In theory, adding a short pause between the two will increase the likelihood that the first one finishes first. That said, I believe the “add a pause” only pauses items on the front-end and doesn’t change database writes, etc. I could be wrong around this 2nd part though.
The only way to really know for sure whether a pause is needed or how much of pause is to actually run it a bunch of times and keep track of how often the 1st step finishes before the 2nd. One thing we’ve learned from experience is that flows that work under normal load with a very high degree of frequency sometimes break down when the server is under load. In other words, the server’s behavior changes when it’s at max capacity so if it’s something critical it may be worth trying to find a way to test with a server that’s at capacity.
Adding another workflow to run as you’re talking about is usually a good solution in my experience. I’d start with that approach unless you seem some other reason not to. I can imagine many scenarios where that would be more than sufficient.
I should mention if you wanted to keep an input field in sync with the database, you could also run a workflow to update the database anytime the field is no longer focused (or similar). As part of this, you could have the workflow run 2 actions and put a pause between them which, I believe, Bubble interprets to mean you want the actions run in series and not in parallel. I don’t know whether this solution would make sense for your scenario, but figured I’d mention it in case it’s helpful.