THE FRICTION OF PROGRESS: why we cling to a BROKEN SPREADSHEEt
I’ll be the first to admit it: I hate change. I don’t even like moving my socks to a different drawer. I know where they are, my hand knows the reach, and even if the new drawer is bigger and easier to open, the first three mornings of "missing" my socks are enough to make me want to move them back.
If that’s how we feel about socks, I know exactly how you feel about your production workflow.
I’ve spent three decades in this industry, and I’ve seen the same story a hundred times. A maker is drowning in spreadsheets, manual lot tracking, and "best guess" formulation. They want a better way. They desire a tool that actually understands chocolate. But when the tool arrives, there is this immediate, heavy resistance. I’ve expressed the same resistance when tools were deployed in my career (but most of the time those weren’t choices - they were mandates. The exception being when I needed better processes but none existed - I've been known to create them).
Because change is exhausting. Even when you want it, adjusting your existing processes—the way you’ve done it since day one—is a mental hurdle. Nobody really likes change, do we? We like the idea of being more efficient, but we don't always like the work of getting there. I’d love to have bigger muscles and be 20lbs lighter - but I can’t say I love the idea of what’s needed to get those things.
The Reality of Atlas
I’ve poured a ton into Atlas. I truly believe it’s the best tool on the market available. It’s what I use myself for a long time (in varying versions). But I also have to acknowledge a sobering possibility: Atlas might not get heavily adopted at all.
The desire to resist change—to stick with the "comfortably broken" system you already know—might be stronger than the need to improve. If Atlas fails, it won't be because the math was wrong or the interface was clunky. It will be because the friction of changing "the way we’ve always done it" was just too high. And I get that. I really do. It’s human nature.
The Roadmap and the Crowd
Atlas is an actively developed product. It’s evolving all the time, and I’m constantly presented with a barrage of feature requests.
I’m going to be honest about my role here: I can’t add every feature everyone asks for. If I just added things to suit one person’s specific style or a single maker's unique preference, the tool would become a bloated mess.
Instead of being a "gatekeeper" who decides what’s best from a mountain top, I suspect there may be a better way. I want to adopt a "wisdom of the crowds" approach. I need a system to identify and prioritize what is most desired by the group as a whole. I have no idea what that looks like, maybe it’s as simple as a Facebook poll. But at this time, I've decided to stop adding requested features to Atlas, and simply put it out there to see what happens. If warranted, I'll continue to develop it. I’ve got a pretty good list of feature requests already, and I might imagine putting those out there in this imaginary poll, asking for what other feature requests are - and then take a vote on them. The results become the roadmap.
How do we decide what comes next? It shouldn't just be my voice. It should be the collective need of the community. Finding a way to filter those requests so that the evolution of Atlas benefits the many, not just the few, is a difficult balancing act. It’s a challenge I’m still figuring out. I’m open to suggestions.
The Choice
At the end of the day, a tool is only as good as the hands that use it. Atlas exists to bear the heavy weight of processes and systems off your shoulders so you can focus on the craft. But to get there, you have to be willing to let go of the old spreadsheets that are holding you back.
Change is hard. It’s uncomfortable. It’s a struggle. But if we can navigate that friction together, the potential for what can be built—and what this industry can become—is worth the three mornings of not being able to find our socks.