You go at the process rather than at the task
You approach a job by first attacking the way it is currently done. Mars in Aquarius in the 6th house means your energy engages with the system rather than with the item, so the task gets finished as a side effect of the method being rebuilt.
The sign is why the target is the structure and the house is why the material is daily work. That makes you genuinely valuable in any environment carrying old assumptions, and difficult in one where the way it is done is not up for discussion.
The thing automated before anybody asked
Given a repetitive task you will remove it rather than perform it, generally by building something nobody requested and nobody was consulted about. That converts your irritation into a genuine asset and it lands badly with anybody who liked the old arrangement or simply wanted to be told. Bring one person along before deploying anything, since the improvement itself is almost never the objection being raised.
Output in surges, on no visible schedule
Your productivity arrives in bursts attached to interest rather than distributed evenly, and a flat week can produce almost nothing while the following two produce a month's work. That is the actual pattern. Design around it: protect the surges by clearing the decks, and keep a low-effort maintenance mode for the flats.
Pointless procedure is where the resistance is
You will do genuinely difficult work indefinitely and stall completely on something you consider ceremonial, and the difference has nothing to do with effort and everything to do with whether the activity achieves anything. That reaction is usually accurate and it reads from outside as insubordination. Ask what the rule is actually for before objecting to it, because about half the time there is a reason and nobody has ever explained it.
Colleagues cannot predict you
The irregular pace, the unannounced improvement, the intense engagement followed by an apparent absence: teams find you difficult to plan around even when the annual total is excellent. That is a communication problem rather than a performance one. Describe the pattern in advance and in plain terms, because stated up front it is a working style and discovered gradually it is filed as unreliability.
Your own hours, or nothing works
Sleep, food and effort in you do not fit the standard schedule, and forcing them into it costs more than it saves. Find out what your actual rhythm is by observing a free fortnight, then build around it rather than around what is conventional. The compliance version has been tried repeatedly and has never once held.
The ones who agreed the process was broken
Your working friendships form with whoever looked at the same arrangement and had the same objection, and those alliances survive changes of employer for decades. In a compliant environment none of them appear at all, and you spend the years politely alone. Weigh that when choosing where to work, because it determines who you will still know in fifteen years and not merely how the job goes.
Improving the system was the contribution
What you leave behind is not a body of completed tasks, it is a set of arrangements that work better than they did. Almost none of that is attributable and you may have concluded you have little to show. Write down what is different because of you in each place you have worked. The list is longer than your record of achievements.
Solving it faster should not pay less
You fix things structurally, which means the work takes fewer hours and delivers considerably more, and any hourly arrangement punishes precisely that. Move to pricing on the outcome wherever it is possible to do so. Otherwise the pattern holds: your least valuable weeks are the best paid and your most valuable ones cost the client almost nothing.
Design it once and stop reopening it
You want the shared arrangements settled properly rather than renegotiated every few months, and revisiting a question you consider closed produces irritation out of all proportion to the matter. Build the whole system together in one sitting, specified in detail. What you gain is not the individual outcome but the end of the recurring conversation, which is worth more to you than winning any part of it.