How to Professionally Challenge an "Average" Performance Rating Despite Consistently Working 12-13 Hours Daily?

Hi everyone,

I'm an embedded software engineer at a mid-sized tech firm in India, and I'm grappling with a frustrating performance review outcome. Last year, I consistently put in 12-13 hours per day (often 70-80 hours/week), including weekends, to meet aggressive deadlines on critical projects. My output included delivering multiple high-impact modules ahead of schedule, .However, my final rating came back as "Average" (or "Meets Expectations")—the same default rating that most team members receive for standard 7-8 hour days. This feels disproportionately low given my sustained overachievement, especially since metrics like code commits, bug fixes, and project milestones were all strong (happy to share anonymized details if relevant).

I'm not looking to vent endlessly, but rather seeking practical advice on next steps:How can I professionally justify or appeal this rating? What data/evidence should I gather (e.g., timesheets, peer feedback, quantifiable impacts) to discuss with my manager/HR during a calibration or feedback session?What phrasing works best in these conversations to highlight my contributions without sounding entitled (e.g., focusing on business value over hours logged)?

Has anyone successfully escalated or renegotiated a rating like this? Any tips on avoiding backlash, especially in a high-pressure Indian tech environment?Long-term strategy: Should I prioritize visible wins, documentation, or stakeholder alignment over raw hours going forward?I'd appreciate any insights from those who've been in similar spots—thanks in advance for your time!