That depends on who the business needs first and on how settled the structure is. Sequencing can work when one partner will open the operation and the other joins later, but every later change to ownership or roles is a fresh set of facts. Preparation, any consular procedure, government review, and admission all take unpredictable time.
Freeze the structure before either file is built
Renegotiating the shareholders' agreement while an application is pending means the description on file stops matching reality. Settle the split, the reserved matters, and the management roles first, then build the evidence. Confirm current submission instructions for the route each partner will use, and allow room for further evidence requests.
If one partner drops out or a new investor joins, revisit the facts before anything further is submitted. Add one further consideration to that freeze: the investment generally needs to be irrevocably committed and at risk before an application rather than afterwards, which means the partners cannot hold their funds back pending an outcome and still show what the requirement asks for. Escrow arrangements drafted purely to protect the buyers against a refusal can leave nothing committed at all, so the commercial protection and the immigration requirement have to be reconciled deliberately with counsel rather than discovered to be in tension.
Hypothetical example: two partners structure a purchase so that funds release only on a favourable decision for both, and are advised that the arrangement they thought was prudent is the very feature that undermines the case, which is a conversation to have while the agreement is in draft rather than after both have signed and the seller has moved on.