By Chris G Jones · · Updated · 3 min read
A stack gets messy by inches
Nobody normally sets out to create a complicated software stack. It happens one subscription at a time. A person signs up to solve a problem quickly, another tool gets added to connect it and before long nobody is sure where a customer record, document or task is meant to live.
Running more than one business makes that cost obvious. Every extra login, hand-off and vague ownership point creates another opportunity for work to be missed. I am not trying to own the smallest possible stack. I am trying to make sure every tool has a job that somebody can explain.
What I expect a tool to do
The tools that stay tend to do one of three things. They remove repeat manual work, keep important information together or help somebody take the next action sooner. GoHighLevel sits around enquiries and follow-up. Make handles workflows with more than one route. ChatGPT helps me get a first draft, a structure or a large piece of information into a form I can work with.
The point is not to put every tool into every company. The right question is where the work is getting stuck and whether software is genuinely the answer. Sometimes the answer is a clearer process or a named owner, not another subscription.
The questions I ask before I keep paying for it
I want to know what the tool replaces, who is responsible for it and what would stop working if we took it away. Price matters, but unclear ownership usually costs more than the monthly fee. If nobody can explain why a tool is there, that is often the answer.
I also look for the irritation. Every useful tool has one. A limitation is not a reason to throw a product out, but ignoring it is how a stack becomes full of workarounds that nobody documents.