I’ve overperformed throughout my entire career. That’s almost two decades now, and it’s already driven me into burnout once; I came back from that, but that was a long time ago, and I’m neither confident I can do so again nor willing to suffer through it again.
At this point I am absolutely ready to give less than all of myself to the job, and more to the things that bring me joy and give my life meaning. If that means overperforming less at work, and closer to par with what’s actually expected of me - if that means no longer giving 150% effort to my day job, and “merely” 100% instead - then I’m okay with that, and so, per relevant discussions, is my reporting chain.
If that changes - if it proves in practice that the company is unwilling to support a transition from the heading-for-burnout precedent I’ve set to a sustainable level of effort - then that’ll be a clear indication that this company is not worth keeping on as a customer of my labor, and I’ll replace it with a customer which is.
The tradeoffs are going to be different for everyone, of course, but I’m convinced the same model generally applies, at least for those of us who have a worthwhile product to sell in our labor. Given the enormous prevalence of impostor syndrome in our industry, I wouldn’t be surprised if the product you’re selling is more valuable than you’re in the habit of thinking.
And it’s also worth keeping in mind that every employer, with the best will in the world, still has a strong economic incentive to convince you to undervalue the product they’re buying from you. That incentive exists because they’re buying it from you, and want to do so as cheaply as possible. No judgment; it’s a business, that’s the game. But you’d be wise not to take their word for what your work is worth, and learn to play the other side of the game - because the better you are at the other side of the game, the closer you get to being paid what your work is worth.