Dear Reader,

There’s something I’ve been reflecting on lately, especially when comparing my previous work environment to my current one. Back in the day, I approached tasks from start to finish, almost as if I were the only person responsible for every part of the process. This “end-to-end” approach allowed me to see the workflow in its entirety, revealing connections, redundancies, and opportunities for streamlining that would otherwise be overlooked. It also helped to identify possible points of stress in the chain.

But now, in another environment, people are often focused on optimising their specific part of the process, which, in theory, seems logical. But in practice? It creates fragmentation. Teams push for efficiency in their siloed tasks, yet the overall process only sometimes benefits. It’s a classic case of “local efficiency” that often clashes with the business’s larger goals. I see this everywhere, and I think that we can do better.

You’ve got to think about big things while you’re doing small things, so that all the small things go in the right direction.

Alvin Toffler

Consider a thought experiment: what if we designed business processes as if a single person were responsible for the entire flow? Now, I’m not saying this is a practical solution—I know having one person handle a complex workflow is not feasible. However, as a theoretical model, it presents an interesting shift in perspective.

When you look at a process from start to finish through the lens of a single operator, the way you see connections and transitions changes. You’re no longer just interested in optimising the micro-efficiencies of individual steps but rather in how each step interacts with the next. Redundancies become evident, and shortcuts that improve the entire flow naturally surface. You’re no longer bound by the constraints of “this is my task, and I’ll do it the best way I can”—you’re thinking about how to get from point A to point Z as smoothly and quickly as possible. Your human tendency for energy preservation (laziness, if you want!) aligns with the efficiency of the process.

The big picture doesn’t just come from distance; it also comes from time

Simon Sinek

This idea resonates with one of the key tenets of the Theory of Constraints, particularly in manufacturing. Focusing on local efficiency in production lines—making each station as fast and effective as possible—often backfires. The real bottleneck lies not in individual tasks but in how they interact. Eliyahu Goldratt, the father of the Theory of Constraints, argued for the abolition of local efficiencies, urging businesses to focus on the constraints of the entire system instead.

The idea is simple: it’s no good if your task is 100% optimised, but your output waits in a queue for the next step to catch up. The process needs to flow, not just function. The same logic can be applied to business processes outside the factory floor. If you optimise each department’s tasks without considering how they fit into the overall business flow, you’re bound to hit inefficiencies somewhere along the line.

In my old job, I naturally embraced an end-to-end mentality simply because I was involved in most aspects of the work. I see how difficult it is to adopt that same vision in a larger, more segmented environment. People become laser-focused on their puzzle pieces, losing sight of the overall picture. And it’s not their fault—organisational structures often encourage this behaviour. Performance metrics are set up to reward localised efficiencies, not global ones.

“The trick to forgetting the big picture is to look at everything close-up.”

Chuck Palaniuk

However, a shift to a more comprehensive mindset, even if just theoretically, could be transformative. It forces you to ask questions like: What’s the bigger purpose of this task? How does it affect the next step? Is there a way to eliminate this transition? These kinds of questions lead to fundamental breakthroughs in process optimisation.

An entire business process cannot be redesigned overnight. But you can start small. Begin by mapping out the whole workflow as if only one person were responsible. Identify the interaction points between steps and ask whether these transitions are essential. Where do things get stuck? Where do handoffs create delays or misunderstandings?

Then, rather than focusing solely on improving individual tasks, work on improving their connections. It might be just a partial overhaul, but minor adjustments in this area can lead to significant gains in efficiency and effectiveness.

The end-to-end approach doesn’t dismiss the importance of specialised roles or tasks; it’s about seeing the bigger picture. Although theoretical models like this one are only sometimes practical in their pure form, they offer a valuable lens to rethink how we manage processes. Instead of optimising each fragment in isolation, we should focus on optimising the entire flow—much like a single operator would if they were responsible for every step.

By shifting our mindset from local to global efficiency, we can uncover the inefficiencies caused by fragmentation. It isn’t easy and requires a willingness to step back and see the bigger picture. But ultimately, this vision leads to lasting improvements and sustainable success.

Until next time, consider how adopting an end-to-end perspective might shift how you approach challenges in your workflows and personal life.