Chana's experiences mirror my own-- I tend to not be a good "draft horse" in terms of work ethic. I work in two modes: think-time, and go-time. The former can look a lot like "doing nothing" to outsiders, but I've found that other cheetahs understand this particular work-mode, and once they've seen a few examples of what top gear in "go-mode" looks like, they leave me alone about think-time.
On the other hand, that only applies to settings where there actually IS sufficient challenge. I do not do well in environs which are inherently low-pressure and not very intellectually challenging, frankly.
My DH (also HG/+) is very very similar, and I mention that because he has never had an underperformance problem. Ever. But he and I both have a tendency to do what is necessary sometimes, rather than exemplary. But it's with things like those Val noted.
Honestly, it sounds as though the underperformance may well be tied to socially prescribed perfectionism issues-- the mention of task avoidance and seeking easy activities kind of rings that bell for me.
I was like that until my senior year in college, when, like Val, I suddenly snapped out of that mindset for reasons that I can't fully articulate or understand even now. It was DiffEq that did it to me, really flipping that switch into "it's really okay to put the pedal all the way to floor and just see what happens.." Before that, my ego was VERY tied up in being good (or even just "almost good enough") without trying.
It didn't fix the problem of being a hare and not a tortoise, of course-- and I mention that as well since it is (from what I've seen) a very common manifestation of giftedness in adults. The higher the LOG, the more pronounced it seems to be-- it's almost like a bipolar kind of productivity, if you will. Think-time is very important for fueling go-time, however, it is helpful to have two types of work activities for one's self, in instances where a boss prefers to see more 'slow-and-steady' kind of progress-- 1. stop-and-go tasks that are amenable to the rocket-fueled-after-cogitation approach, and 2. mundane, non-taxing, almost mindless things that need doing either way and that one can do whilst thinking of other things (item 1 things).
That way you can show the boss a list of 2. tasks each performance review, and a few dazzlers of the 1. variety that crop up rather unpredictably, but shine brightly (because they are the kinds of things that the average person cannot do).
