OCI RFP Discussion, Part III
Intellectual Property
Intellectual Property, research and our user community are the three competitive advantages that People, Ideas & Objects have defined and built our offering upon. The configuration is designed to accelerate the development and implementation of our software. It is also designed to achieve user-based software quality and continuously improve and enhance our software development. This community evolves and resolves issues and opportunities based on Intellectual Property. Providing a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable means of oil & gas operations everywhere and always. Setting the foundation for profitable, North American energy independence. This is the strategic position we’ve taken in this market. We have defined and resolved oil & gas industry issues and opportunities in the Preliminary Specification. This is to capture a substantial twenty five year value of $25.7 to $45.7 trillion due to our focus on profitability. We recently identified $660 billion in incremental value available to investors in the short term. The Preliminary Specification focuses on the Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the oil & gas industry. Which holds the legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural, communication, strategic and innovation frameworks. When we move the compliance and governance frameworks into alignment with the seven frameworks of the Joint Operating Committee, we achieve organizational speed, innovation, and profitability in producer firms.
Commercialization of this Intellectual Property is licensed to People, Ideas & Objects. It is focused on profitability and accountability in oil & gas and resolves the issues present in the industry today. With this IP supporting our user community through its license, our software and service providers can continually adapt to oil & gas needs. This is done through Cloud Administration & Accounting for Oil & Gas. This created substantial conflict between our firm and the producer's officers and directors. We feel our conflict with the producers has grown and expanded to include their investors and bankers. In addition, the service industry, producers' staff and the energy consumer are all disappointed and frustrated with producers' performance. Are all disappointed in the lack of profitability, accountability, action on these issues, deprecated capacities and capabilities and the loss of North American energy independence available only a short time ago. The handful of people who personally prospered financially at the expense of all these others are now identified as the individuals who did nothing but “muddle through.” Who had the responsibility and authority to ensure these things didn’t happen but didn't care and refused to consider the criticism of People, Ideas & Objects and the Preliminary Specification. A solution they know is appropriate however eliminates their ability to personally prosper disproportionally and exclusively.
Investors expect Tier 1 ERP systems to be implemented to alleviate profitability and accountability concerns. We suspect producer officers and directors are orchestrating a move to meet investor demands. Through the implementation of SAP systems, we believe they are unprepared and inconsistent with industry needs. SAP, which lacks an oil & gas vision and specification of "what, how, and why," has been selected due to its ability to fit into the current methods of poor accountability and profitability used by these officers and directors by way of its custom implementation at each producer firm. SAP held their 11th annual oil & gas conference on September 12, 2022. Highlights of SAP's oil & gas materials include.
Companies will work together in meeting production, profitability, and safety targets (possibly as “pay for outcome.”)
Ultimately, they are shifting to core profitable and sustainable value pools and minimizing their exposure to the market volatility.
I see these as one of three potential SAP alternatives.
- It may be an extension of their Performance Management feature set that’s been available in the marketplace. Indicating no change in the status quo of the prospective SAP users or oil & gas investors.
- To suggest that SAP is offering a solution to the oil & gas industry that caters to the definition and needs of the officers and directors, as People, Ideas & Objects allege, as the reason for this potential selection process proceeding. They are in fact offering themselves and will become blind sleepwalking agents of whomever will feed them. However, SAP also needs to walk both sides of the streets in this transaction. If they’re not promoting and providing a methodology of enhanced profitability then I would see that as problematic for many reasons. Knowing producer bureaucrats as I do, SAP would only be setting themselves up as a future viable scapegoat of the producers' officers and directors as to why they subsequently failed, post SAP integration. For example, the viable scapegoat of “SAP did not implement appropriate profitability and accountability methods, they failed.” (By mentioning this alternative one can see how much I’ve personally enjoyed the interactions and the experience I've gained from the officers and directors of these producer firms.)
- Or, someone devised a method of oil & gas profitability that “borrows” heavily from the Intellectual Property being commercialized by People, Ideas & Objects. Under the name of “pay for outcome” or “sustainable value pools” and “minimizing their exposure to the market volatility.”
Regarding the last option, as a software company People, Ideas & Objects would never violate any Intellectual Property of any other software or service-oriented company. When software firms depend on the pristine nature of their Intellectual Property, they are above reproach and maintain a historical legacy evident throughout. An example of this is the legacy on our blog and wiki. We know that those dependent on IP for their revenue streams are of the same mindset.
I am also convinced that the officers and directors of the producer firms are wise to the needs of innovation and development in the software field. They also need IP to succeed in the marketplace as a science-based business. That producers would evaluate software offerings on the basis of the origins and pedigree of the IP proposed to be employed in their organization. To ensure that it does not infringe upon others' Intellectual Property. And can therefore continue to use those products through their appropriate life cycles. Ensuring that their reputation of being upstanding, law abiding citizens that would never use others' property would not need to be mentioned here. This may be seen as a feature of the producers today. Their inability to access People, Ideas & Objects Intellectual Property by ignoring it is another viable scapegoat as to why they can’t attain that desired accountability and profitability.
Why "Just" a Preliminary Specification
We noted earlier that the eight-year-long cash and working capital crisis in oil & gas led to the cannibalization of producer business processes. Oil & gas producers and service industry deal with layoffs at the beginning of the business development process to avoid disrupting production. However, eight years of officer and director inactivity have cut into these industries' capabilities and capacities. There’s been a proliferation of advanced processes as noted in this World Oil article. This trend won't end there either. The move to the Internet of Things will open new opportunities for capabilities that would have seemed impossible and unimaginable eight years ago. For example, Elon Musk's Swarm network. Which enables access and control of oil & gas remote facilities via the Internet of Things (IoT).
The first advantage of having a Preliminary Specification is that we can set the direction we’re headed with a vision and viable business model. However, we cannot lock that into the 2012 environment that existed at the time of the initial specifications publication. And this is why People, Ideas & Objects, our user community, their service provider organizations and Oracle Cloud ERP are configured to provide the industry with permanent software development capability for oil & gas through our Cloud Administration & Accounting for Oil & Gas service to ensure a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable industry.
Within producer firms today, officers and directors expect investors to provide the financial resources to “build balance sheets.” Similar assumptions were made with respect to business in general, the service industry and other vendors providing producers with market solutions that spontaneously appear on command. As a participant in the ERP market space I am witness to these assumptions and methods used throughout the producer population. It’s incumbent upon producer firms to ensure that any competitive advantage that a supplier had, would be extracted and distributed to their competitors in order to sponsor price competition in that product or service. This is a well known fact and is now one of the impediments to the industry standing on its own two feet and innovating. It is why it can’t, won’t and will not ever under the current administration. We’ve seen the game played too many times to know the outcome. It is for this reason that People, Ideas & Objects depend on Intellectual Property to safeguard and protect our efforts against this behavior. This is in the short to long term.
The long and short of it is that nothing will be done while this culture exists. It must be ripped and replaced by a culture with the following characteristics.
- It needs to respect the participation of others in order to secure a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil & gas economy.
- Everyone in the industry now knows and understands why “real” profitability in the industry is such a critical necessity, everywhere and always. Profits fuel growth and prosperity for all throughout the greater oil & gas economy.
- Provide generic, aggregate producer information to vendors in terms of the anticipated capital expenditures by region, product or service classification as detailed in producer reserves reports.
- It needs to pay its suppliers as if they were business partners and not extend accounts payable schedules to the ridiculous levels we’ve seen recently. All to provide officers and directors with the chance to continue their foolish endeavors.
These are just a few of the functions of the Preliminary Specification as it stands today. I could go on but the point is that it's just basic business and culture! Everyone points to the producer's responsibility and undertaking. The current culture fosters a behavior where officers and directors sit atop a primary industry and hand out the pennies to those that will beg the loudest and provide the greatest (personal) favors. A culture where “power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Coil tubing providers and Packers Plus are exemplary examples of another phenomenon in their struggle for producer acceptance. Being denied entry into the industry for decades due to their ground breaking technologies. A lack of funding has prevented ERP development over the past few decades. The protracted argument over People, Ideas & Objects over the ideas contained here. Which began with enhanced profitability and accountability, which were consistently argued against as if profits didn’t matter. That is why there’s been nothing beyond a Preliminary Specification developed. Therefore, Intellectual Property is all that’s needed to seize the higher ground from those who thought profits were irrelevant. Imagine an industry that utters the words “profits don’t matter!” In ERP you’ll only get what you’ve paid for and producers have paid for nothing and therefore achieved their objective of abysmal accountability ensuring their unprofitability.
There’s no capacity and capabilities in the oil & gas ERP tier 1 marketplace. Producers are left with two development choices that meet investors' basic demands, SAP or People, Ideas & Objects et al. Only we have an oil & gas vision, understanding, plan and Preliminary Specification. Most significant of all, is our nine years (as of 2023) of user community development based on a compelling and powerful user community vision. A product offering that may be jeopardized due to producers' "compliance" with investors' demands for tier 1 ERP providers by selecting SAP. Eliminating People, Ideas & Objects and our user community from the market due to our pursuit of accountability and profitability for producer firms. Which is the primary point of friction between us and the producer's officers and directors.
What will happen in oil & gas when SAP needs replacement in ten, fifteen, twenty or thirty two years? Who will provide solutions at that time? Will they have spent the time and effort necessary to solve the industry's issues? Regardless of who it is, their IP will need to be spectacular to avoid the Preliminary Specifications and its derivative works, while also building value for the industry as a whole. Just as SAP is expected to do at the moment. Will that person or group focus on accountability, profitability and energy independence in North American oil & gas? Or follow SAP’s lead by providing producer officers and directors with exactly what they want, unacceptable levels of accountability and continued specious profitability. Producers can make their own ERP selection decisions and I’m pleased with my actions over these years in taking the fight to them. I’ll leave you with these quotes from Joseph Schumpeter and Milton Friedman about the importance of “just” a Preliminary Specification.
The first thing to go is the traditional conception of the modus operandi of competition … in capitalist reality as distinguished from its textbook picture, it is not that type of competition which counts but the competition from the new commodity, the new technology, the new source of supply, the new type of organization … which strikes not at the margins of the profits and the outputs of the existing firms but at their foundations and their very lives … It is hardly necessary to point out that competition of the kind we now have in mind acts not only when in being but also when it is merely an ever-present threat. It disciplines before it attacks. The businessman feels himself to be in a competitive situation even if he is alone in his field.
Joseph A. Schumpeter (1942), Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy: 84–85.
And
Can capitalism survive? No. I do not think it can … Its very success undermines the social institutions which protect it, and “inevitably” creates conditions in which it will not be able to live and which strongly point to socialism as the heir apparent.
Joseph A. Schumpeter (1942), Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy: 61.
Only a crisis - actual or perceived - produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable.