About six years ago, we experienced a fundamental shift in how and where work got done. A huge number of roles transitioned to be completely remote or hybrid, but the way many companies evaluate performance is still built around an in-office workforce.
Even now, more than half a decade later, a lot of managers continue to rely on visibility signals to decide who’s ready for a more challenging role or has earned a substantial raise. They decide that the people who always speak up or stay late must be strong performers.
But being visible isn’t the same thing as being productive. When some employees spend more time in the office than others, relying on visibility can give them an advantage when it comes to performance reviews, high-profile assignments, and promotions.
Let’s talk about the difference between being seen and being effective, as well as strategies that managers can use to evaluate every worker equitably, no matter where they’re working from.
We still confuse visibility with performance
There’s a reason that managers tend to fall back on visibility: knowledge work is notoriously difficult to measure.
At a factory, you can count how many units come off the line. In a call center, you can count the number of calls and conversations an employee has had during their shift. But how do you quantify a marketer developing a new strategy or an engineer proactively preventing a future problem?
Since there’s no obvious way to evaluate how productive a knowledge worker is, managers can start relying on what they can observe. Who immediately replies in Slack? Who’s already sitting at their desk when the manager gets to the office in the morning?
Work that your leaders and colleagues can see isn’t inherently bad, but it isn’t always work that moves the needle forward.
Research has shown that employees who work at home offer similar results to their in-office peers. A six-month study of over 1,600 hybrid employees found that having the ability to work from home improved retention without any impact on employee performance. Another study found a positive relationship between remote work and individual performance.
But for managers who are in the thick of it, it’s hard to get an unbiased snapshot of a remote or hybrid employee’s productivity, unless they’re clear about what they’re looking for. That uncertainty creates a vacuum that visibility is all too happy to fill. The employees that managers interact with most become the employees they trust the most, and then, the employees they give the most opportunities to.
Visibility bias is more than a small nuisance. It has the power to shape an employee’s entire future with their company.
Proximity bias shows up when the stakes are highest
Out of sight, out of mind is a pretty helpful concept when you’re trying to limit your caffeine intake or cut down on your kids’ tablet time. It can do a lot more harm than good, however, when it causes leaders to think less about the remote employees they’re managing.
Proximity bias, the tendency to favor employees who are physically closer, can influence the small, everyday interactions between managers and employees. Its impact becomes even more significant when those interactions start adding up to affect a person’s career.
Concerns about proximity bias are well warranted: 67% of supervisors view their remote workers as more replaceable than their in-person workers. And recent research shows that the consequences can have long-term impacts on remote employees’ career trajectory.
Performance reviews
For employees working in-person, their managers see a steady stream of reminders of their hard work. It’s almost impossible not to see the work they’re doing, but the same isn’t true for someone working from home.
That difference comes into play when it’s time for a performance review. Managers are essentially being asked to condense months of work into a single evaluation, and unless they’ve kept a detailed record along the way, most of the review depends on their memory.
Proximity gives in-office employees an advantage because they generate more memories. Their contributions are reinforced through everyday interactions, but a lot of a remote employee’s work only becomes visible when they deliver the final result.
Promotions
Performance reviews tend to go hand-in-hand with promotions, so biased performance reviews can lead to fewer promotions for remote employees. Deciding who’s ready to move up isn’t as simple as checking off completed projects. Managers have to also look at less concrete qualities like leadership, initiative, and commitment. They’re all legitimate criteria, but they’re also vulnerable to proximity bias.
For example, the employee who regularly chats with senior leadership can feel more like a leader, and the person who’s around when a problem comes up has more of a chance to show initiative. In instances like these, visibility becomes evidence of qualities, all because someone was in the right place at the right time.
High-profile opportunities
Almost 90% of CEOs are more likely to choose in-office employees for projects that can have major impact on their career trajectory. When a remote employee is continuously passed over for the same opportunities, it can start to look like they lack the necessary initiative or skills. But what’s really happening is that it’s often easier to recruit the employee sitting 3 desks away.
This ends up creating a cycle that’s hard to break because the high-profile assignments build new skills and relationships. The person involved proves they’re capable of taking on more responsibility. The remote employee who wasn’t considered doesn’t get the chance to build the same evidence, and in time, that difference makes proximity bias look perfectly rational. Why wouldn’t you choose the employee who has a strong record of taking on challenging work?
How to build a promotion system that remembers what managers don’t
Once you know how to identify proximity bias, the next step requires building systems that prevent it. Here’s what that looks like in action.
Schedule frequent, low-stakes evaluations
Performance evaluations, which typically go hand-in-hand with promotions and raises, are usually an annual event. Maybe bi-annual or quarterly if you’re feeling wild. But even meeting once every three months to review someone’s performance can leave a lot of little things unnoticed.
In his article, What Is Proximity Bias and How Can Managers Prevent It?, Gleb Tsipursky suggests scheduling weekly or bi-weekly check-ins with remote workers, discussing small, short-term goals. A few days before the meeting, ask each employee for a progress report, then discuss their goals at the meeting.
These meetings serve two purposes: providing more intentional face-to-face time with remote employees, and giving managers more context for formal performance reviews.
Evaluate deliverables & impact, not time in office
If you want to eliminate proximity bias from promotion decisions, managers need something to measure other than proximity.
When discussing how to find the right balance for remote and hybrid teams, MIT recommends that leaders avoid evaluating only activities or labor hours. These measurements tend to favor in-office employees, and they encourage you to focus on busyness over actual productivity. Instead, look at accomplishments and outcomes.
Here are a few ways to put this into practice:
– Set the finish line before the work starts.
It’s nearly impossible to meet or exceed expectations when the goalposts are moving during the work. At the beginning of a quarter or project, clearly define what successful performance looks like as far as goals, deliverables, and impact. This is where SMART goals can come into play, giving you concrete numbers and timelines to look for.
– Use the same scorecard regardless of location.
If an employee’s performance metrics change depending on whether or not their manager can physically see them, those probably aren’t very good metrics. Establish the same goals, quality standards, deadlines, and expected outcomes for remote, hybrid, and in-person employees.
– Look at quality, not just quantity.
Outcome-based metrics need to measure more than a number-based total. Performance evaluation should also account for accuracy, customer satisfaction, quality of decisions, project success, and collaboration.
– Stop equating digital presenteeism with physical presenteeism.
Don’t replace one visibility problem with another. Keeping a green status doesn’t mean a remote employee is working hard. Tracking hours online, keystrokes, and Slack messages just tells you that someone is sitting at their desk.
This is where RecueTime can make an impact. Our software isn’t designed to prove that someone was active every minute of the day. Instead, it gives teams insight into how their time is actually being spent, like whether they had enough uninterrupted work time or how their work patterns change over time.
That kind of productivity data gives you more context without turning visibility into the goal. It can be used alongside deliverables and outcomes to understand how work gets done, while still judging performance based on what gets accomplished.
Audit access to career-making opportunities
The research is clear that in-office employees are assigned to big-impact projects far more often than their remote counterparts. This does not mean, however, that it’s the only way to move forward.
Almost half (42%) of supervisors sometimes forget about remote workers when they’re assigning tasks. Simply trying to keep everyone in mind isn’t enough. You need an actionable plan that ensures everyone is considered and offered these career-making opportunities.
Start by looking back over the last 6-12 months. Who’s been asked to lead major projects, work with high-profile clients, or represent their entire department in an organization-wide meeting? If it’s consistently the same in-office employees, you’ve (unintentionally) created an imbalance.
An intentional system ensures that these opportunities are distributed more equally. Keep a list of employees ready for stretch assignments, rotate leadership opportunities when they come up, and take some time to consider who should lead a major project instead of automatically choosing the first person who comes to mind.
It doesn’t take long for the effects of proximity bias to compound. This kind of high-profile work gives employees a chance to build new skills, create relationships with senior leaders, and earn the accomplishments that stack up to earn their next promotion.
Record feedback while it’s fresh
Research from Gallup reveals that effective feedback has an expiration date. Ideally, employees should be receiving feedback a few times a week, and it’s even better if you can give feedback as soon as it’s warranted. If an employee shared some creative thinking during a meeting, call it out before you end the meeting or immediately mention it in Slack. Giving voice to your praise makes it easier to remember that moment for later evaluations.
The best work should win
Remote and hybrid employees shouldn’t have to choose between the option to work from home or progress in their career. And managers shouldn’t feel like they need everyone in the office just to get a clear picture of who’s performing well.
The solution is to create and implement systems that work even when managers can’t see everything that employees are doing. Things like frequent check-ins, clear performance expectations, and equitable access to high-profile projects can give far better context about an employee’s performance than simply considering who’s most responsive or available.
You don’t need to make remote employees more visible, you just need to make visibility matter less.
