I agree with Jennifer, Blue, Disregard and Anja.
On the path of self-improvement, when do you stop improving who you are and start disowning who you are? Because you can do both, but the second is self-destructive. The first is productive. But it's confusing knowing where to draw the line, I think.
I think maybe the difference between improving oneself and disowning oneself lies in where you intend to get your self-worth from. I call shame a diminished sense of worth and value, but I think there's a baseline level of worth and value that we all deserve regardless of whatever flaws or shortcomings we have. This value or worth is unconditional and exists because we exist and because we are human beings; it has no other conditions. But I think that perfectionists and overly self-critical people chip away at this basic worth, and they come to believe that it is not and cannot be unconditional, that they have to earn it, or else they think that the worth that they deserve because they are human is an insignificant amount, a triviality. They don't realize how significant it is, or that it really is not contingent upon performance or attributes or approval. For me, it was hardest to realize that it was not contingent upon performance.
I think that beyond this basic amount, there is a higher layer of worth that is conditional; I call this conditional worth self-esteem. It is THIS worth which should be affected when we do a wrong or do not perform well, but because it is a shallower and less paramount kind of worth, it does not break us to admit we have made a mistake or done a wrong; it does not kill us or make us lose our head. Knowing that on a basic level, we are unconditionally worthy helps us to accept our humanness but to also improve ourselves wholesomely and happily. When we believe we deserve a basic amount of unconditional worth, our best is good enough. When we do not believe are are unconditionally worthy, even our best isn't good enough, and it never can be.
When I'm trying to improve something about myself or my performance or my behavior, it does not become a like-or-death issue, like it often did when I thought my basic worth was contingent upon conditions. I try to tell myself that I'm just doing my best, and that because I am doing my best I deserve self-esteem - which, again, is contingent upon certain choices we make. Our basic worth, though, is not. Sometimes it is very hard to believe that.
I don't think you can or should have to earn your basic human worth, but I think you can and should earn a sense of efficacy and self-esteem. Confidence comes with knowledge, and if the knowledge is not earned, neither is the confidence. I don't have to prove myself to others, but to myself. And it is not worth I am proving, but that I am actually competent in something and can do it. It is my reputation with myself I am proving, not my worth. It is shallower and less important than my worth. My reputation with myself includes things like honesty, integrity, kindness, and things which I think help me like myself more. But I should always on a basic level like myself whatever my shortcomings, as Blue said.
And as Jennifer said, I'm not trying to prove anything to others, though I easily fall into this mode of being even yet. I try not to prove that I'm funny, or smart, or articulate, or kind, or anything else. My worth does not come from how I come across to others, who gives me the time of day, or anything to do with how other people respond to me, positively or negatively. It does not come from how well I perform, and this, for me, is the key.
Edit: And because it does not come from how well I perform, I can easily adopt a sort of attitude of gamesmanship with myself; I can lightheartedly challenge myself to impress myself or do well, without the fear that something so very precious is on the line if I fail. Because what is really precious does not have anything to do with how well I do or the results of my efforts.