Dancing with the Data
Day three into a “six” day blackout, operators are starting to get logins and tokens, but no one knows exactly what to do with them yet. BioTrack says there will be a software update scheduled for Core users starting sometime next week, while Dutchie, Flourish, and various other providers assure operators that service will continue as normal.
And technically, they’re right.
As above,
Plants are still growing. labels printing, products packaged. Commercial systems are recording those transactions just like they did last week. But for the first time in a long time, operators are being forced to seriously reevaluate the processes and systems running their businesses. And in the resulting chaos, a sniper’s picnic for developers, consultants, software companies, and integration providers looking for new clients.
Albuquerque-based Leafnet announced this week that it's offering free transition assistance to New Mexico retailers regardless of whether they're using Dutchie, Treez, Cova, BLAZE or another POS. The week before, Inscribe, a compliance label software blasted out emails encouraging manufacturers and producers to consider generating and printing as many anticipated product labels as operationally appropriate before August 25 along with a discount on labels.
Flourish, an ERP software, explicitly states operators can continue using their software to manage operations, but there is currently no state system available for that software to integrate with.That tells you something about where the industry's attention has shifted: we're past debating whether the migration would impact operators, some ancillary services may not make it to the other side either.
So Below
One important distinction that still gets missed is that BioTrack Trace (free online version), and BioTrack Core (paid desktop version), were never the same thing. That is arguably one of the reasons CCD needed a more comprehensive compliance window in the first place. The state provided a free tool for conducting compliant activities, but at scale, that software was limited—especially for businesses requiring deeper operational functionality and business intelligence.
That's where the seemingly endless list of ancillary providers came in, but not everyone had it figured it. You ever notice your sales dont match what the state reports, it was possibly due to failed syncs happening daily.
A failed sync occurs for any number of reasons ranging from bad Wi-Fi, to incorrect conversions. It isn't just a technical inconvenience sitting quietly on a dashboard. It means an activity recorded in one system may not have successfully reached the state's system of record.
In some systems, if one item fails, the entire ticket is hung up. At scale, those failures accumulate, and with turnover being so high, people rarely stick around long enough to understand why its happening, let alone how to fix it.
Even the major service providers have a “failed sync” dashboard for a reason; compound that with AI suddenly turning everyone into an engineer, and you have an entire industry conducting business inside a house of cards with leaky floors, built over quicksand. Those failed syncs imply two major problems for the state, incomplete product traceability, and under reported sales.
Data’s Inferno
Failed syncs were already happening when the systems were connected. Now imagine what's happening while businesses continue creating days worth of transactions, parent-child relationships, and inventory history while they're disconnected.
Take a vertically integrated operator with cultivation and manufacturing running continuously for six days. Hundreds of splits, conversions, packaging events, production batches, samples, waste events, and room movements can create thousands of state-relevant records. Every downstream record depends on the record before it existing—and existing correctly.
Not to mention, who has the ID authority? If BioTrack Core, Dutchie, Flourish, or another commercial platform generates a child identifier while disconnected, we still need to know what happens to that identifier when NMS2S becomes the system of record.
Does NMS2S:
Accept the existing identifier?
Replace it with a new NMS2S identifier?
Maintain a cross-reference between the two?
Require the operator to recreate the record and then update the commercial system with the newly assigned state identifier?
If it's #4, you're no longer just reconciling your commercial system into NMS2S. You're potentially reconciling NMS2S back into your commercial system.
The Human Touch
One of the biggest reasons for failed syncs is painfully simple, processes and quality control. the QC work starts before the product leaves the building. Is it the right barcode? Is everything in the package? Are all the packages in the box? Are all the boxes on the truck? Then you ask the same questions when it arrives. Did every box come off the truck? Is every package there? Are the labels correct? Do the barcodes work? Is the inventory information accurate? Are the expiration dates correct?
When the answer to any of those questions is no, the problem often gets pushed aside while everyone focuses on the inventory that actually works. With constant turnover and limited staff, few people are dedicated to fixing yesterday's problems when today's and tomorrow's are already waiting.
for example: if a product previously arrived classified as a hydrocarbon wax but needed to be converted before it can legally be sold, some commercial systems may still allow the sale to proceed. Now to correct it, that transaction has to be pulled back, the inventory converted, a new identifier created, and the transaction rebuilt using that new ID. But if you waited too long, more problems can appear. The customer's medical card may have expired, and if it does go through now your taking units today that were owed last year.
Something that could have been corrected at receiving has now takes an owner, a manager, two customer service teams, and a compliance consultant to correct identify and correct a single transaction.
Ascension
When the state started issuing licenses, it did so with good intentions: inclusivity, open licensing, equal opportunity, giving everyone a chance. But in some ways, it also set people up for failure. There's a reason you don't put every high school team on the same field and expect the same performance. Some are better equipped than others for the expectations, and when the rules change, not everyone has the same ability to adapt regardless of money or company size. Trust me, the big guys are struggling with this shit too.
A lot of it comes down to best practices and standards.
It's hard to do business with someone who doesn't speak business. It's even harder when everyone does things differently. One company requires onboarding documents. Another doesn't. One requires deliveries to be scheduled and information submitted beforehand. Another lets you show up whenever you want.
When operators encounter those expectations, some say, "F*ck that sh*t, that's stup*d." Others say, "Okay, that's the expectation. Let's build a process for it." Eventually, that process becomes a standard, and standards are what eventually allow you to step away, without worrying about the business suffering.
This transition is an opportunity for the industry to look at itself and decide what we actually expect from each other; both as a community, and business partners. What should our best practices be? What standards should exist regardless of company size, software provider, or license type? Those are things we can dictate, not the State.
We can all agree on, maybe a state compliance system that doesn't shut down on us would be a pretty good place to start. Until then, we can focus on the things we can actually control.
