The Fastest Way Isn’t Always the Shortest
- Jul 30
- 2 min read
When TL Global Insights was operating as primarily a translation company (Tender Leaves Translation), prospective clients would occasionally ask whether we could begin translating while they were still writing the original manuscript. At first glance, the idea seemed perfectly reasonable. If writing and translation could proceed simultaneously, surely the entire project would be completed sooner.
We almost always rejected any job that was to be executed that way. The reason was not that it couldn’t be done, but that experience had taught us it was rarely the most efficient approach. Translation depends on a text reaching a certain degree of stability. As authors continue writing, they often refine terminology, reorganize chapters, replace examples, or rethink the way an argument unfolds. Every change made to the source text has the potential to ripple through the translation, requiring work that has already been completed to be revisited. What appears to save time at the beginning frequently creates far more work later.
In a workflow with translation happening at the same time as writing, inefficiency does not disappear. It has simply been transferred. Instead of being visible in the overall project timeline, it becomes the translator’s responsibility to track revisions, reconcile inconsistencies, and repeatedly rework material that could have been translated once had the manuscript first been allowed to settle – time that is not given further compensation.
Over the years, we have come to realize that this principle extends well beyond translation. Many forms of professional work are not assembly lines, and they lose something important when we try to force them into that model. Good thinking usually comes before good writing. Careful diagnosis comes before effective advice. Sound design comes before construction. In each case, one stage lays the foundation for the next, and attempting to compress or overlap those stages often slows the entire process rather than accelerating it.
This is particularly true in knowledge work, where the most valuable part of the process is often invisible. Reflection, research, discussion, and refinement can appear unproductive because they produce few immediate outputs. Yet they frequently prevent costly revisions later, allowing subsequent work to proceed with greater clarity and confidence. What looks like delay is often preparation.
One of the less obvious marks of expertise, then, is not simply the ability to work more quickly. It is the ability to recognize which parts of a process should not be rushed. Experienced professionals understand that different kinds of work have different rhythms, and that respecting those rhythms is often the surest path to both quality and efficiency.
Efficiency, in other words, is not about doing as many things as possible at the same time. It is about understanding the natural sequence in which good work unfolds and resisting the temptation to sacrifice that sequence for the appearance of speed.
Sometimes the fastest way forward is simply to do things in the right order.
Comments