠ Productivity

On the other hand, Person B might get noticed more because of their vocal presence in meetings and their ability to “manage up.” While these are valuable traits, they don’t necessarily correlate with getting more work done. It’s easy to fall into the trap of assuming that someone who speaks more is doing more, but the numbers don’t lie.

Person B’s visibility might make them seem like a key player, but if results are lagging behind, it raises the question: what’s more important – showing up or getting things done?

3. The Quiet Power of Focus

Person A’s strength lies in their ability to stay focused and productive without the need for constant interaction. Introverts, by nature, tend to work well independently, and they thrive in environments where they can dive deep into tasks without distractions.

A great deal of innovation and success comes from people like Person A, who don’t seek the spotlight but are relentless in delivering high-quality work. These individuals might not be the first to speak up, but their work speaks volumes.

4. Performance Reviews Should Reflect Actual Performance

This is where performance reviews can sometimes fall short. If we’re basing evaluations on who’s talking the loudest, attending the most meetings, or being the most visible, we might overlook the real value someone like Person A brings. In a fair review system, results should take precedence over visibility – especially in roles that are largely task-oriented.

Workplaces should prioritize metrics like productivity, quality of work, and consistency. While soft skills and communication matter, they shouldn’t overshadow the core responsibility of getting the job done. If Person A is consistently outperforming their peers, that should be reflected in their review, regardless of how visible or vocal they are in the team.

5. Avoiding Bias Toward Visibility

In many organizations, especially those with a strong meeting culture, it’s easy for leaders to favor those who are more vocal. But it’s important to ask: Are we rewarding the people who speak the most, or the ones who deliver the most?

While it’s true that communication and collaboration are important, they shouldn’t be the sole factors in determining performance. Introverted employees who work quietly behind the scenes can often outperform their more extroverted colleagues in terms of output and efficiency. And those contributions need to be acknowledged, even if they aren’t as visible.

If your performance review isn’t about the actual performance, what are we even reviewing? It’s time to stop rewarding “who shows up to the most meetings” and start rewarding who’s moving the needle.

6. The Role of Managers in Fair Evaluations

Managers play a crucial role in making sure that performance reviews are balanced. They need to recognize the value of different working styles and ensure that the person who’s completing the most tasks (Person A) isn’t overlooked because they’re not constantly engaging in meetings or discussions.

A more objective approach to reviews would involve looking at key performance indicators, actual results, and how those align with the goals of the role. Communication and team interaction are important, but they shouldn’t be weighted more heavily than productivity, especially for roles where results matter most.

---

Here’s the thing: if both Person A and Person B are knocking out 10 tasks a day, I get it – give Person B the upper hand for their active engagement in meetings and team activities. That’s a win for visibility on top of the same level of output. Fair game!

But if Person A is consistently delivering 10 tasks while Person B is only hitting 7, should Person B really get more credit just because they’re more vocal? That doesn’t seem fair. Yes, meetings and communication matter, but they shouldn’t completely overshadow actual work output. You don’t get extra points in a race for being the loudest runner – you get them for crossing the finish line first!

This isn’t about undervaluing Person B’s contributions – they’re clearly valuable for team engagement and communication. But if Person B’s output is consistently lower, should their visibility be enough to bump them ahead of someone who’s doing more actual work? I don’t think so. At the end of the day, we need a review system that balances both results and visibility, without tipping too far in favor of one over the other.

Now, I’m not a manager, and I’m definitely not handing out performance reviews anytime soon! But as an employee who’s passionate about fairness, I think it’s worth raising this point: Are we truly valuing productivity, or are we sometimes swayed by who’s the most visible?