When everything is efficient - are we?
- Claas
- Jul 24
- 2 min read
The hidden cost of optimizing the easy stuff
Automation is a promise: take the repetitive, low-value, mundane work away so people can focus on what matters. And in many cases, that promise is being kept. Admin is vanishing. Dashboards update themselves. Copilots draft emails. Systems nudge us toward decisions. The friction is gone.
But what happens when that’s all that’s left? When our day consists entirely of high stakes, creative, emotionally nuanced, or intellectually demanding tasks? When every hour must produce insight, empathy, judgment, or leadership?
It sounds like an ideal scenario. But it isn’t.
The problem with optimizing everything else
When you remove the low-effort work, you remove the natural buffer. There are no warmups. No breathing room. No easy wins between complex calls, creative sprints, or tough decisions.
You end up with calendars full of "valuable work" and people who are cognitively exhausted by lunch.
This isn’t just theory. We’re seeing it now:
Meetings booked back-to-back because "you have more time now"
Pressure to "use AI to handle that" so humans can move to harder problems
Less tolerance for pauses, drift, or exploratory thinking
It’s the paradox of hyper-efficiency: you give people more space and then overfill it with intensity.
Ask the artists (or the athletes)
Artists don’t create all day.
A painter doesn’t produce on command, hour after hour.
A writer has productive days and blank ones. They walk, rework, abandon, start again.
A composer needs silence as much as sound.
Their work requires space to be good. And so does ours.
It’s the same with high-performance athletes. No one trains at 100% all day. They cycle between rest, intensity, technical work, and recovery. Because peak output without recovery isn’t productivity. It’s injury.
In business, especially in consulting and knowledge work, we’re not building those cycles in. We’re doing the opposite: replacing every break with another high-impact task.
What needs to change
We need to stop designing for maximum output and start designing for sustainable performance. That doesn’t mean slowing down. It means pacing with intent.
Some ideas:
Rotate task intensity: blend deep work with simpler execution, collaboration, or learning
Protect buffer time: don’t auto-fill freed-up space with more pressure
Redefine value: include reflection, exploration, and mentoring in what counts
Use AI not just to automate, but to filter: fewer inputs, sharper focus
Design the rhythm, not just the structure: help people manage energy, not just time
The consultant's role
As consultants, we often push for efficiency. That’s part of the job. But we should also ask:
Are we optimizing for something sustainable?
Are we giving people better tools and better pacing?
Are we solving process gaps but creating human bottlenecks?
Comments