This paper examines how researchers make sense of the dominant valuation regimes in the context of career assessment, especially academic recruitment. It also asks what changes researchers envision, especially what areas of academic work are under-recognised. Universities' assessment systems are important because they encourage researchers to focus on certain activities and outputs. Dominant ways of assessment have been criticised for their emphasis on scholarly publications and the use of research metrics. Based on interviews of researchers in a Finnish university, the findings show that researchers put high value on research contributions. Researchers below the top academic hierarchy pointed to the underestimation of teaching and societal engagement, often seeing a mismatch between what they did and valued in daily work, and what contributions were rewarded by the organisation. The study contributes to ongoing discussions on reforming researcher assessment, pointing to differences between researchers positioned at higher and lower academic career stages.