Automation chaining bottlenecks: which step slows the whole run

Bottleneck close-up.jpg

The newsletter for newsletter operators

Daily field notes on deliverability, AI tools, hosting, and monetisation. No "top 10 plugins" filler — real tools, real numbers, real failures.

Automation chaining bottlenecks: which step slows the whole run
Photo: Donald Olszewski via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 4.0)

You built a five-step Zapier workflow that turns form submissions into CRM records, Slack pings, welcome emails, and calendar invites. It worked fine for a week. Then someone submits a form and nothing happens for nine minutes—or the workflow times out completely.

The culprit is almost never the trigger. It’s the third or fourth action in the chain, waiting on an API that’s slow, rate-limited, or temporarily unreachable. When you chain multiple services together, your workflow is only as fast as its slowest dependency.

Where bottlenecks hide in multi-step workflows

Most automation platforms—Zapier, Make, n8n—execute steps sequentially. Step two waits for step one to return a result. Step three waits for step two. If step two calls an external API that takes 30 seconds to respond, the entire workflow stalls.

Common slow points:

  • CRM lookups and upserts. HubSpot, Salesforce, and Pipedrive can take 5–15 seconds per contact update when their servers are loaded.
  • AI model calls. GPT-4, Claude, or custom fine-tunes often wait in queue. A single prompt can add 10–40 seconds depending on token count and API load.
  • Webhook receivers that run their own automation. If you’re posting to a webhook that itself triggers a Make scenario or Zapier zap, you’re chaining two execution environments—and both can lag.
  • Email sends via third-party SMTP. Postmark and Brevo are fast (sub-second), but routing through a generic SMTP relay or a self-hosted mail server can add 3–10 seconds per send.

Zapier’s task history shows total run time but doesn’t break it down by step unless you click into each action individually. Make displays step duration in the execution log—it’s easier to spot the lag there.

How to diagnose the slow step

Run a test submission and open the workflow execution log. Look for:

  • Steps that show a timestamp gap longer than two seconds.
  • Steps that return a 202 status (accepted, processing) instead of 200 (complete).
  • Steps that retry automatically—these often indicate timeouts or rate limits.

If you’re using Zapier, enable “Detailed Logs” in the zap settings. This adds response time and header data to each step’s output. In Make, every module shows execution time in milliseconds once the scenario completes.

Once you’ve identified the slow step, check the service’s status page. If there’s no outage, the lag is structural—either rate limiting, cold-start delays, or query complexity.

Three ways to route around the bottleneck

Option one: move the slow step to the end. If the CRM update or AI call isn’t required for downstream steps, reorder your workflow so the user-facing actions (email, Slack ping) fire first. The CRM write can happen last, after everything time-sensitive completes.

Option two: split the workflow into two zaps with a fast intermediary. Trigger the first zap, have it write to a Google Sheet or Airtable row, then use that row creation as the trigger for the second zap. This decouples the slow step from the rest of the chain. The first workflow completes in under five seconds; the second can take as long as it needs.

Option three: replace the slow connector with a faster alternative. If you’re calling an AI model via OpenAI’s API and it’s lagging, test the same prompt via Anthropic or a hosted fine-tune with guaranteed latency SLAs. If your CRM lookup is the problem, cache contact data in Airtable and query that instead of hitting the CRM on every run.

The welcome email and Slack ping now fire immediately; the CRM syncs once a day at 2 a.m.

When to live with the lag

Not every bottleneck is worth fixing. If your workflow runs twice a day and takes 40 seconds, that’s fine. If it runs 200 times a day and users are waiting for a confirmation email that arrives five minutes late, the bottleneck is costing you trust.

The break-even point: if more than 10% of your workflow runs time out or if users contact you asking why something didn’t arrive, the bottleneck matters. Otherwise, log it and move on.

Want more breakdowns like this? Subscribe to One Two Three Send—one operator-focused article every morning, no fluff.

Heads up — some links in this article are affiliate links. If you sign up through them, we may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. We only recommend tools we use ourselves.

The newsletter for newsletter operators

Daily field notes on deliverability, AI tools, hosting, and monetisation. No "top 10 plugins" filler — real tools, real numbers, real failures.

Other newsletters you might like

Local Edinburgh

Local Edinburgh is a website that is dedicated to the promotion of Edinburgh as a travel destination. Edinburgh is Scotland’s capital city renowned for its heritage culture and festivals.

Subscribe

Ireland Moments

A daily newsletter and blog celebrating Ireland — its places, culture, music, history and the stories worth sharing from the Emerald Isle.

Subscribe

Love London

A newsletter for Londoners who want to rediscover their own city. Travellers planning their first or fifth visit. Anglophiles who fell in love with London through literature, film, or a rainy afternoon on the South Bank.

Subscribe

Scottish Rugby Fans

The best Scottish rugby updates, straight to your inbox — Six Nations, the Nations Championship, Glasgow and Edinburgh. Only when there's something worth reading.

Subscribe

Newsletters via the One Two Three Send network.  ·  Want your newsletter featured here? Click here