Showing posts with label CISP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CISP. Show all posts

Sunday, October 16, 2011

The Preliminary Specification Part LVII (PLM Part VII)


In this post I want to discuss the manner in which People, Ideas & Objects software development team will support the division of labor and specialization in the Preliminary Specification and particularly in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace (PLM). We had discussed in the previous parts to the PLM that the determination of where the data would reside, and hence where the people would work in the industry. Would the data be stored within the Joint Operating Committee or the producer. This was to be determined by the community based on their research. We also noted that with the division of labor and further specialization of the people that work in the industry required that maybe individuals might not work for a specific producer or Joint Operating Committee but instead work for a process that was billed for example as a service to a 1,000 JOC’s representing 200 firms. This post assumes that both situations, the data is stored at the JOC, and a process is managed by a dedicated team that employs the people who work for a variety of JOC’s representing many producer firms, are the case.

When we consider the global experience and understanding of the people that are employed in the oil and gas industry. We have many people today with a diversity of experience and understanding of the industry. When we think of the future, in order to deal with the ability to handle the greater volumes of work, we generally feel that there is a need to have a wholesale increase in the overall experience and understanding of the industry. But is this necessarily the case. With the division of labor and specialization we are able to rely on a level of experience and understanding of a few that understand the entire process, and assign the specifics to those that can specialize in their own specific domain of understanding. With each person taking care of their part of the process, at a high level of understanding, the entire process is managed with an efficiency and understanding that aggregates the skills of all of those people within the process. This is the advantage of specialization. And it enables the industry to undertake greater processing loads with the same resource levels.

Now lets assume for a moment that you had a group that processed all the lease rentals for all the JOC’s and producers that used People, Ideas & Objects proposed software applications. And this groups was a very specialized team of 20 people who were supported by the software development team and user community that People, Ideas & Objects is based upon. How would you divide up that work to make it more efficient? Would it be based on producer or JOC? I don’t think so. Probably on the basis of rental due date, or maybe geographical location. One thing for certain the way that the work was organized would be fundamentally different then the way that lease rentals were organized within any firm or JOC today. No matter how large the producers size. The specialization that this service provider would be able to present would reduce the costs of lease rental processing and also increase the quality of the service, and the data and information that was presented. This is how I think we need to begin reorganizing some of the processes the industry depends upon. Here’s why.

How does the division of labor expand. That is to say, this lease rental process continues on and they find if they make a small change in the way they process this element of it, then they could save x% of time. This is the process of “gap filing” which makes inherent sense. Then the  boss says ok, sounds great go do it. The problem today is that all of our processes are highly automated. And the way that People, Ideas & Objects are talking in the Preliminary Specification these processes will be even more automated. Therefore the ability to change a process is heavily dependent on a software change. Which in the current environment is next to impossible. People, Ideas & Objects however are marketing a software development capability. One that is available for the purposes of gap filing and supporting the user community needs. One that is designed to support innovation. Therefore the ability to make the change in the process and have the software updated to support the process change is available. The larger issue of having this done once at the lease rental service provider makes the process manageable. As today, having to do this within each firm doesn’t provide the efficiencies that with tomorrows division of labor and specialization can provide, there isn't the volume of lease rental activity. It is also assumed in this example that the data is stored at the JOC and therefore the amount of lease rental data that is held at the JOC is relatively negligible, providing more support for centralizing the lease rental process under one service provider.

People, Ideas & Objects has introduced the concept of the Community of Independent Service Providers to initiate these types of process services. I think this is how the industry needs to reorganize themselves in order to attain the efficiencies and quality processes in the future. The example of lease rentals is only one of possibly hundreds of processes that could be handled in similar ways. The key competitive advantage of the innovative oil and gas producer is their land and asset base, & application of their earth science and engineering capabilities. The efficient development of internal administrative processes are not going to provide any producer with any competitive advantage or disadvantage. By developing processes in the manner that People, Ideas & Objects proposes provides all the producers with the most efficient and cost effective means of administrative management.

I’ll say it again. Unfortunately the current bureaucracy have chosen not to join us in this vision of the future. They are fully vested in the status quo and will have none of this discussion of organizing the industry in more efficient ways. It is for the C class and investor class to direct the flow of funds towards People, Ideas & Objects to begin the process of making this vision real.

For the industry to successfully provide for the consumers energy demands, it’s necessary to build the systems that identify and support the Joint Operating Committee. Building the Preliminary Specification is the focus of People, Ideas & Objects. Producers are encouraged to contact me in order to support our Revenue Model and begin their participation in these communities. Those individuals that are interested in joining People, Ideas & Objects can join me here and begin building the software necessary for the successful and innovative oil and gas industry.

Please note what Google+ provides us is the opportunity to prove that People, Ideas & Objects are committed to developing this community. That this is user developed software, not change that is driven from the top down. Join me on the People, Ideas & Objects Google+ Circle and begin building the community for the development of the Preliminary Specification. Email me here if you need an invite.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Hagel & Brown on Leadership

John Hagel and John Seeley Brown are two authors that we follow closely here at People, Ideas & Objects. In a Forbes article entitled “Today You Can Only be a Leader by Creating Leaders” they bring up the topic of leadership and how it’s changing.

In a world where automation of transactions and business processes increases, and escalates, particularly with the development of the Draft Specification, leadership is one of the key human actions and skills that can not be automated. A short list of the types of work that people will be involved in in the future is as follows.

  • Leadership
  • Issue Identification
  • Issue Resolution
  • Decisions
  • Design
  • Ideas
  • Search

This is to name just a few of the key human activities that will be needed. When we talk about leadership, we note the size and scope of the task that People, Ideas & Objects is focused on. It is the enormity of this task that will require many leaders. Whether its a Product Owner who will work to capture the users demands in the software, or a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers leading a system integration at a producer firm, leadership will be a key skill that will be needed. Hagel & Brown note the somewhat simple process in which this starts.
Leaders can flip these perceptions of risk and reward if they can paint compelling long-term views of the future. This is completely against the grain for most business and political leaders today; they study quarterly numbers to carefully craft a short-term view of the road ahead. Leaders in the big shift will be those who can peer ahead and paint compelling views of opportunities--and not just opportunities for themselves or their institutions but for all kinds of people. If they can help us to make sense of the long-term future, they'll be able to inspire bold action and investment in support of their initiatives, while everyone else sits on the sidelines.
People interested in getting involved with People, Ideas & Objects should contact me here to begin the process of joining this project. People who are interested in building and providing the systems and services the innovative oil and gas producers will need to meet the market demand for energy. We should also take note of the following.
But there will be another even bigger change in leadership. In the past, leaders were measured by how many people followed them. In the era ahead, they will be measured by how many other leaders they can cultivate. We are moving from a world of push, where people are expected to follow detailed scripts to accomplish specified tasks, to a world of pull, where everyone must master the techniques of drawing out people and resources when needed to address unanticipated opportunities and challenges. In the world of push, followers were prized. In the world of pull, everyone must figure out how to become a leader in their own domain.
This makes intuitive sense. With the systems handling the majority of the business, the remaining tasks are not going to be distributed by some all knowing greater power. The more that can be initiated by the leader, the higher the value that is generated for the producers.
Rather than using persuasion to get others to follow predefined programs, the new generation of leaders will use persuasion to help people more effectively draw out their own individual potential. The really effective leader will be one who can persuade emerging leaders to join forces toward common goals and develop faster than they could on their own.
I can’t think of a more exciting place to work. People, Ideas & Objects, the Community of Independent Service Providers offers leaders a place where their skills are needed.
The bottom line: Leaders will no longer be defined by the number of followers they have, but rather by the number of other leaders they have cultivated and mobilized across institutional boundaries. That is a profound shift.
For the industry to successfully provide for the consumers energy demands, it’s necessary to build the systems that identify and support the Joint Operating Committee. Building the Preliminary Specification is the focus of People, Ideas & Objects. Producers are encouraged to contact me in order to support our Revenue Model and begin their participation in these communities. Those individuals that are interested in joining People, Ideas & Objects can join me here and begin building the software necessary for the successful and innovative oil and gas industry.

Technorati Tags:

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Getting it Right

The Draft Specification provides a clear vision of how the innovative oil and gas producer would be supported by Information Technology systems. By building IT systems that use the industry standard Joint Operating Committee, innovation is facilitated and enabled. The Draft Specification is however, only the beginning and is by no means the final say. It is the beginning of a process that will discover the right solution with the input of users, producers, the Community of Independent Service Providers and others. Only then can we begin to develop the “right” systems for the industry.

Getting it right will be the difficult part of developing these systems. Community based developments are the only possible way of discovering what is “right”. Producers need to realize these are critical and necessary elements of their future systems success. To assume a vision, or technology driven solution from another vendor would require the same user-driven process. Unlike other ERP vendors, we are not selling a solution to users, we are building the user the “right” tools they need to efficiently do their jobs.

Technorati Tags:

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

McKinsey Ten Technology Trends Part I

McKinsey are once again focusing on the impact that technology will have on organizations. This new article entitled “Clouds, Big Data and Smart Assets: Ten Tech-Enabled Business Trends to Watch” and sub-titled “Advancing technologies and their swift adoption are upending traditional business models. Senior executives need to think strategically about how to prepare their organizations for the challenging new environment.” For the past while I have been closing these blog posts with the comment that management are conflicted and will not make the necessary changes to financially support these developments. Here McKinsey is putting the decision to move to adopt these technologies at the foot of senior executives.

As the worlds premier consulting firm, McKinsey have added substantially to the discussion of applying technology to organizational change.

The ways information technologies are deployed are changing too, as new developments such as virtualization and cloud computing reallocate technology costs and usage patterns while creating new ways for individuals to consume goods and services and for entrepreneurs and enterprises to dream up viable business models.
Again, prospective users of People, Ideas & Objects, and members of the Community of Independent Service Providers will be at the forefront of these major trends.
For senior executives, therefore, merely understanding the ten trends outlined here isn’t enough. They also need to think strategically about how to adapt management and organizational structures to meet these new demands.

1. Distributed co-creation moves into the mainstream.

Recall that we are working to detail “Phase Two” of this project. The purpose of Phase Two is to develop the Preliminary Specification which is proposed to generate a system design consisting of 100 man-years of effort. These developments will be generated from one thousand or more contributors and the entire prospective user community reviewing and influencing the output. A design such as the Preliminary Specification, which of course has not been done before, has also never been possible before.
In the past few years, the ability to organize communities of Web participants to develop, market, and support products and services has moved from the margins of business practice to the mainstream.
Producers need to be a part of this process. Determining the geographical, functional and process scope of the application are part of the Preliminary Specifications deliverable. Ensuring that the specification addresses the producers needs is the responsibility of each producer.

The time for producers to begin their involvement in these communities and developments is now. With the Revenue Model providing significant financial incentives for early participation and the ability to influence the output of these developing communities, delays in a producers participation could be costly.

2. Making the network the organization. 

Using the Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the innovative oil and gas producer is only possible as a result of the advanced networks and Information Technologies. Networks enable and facilitate the interactions between JOC partners and service providers.
We believe that the more porous, networked organizations of the future will need to organize work around critical tasks rather than molding it to constraints imposed by corporate structures.
Management orthodoxies still prevent most companies from leveraging talent beyond full-time employees who are tied to existing organizational structures. But adhering to these orthodoxies limits a company’s ability to tackle increasingly complex challenges. 
As the research that has been conducted here at People, Ideas & Objects shows, the use of the Joint Operating Committee provides a solution to many of the key issues that the industry faces.

3. Collaboration at scale.

To suggest that the oil and gas industry is already engaged in a high level of collaboration would be an understatement. The Joint Operating Committee by its definition is a collaboration. These interactions have been conducted throughout the industry for many years. What is needed is for the Information Technology systems the industry uses to capture these collaborations and embed them within the ERP systems used in the industry. That is what People, Ideas & Objects is working to provide. By adopting the advanced IT infrastructure and enabling the collaborations to be handled through the technology, the industry will be able to scale their activity and innovations to the level necessary to meet the market demands for energy.
Despite such successes, many companies err in the belief that technology by itself will foster increased collaboration. For technology to be effective, organizations first need a better understanding of how knowledge work actually takes place. A good starting point is to map the informal pathways through which information travels, how employees interact, and where wasteful bottlenecks lie.
A process that is part of the work being proposed to be completed in the Preliminary Specification. Recall as well, that tacit knowledge, the understanding of how things get done, can not be captured. It exists only in the minds of the users, Community of Independent Service Providers and employees of the firms involved in oil and gas. What we can do is design and build the tools that enable the people in the industry to use their tacit knowledge.

4. The growing “Internet of Things”.    

McKinsey highlighted their concept of the Internet of Things a few months ago. These concepts were covered in a blog post that ties McKinsey concept to the People, Ideas & Objects Technical Vision.

5. Experimentation and big data.

Experimentation is the way in which innovation in oil and gas will expand the sciences. One of the keys to exploiting the experimentation and “big data” in the industry is the Joint Operating Committees operational decision making framework. When we align these organizational decision making processes to the systems used by the innovative firms, then we will be able to use these new and valuable tools.
Using experimentation and big data as essential components of management decision making requires new capabilities, as well as organizational and cultural change. Most companies are far from accessing all the available data. Some haven’t even mastered the technologies needed to capture and analyze the valuable information they can access.
We will address the remaining McKinsey technology trends in a future blog post. McKinsey close their paper with the following comment.
The pace of technology and business change will only accelerate, and the impact of the trends above will broaden and deepen. For some organizations, they will unlock significant competitive advantages; for others, dealing with the disruption they bring will be a major challenge. Our broad message is that organizations should incorporate an understanding of the trends into their strategic thinking to help identify new market opportunities, invent new ways of doing business, and compete with an ever-growing number of innovative rivals.
Society is put in peril when world oil production declines. There is evidence that the world's oil production has declined. Therefore the world needs to have the energy industry expand its production. To do so requires that we reorganize to enhance the division of labor and specialization within the industry. As economic development has proven, reorganization would achieve far greater oil and gas production. Management of the industry is conflicted in expanding the output of the industry. The less they do, the higher the oil and gas prices and the better they appear to perform. This managerial conflict must be addressed and the performance of the industry unleashed. To do so requires the current management of the industry to fund People, Ideas & Objects and build the systems as defined in the Draft Specification. Please join me here.

Technorati Tags:

Thursday, August 05, 2010

Our Revenue Model Part VI

Throughout the past few months (here, here and here) we have talked about the risks of becoming blind sleep-walking agents of whomever will feed us. An issue when we are discussing systems development. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model shows these risks are real and require a new approach to funding these software developments. It serves no ones interests, People, Ideas & Objects, the Community of Independent Service Providers, Users or Producers to proceed without dealing with this issue. It is best to identify these conflicts and compromising situations now, while the influences are manageable.

Producers are expected to fund the software developments on the basis of their production profile. Rental fees are assessed on all producers starting January 2010. This eliminates the possibility that some producers will pay disproportionate shares of the development costs. All producers will be required to have their rental fees, and penalties, paid in full from January 2010 to the current year in order to access the applications. These methods and penalties eliminate all incentive to delay and avoid financial participation by producer firms.

Financial participation is how the communities are supported and hence able to avoid the trap of becoming blind sleep-walking agents of whoever feeds them. People, Ideas & Objects are user focused developments. The choices that a software development project can prioritize are many. Users are one, technical efficiency another and there are many other possibilities. For users to support the producers focus on its competitive advantages of their asset base, oil and gas leases and earth science and engineering capabilities. Users need to have the software tools and means of production, (the financial resources to build those tools) within their control.

This discussion does not preclude the producers participation in these communities. Producers, on the contrary, are critical elements of the user community. These developments will need their full participation and contribution. What is necessary to proceed is the appropriate “political environment” in which users are able to define, build and use the software tools they need to do their jobs.

Society is put in peril when world oil production declines. There is evidence that the world's oil production has declined. Therefore the world needs to have the energy industry expand its production. To do so requires that we reorganize to enhance the division of labor and specialization within the industry. As economic development has proven, reorganization would achieve far greater oil and gas production. Management of the industry is conflicted in expanding the output of the industry. The less they do, the higher the oil and gas prices and the better they appear to perform. This managerial conflict must be addressed and the performance of the industry unleashed. To do so requires the current management of the industry to fund People, Ideas & Objects and build the systems as defined in the Draft Specification. Please join me here.

Tuesday, August 03, 2010

Our Revenue Model Part V

Another element of our Revenue Model is the means in which People, Ideas & Objects is capitalized. Traditionally software developers are stand-alone organizations with their own banking, regulatory and venture capital influences. People, Ideas & Objects is taking a project management perspective in providing this software solution to the marketplace. The differences in our capital structure are significant, with our Revenue Model being a critical element in defining and supporting these differences.

The fact of the matter is, by having user based developments defined and supported by various communities. To then have various venture capitalists, or other groups involved in a traditional capital structure, influence whether or not the software was built to specification is too large of a compromise to be viable. Therefore People, Ideas & Objects is funded by its Revenue Model and focused on its users.

To be clear the scope of People, Ideas & Objects is beyond what venture capital groups would be willing to fund. That is to say if the producers are unwilling to invest in this software development, based on the value proposition put forward, no venture capital groups would touch this type of venture. Amortizing the costs of this development over the production profile of the industry is our value proposition. Complicating our capital structure only complicates and compromises the deliver-ability of the software.

To suggest that People, Ideas & Objects can be structured without the traditional involvement of investment capital might be naive for me to consider. However I do know, that it would be naive to suggest that the systems as described in the Draft Specification could be built with the influences of a traditional capital structure. Therefore, it is with that in mind, and to ensure that the Preliminary Specification captures the full scope of the technical and geographical concerns of each subscribing producer. That producers would be wise to support these developments to ensure their concerns remain the appropriate priority of this software development.

One area where our capital structure is not a concern is in the hosting of the application on the cloud computing infrastructure. I have addressed these needs by separating these business concerns from the software development activities. As I have documented in our Hardware Policies & Procedures, the hardware infrastructure is directly managed by the producers themselves. The purpose in structuring the hardware in this fashion is to eliminate the producers regulatory concerns in running their ERP systems, and to ensure that all parties have a vested interest in the infrastructure. In the process of meeting those concerns the business of the firm that hosts the application will have its own capital structure that will not in any way affect or influence the software developments or communities of People, Ideas & Objects.

Society is put in peril when world oil production declines. There is evidence that the world's oil production has declined. Therefore the world needs to have the energy industry expand its production. To do so requires that we reorganize to enhance the division of labor and specialization within the industry. As economic development has proven, reorganization would achieve far greater oil and gas production. Management of the industry is conflicted in expanding the output of the industry. The less they do, the higher the oil and gas prices and the better they appear to perform. This managerial conflict must be addressed and the performance of the industry unleashed. To do so requires the current management of the industry to fund People, Ideas & Objects and build the systems as defined in the Draft Specification. Please join me here.

Friday, July 30, 2010

Our Revenue Model Part IV

This post seeks to clarify People, Ideas & Objects revenue model and provide an understanding of the flow of funds within the associated communities. Needless to say all the funds flow from the Producers, however that is where the money is. I’ll break down the general flow to show how each of the different groups are sustained over the long term.

To start we need to clearly identify the three different groups that are supported directly by the producer firms. These groups include (1) People, Ideas & Objects, (2) the user communities and (3) the Community of Independent Service Providers (CISP). The need for this financial support is as follows.

  1. People, Ideas & Objects assesses an annual rental on all producers for access to the software applications, cloud computing infrastructure and the communities involved in the development. These funds are assessed based on an annual rental for each barrel of oil equivalent of the producer. This rental has been set at $1.00 per barrel of oil equivalent for the 2010 calendar year. In addition, assessments are due and payable by March 31, of each year. Producers are subject to a 300% penalty for any late payments. All producers are required to pay the rental from 2010 forward. 
  2. The second group that receives producer funds are the users themselves. These users are the producers employees or consultants that they hire to do the work within their organizations and Joint Operating Committees. These funds are incurred indirectly as a result of the individuals doing their jobs and are not necessarily a direct cash payout. These costs are incurred by the users on behalf of the producers in working with the Community of Independent Service Providers and the People, Ideas & Objects developers. The work the users are compensated for is in defining and designing the systems they and the producers want and need. 
  3. The third group that receives direct funding from the producers is the Community of Independent Service Providers. This community is engaged by the producers to handle many of their specific systems related needs. Accounting integration and systems development are the two areas where the CISP will be used most often.

What happens to these funds is also important to note.
  1. People, Ideas & Objects incurs the costs associated with the hosting of the infrastructure for running the application and software development environment. We also have the developers on staff who are working with the Community of Independent Service Providers and user groups to define and enhance the systems they need and want. Lastly we directly compensate the CISP for the work that is done concerning the applications development.
  2. Users are direct recipients of the funds they earn in their positions with the producer firms. 
  3. The Community of Independent Service Providers are independent in that they are not affiliated with one specific producer or Joint Operating Committee. They are service providers to the oil and gas industry. Their services to People, Ideas & Objects and subscribing producers are provided as independent organizations. 

Society is put in peril when world oil production declines. There is evidence that the world's oil production has declined. Therefore the world needs to have the energy industry expand its production. To do so requires that we reorganize to enhance the division of labor and specialization within the industry. As economic development has proven, reorganization would achieve far greater oil and gas production. Management of the industry is conflicted in expanding the output of the industry. The less they do, the higher the oil and gas prices and the better they appear to perform. This managerial conflict must be addressed and the performance of the industry unleashed. To do so requires the current management of the industry to fund People, Ideas & Objects and build the systems as defined in the Draft Specification. Please join me here.

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Start Date

It might be reasonable to establish a start date in which we could look forward to beginning the next step in our developments. That being the development of the Preliminary Specification. Therefore, you should mark your calendars for January 1, 2011. That is when the development of the Preliminary Specification will begin. People who are interested in becoming members of the Community of Independent Service Providers (CISP), and participate directly in the Preliminary Specification, should begin the development of your proposal as soon as possible. We will begin accepting applications August 31, 2010.  


It would be ideal to have as many people as possible involved in the development of the Preliminary Specification. Therefore, special emphasis should be placed on the marketing aspects of your proposal, as all the other CISP members, users and producers will be able to view the wiki, where they are stored with the specifications deliverables, starting January 31, 2011. Users and producers would then be able to contact CISP members to have their ideas, participation and needs defined through the CISP membership.


Society is put in peril when world oil production declines. There is evidence that the world's oil production has declined. Therefore the world needs to have the energy industry expand its production. To do so requires that we reorganize to enhance the division of labor and specialization within the industry. As has been proven, this reorganization could achieve far greater oil and gas production. Management of the industry is conflicted in expanding the output of the industry. The less they do, the higher the oil and gas prices and the better they appear to perform. This managerial conflict must be addressed and the performance of the industry unleashed. To do so requires the current management of the industry to fund People, Ideas & Objects and build the systems as defined in the Draft Specification. Please join me here.

Technorati Tags:
 

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Phase Two

It has been an interesting June so far. What I see happening in the marketplace is quite remarkable. Discussion of the financial difficulties that oil and gas producers are having can be cited daily. Margins are thin, and in some instances, negative. Reserves and production profiles are in decline, while capital expenditures are ever increasing. The basis of this project has always been the volumes of earth science and engineering effort in each barrel of oil equivalent has and will continue to increase. To approach this issue, producers need to reorganize the fixed volume of human resources in order to achieve greater output and capabilities. Organize around the Joint Operating Committee as suggested in People, Ideas & Objects Draft Specification. The time for this project to be fully funded and begin developing the Draft Specification is near at hand. This is why we now need to shift to phase two of this project.


Phase one has been the research and development of the Draft Specification and associated attributes. In the first half of 2010 we have been fortunate to be able to conduct a fairly comprehensive review of the research that went into the Draft Specification. This review for all intents and purposes has ended. Academically proving the basis of the Draft Specification was valuable, now we need to shift gears and get on with the business of People, Ideas & Objects.


After a two week hiatus, I have posted a number of entries that intimate some of the changes that need to be made. This is the beginning of the “commercialization” of the Intellectual Property (IP) contained within this project. Although I am hesitant to prepare a budget and plan for how this project proceeds, these may be possible in the fourth quarter of 2010. The majority of the material being developed for that budget and plan generated from the entries that are written here in the next few months.


What is necessary now is for the producers to begin actively supporting this project. To sit back and wait until someone delivers a software application that meets your needs will be a long and lonely waste of time. To suggest that you can have systems that meet your needs without your direct involvement is foolish. The industry has to financially commit and actively participate in the communities that are an inherent part of these developments.


I don’t expect this transition from Phase one to two will necessarily be easy. It would be of great assistance if those that read this blog were to begin their own action plans. Plans on how they could participate and encourage the firm they work for to join in these developments. One of the difficult aspects of this second phase is the scope of the effort is very large. Not much will happen unless everyone gets involved.


Society is put in peril when world oil production declines. There is evidence that the worlds oil production has declined. Therefore the world needs to have the energy industry expand its production. To do so requires that we reorganize to enhance the division of labor and specialization within the industry. As has been proven, this reorganization could achieve far greater oil and gas production. Management of the industry is conflicted in expanding the output of the industry. The less they do, the higher the oil and gas prices and the better they appear to perform. This managerial conflict must be addressed and the performance of the industry unleashed. To do so require the current management of the industry to fund People, Ideas & Objects and build the systems as defined in the Draft Specification. Please join me here.


Technorati Tags:
 

Friday, June 18, 2010

We are an Oracle Customer

Cloud computing is a paradigm shift. The consequences of moving to that new platform are substantial for all concerned. As software developers, we are not immune to these changes. Viewing cloud computing, as developers, from the same perspective as that used in the past would eliminate many of the benefits of this new dynamic. This post seeks to highlight how People, Ideas & Objects, as cloud computing software providers to the oil and gas industry, approach the use of Oracle technologies and services.

The overall strategy that I have used with respect to Oracle is that we are perceived as a customer. In today's environment, Oracle's business is based on selling technology directly to the oil and gas firms. People, Ideas & Objects now represents the oil and gas firms interest by providing the cloud computing services, and therefore we are Oracle's customer.

Usually, as developers, we would be classified within Oracle's developer network. Providing People, Ideas & Objects with a discount on all of their products. As a result of being a "customer" as opposed to the traditional "developer", People, Ideas & Objects will have to pay the full list price for Oracle's technology. This premium being paid entitles us to perceive Oracle as we noted in the second paragraph of this post. This is also wholly consistent with how the innovative oil and gas producer is focused on their key competitive advantages of their asset base, and earth science & engineering capabilities.

Many of Oracle's technologies are the preferred choice in most markets. That is to say that we will use Oracle technology and services at every opportunity. Hardware, operating systems, database, middleware, applications, consulting and services. The only area of conflict in our policies is regarding the Community of Independent Service Providers (CISP). If a member of the CISP and Oracle are providing similar services, we will defer to, and support the CISP.

People, Ideas & Objects as providers of a software development capability and cloud computing provider. Are in partnership with Oracle in bringing this technology to the innovative oil and gas producer. One thing that can be said about Oracle's technology, is that it is the best. When we look at the difficulties in increasing the market supply of oil and gas to the global economy. It is challenges such as these that Oracle is prepared for.

Society is put in peril when world oil production declines. There is evidence that the worlds oil production has declined. Therefore the world needs to have the energy industry expand its production. To do so requires that we reorganize to enhance the division of labor and specialization within the industry. As has been proven, this reorganization could achieve far greater oil and gas production. Management of the industry are conflicted in expanding the output of the industry. The less they do, the higher the oil and gas prices and the better they appear to perform. This managerial conflict must be addressed and the performance of the industry unleashed. To do so requires the current management of the industry to fund People, Ideas & Objects and build the systems as defined in the Draft Specification. Please join me here.

Technorati Tags:
 

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Independence of the CISP

The past few months have provided a review of many of the attributes of the Community of Independent Service Providers (CISP). One of the key attributes that we have not been able to discuss or highlight is the independent nature of the people who are part of the CISP community. By independent we simply mean that the people are not affiliated with one producer firm. They are oriented to the Joint Operating Committee (JOC), and therefore do not bring any of the bias that people affiliated with one producer might.

This independence is of importance, particularly in the administrative areas of the oil and gas industry. What is central to the administration of the JOC is the bias towards all of the producers that are represented in the property. For example, it is assumed that most accounting personnel will be affiliated with certain JOC's as opposed to being employed by one firm. If people are affiliated with more then one JOC, which is highly likely, they may be associated with certain geographical regions or producing zones as their specialty. It is the JOC that is their employer / client, not the operator or any single firm that may have hired them.

This discussion precludes any of the administration that would be associated with the compliance and governance related areas of the individual producer firm. Administrators will also be engaged on a producer by producer basis. I will however note that the Compliance & Governance of the firm is mostly oriented to the decisions that are made at the JOC level, therefore, they are more a fallout of the decision process, as opposed to the all consuming activities they appear to be today.

The accounting for the JOC that is done in the People, Ideas & Objects Draft Specification is handled primarily in the Partnership Accounting Module. This module seeks to account for the JOC and the contributions that are made by each participant firm. Effectively eliminating the concept of having one firm designated as the operator, each producers resources are pooled through the Military Command & Control Metaphor. And those resources are costed to the JOC on the basis that they are either chargeable or non-chargeable to the other partners within the specific JOC. The resources that are provided by the CISP , and for that matter any service sector firm, are engaged contractually through the JOC and therefore are independent of any specific producer firm.

As an example, lets consider the manner in which production accounting allocations are handled under the proposed People, Ideas & Objects application. Lets first assume that the entire history of the properties development has been handled by People, Ideas & Objects application and the independence of the CISP . The overriding concern of the production allocation is to ensure that the methods of allocation be consistent with that which is captured in the spirit of the governing agreements. Because the CISP is oriented to the JOC and not one individual producer, interpretation of that agreement is consistent with the spirit. (Not to suggest that this is not the case in current oil and gas production accounting. ;))

Applying this same example to a property who's history has codified the production allocation process. This production allocation process would be adopted "as is" within the Partnership Accounting module.

Action to fund these developments is required. But action can also be taken by those that are employed in the oil and gas industry. Participation in the development of this software, either as a user or member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, is open to all those that may be interested. Our appeal should be based on these eight "Focused on" priorities and values of how better the oil and gas industry and its operations could be handled. They may not initially be the right way to go, but we are committed to working with the various communities to discover and ensure the right ones are.

Society is put in peril when world oil production declines. There is evidence that the worlds oil production has declined. Therefore the world needs to have the energy industry expand its production. To do so requires that we reorganize to enhance the division of labor and specialization within the industry. As has been proven, this reorganization could achieve far greater oil and gas production . Management of the industry are conflicted in expanding the output of the industry. The less they do, the higher the oil and gas prices and the better they appear to perform. This managerial conflict must be addressed and the performance of the industry unleashed. To do so requires the current management of the industry to fund People, Ideas & Objects and build the systems as defined in the Draft Specification. Please join me here

Technorati Tags:
 

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

The CISP is a marketplace.

If we were to have name tags on each of the birds in this picture. The mother bird of course would be the oil and gas industry. And the others would be PriceWaterhouse Coopers, IBM, Delloitte & Touche, EDS, Accenture, CapGemini etc. To sustain this type of "environment" would not be in the best interests of the innovative oil and gas producers. I see many of the types of services that are provided by these vendors to be in direct conflict with the members of the Community of Independent Service Providers. It is in our best interest to ensure that we don't replicate this relationship in the future. This post explains how the CISP will replace these service providers with value adding services to the innovative oil and gas producers.

Please note that I see the CISP providing much more then the services that are provided by just these firms. Recall some of the key areas where members of the CISP will be providing value include software definition and development with People, Ideas & Objects developers, software installation and integration using Oracle Application Integration Architecture, Accounting Service Provider, Representatives of user group, and conference planner to name just a few. To detail the list of services that are provided by the CISP runs the risk of limiting the imagination of what they can provide the innovative oil and gas producers.

What we are creating in the CISP is a market of self organizing individuals, groups and firms. Participation within the CISP is not limited to anyone, and is open to whomever wants to join. The only requirement is to follow this procedure. Once the license is signed and the summaries are posted, then the individual is free to develop their firm in the best interests of the People, Ideas & Objects software and the innovative oil and gas producer. This membership process would also be open to the named groups at the beginning of this post, if they desired to and believed they could make some money at it.

To eliminate the possibility that the CISP or market of self organizing individuals, groups or firms are precluded from the oil and gas firms business. (As reflected in the above picture.) People, Ideas & Objects needs to implement a policy change in the license that is granted to those licensees of the CISP . That change is to assess a royalty of 40% on any revenues in excess of $5 million to be payable to People, Ideas & Objects. Revenues that are subject to this royalty calculation are those that are derived from working with the People, Ideas & Objects developers and the associated CISP client producer firm.

We are doing this to provide any member of the CISP with an unconstrained $5 million revenue stream. Companies such as those named above, far exceed that threshold and therefore would find the royalty too onerous to be able to compete. This royalty is being implemented to ensure that the members of the CISP remain a market of self organizing individuals, groups or firms.

We have seen the level of innovation and ideas being generated from those named at the beginning of this post. Little if nothing has been generated in terms of implementing new and value adding ideas or technology to the oil and gas industry. Having a market of providers, that is unlimited in terms of who can participate, and financially penalizes the large firms is in the best interest of the innovative oil and gas producers.

Firms that are generating $5 to $10 million in gross revenues (net revenues of $5 to $8 million)  will still be able to generate significant value for their owners. That assumes they are able to build value for their clients, the innovative oil and gas producers. Instead of focusing on quantity, they can focus on the quality of the services they provide and continue to accelerate the specialization of the services provided and the industry division of labor.

Our policies are designed to motivate the members of the CISP to enter and prosper in building value for the innovative oil and gas producer. To develop this resource it is necessary to ensure that these people are free to pursue their business without the risk that they will be eliminated from the market by those mechanisms that are in play in the picture that is reflected above.

Society is put in peril when world oil production declines. There is evidence that the worlds oil production has declined. Therefore the world needs to have the energy industry expand its production. To do so requires that we reorganize to enhance the division of labor and specialization within the industry. As has been proven, this reorganization could achieve far greater oil and gas production. Management of the industry are conflicted in expanding the output of the industry. The less they do, the higher the oil and gas prices and the better they appear to perform. This managerial conflict must be addressed and the performance of the industry unleashed. To do so requires the current management of the industry to fund People, Ideas & Objects and build the systems as defined in the Draft Specification. Please join me here.

Technorati Tags:
 

Thursday, May 27, 2010

Langlois Personal Capitalism Part I

In Chapter 3 of Professor Langlois book "The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism" we look at "Personal Capitalism". In this, and my next post, I want to highlight the role of the entrepreneur in making the changes in the oil and gas industry. The Community of Independent Service Providers (CISP), Industrial Districts (ID), Business Groups (BG) or Small Knowledge Intensive Enterprises (SKIE) being filled with individual entrepreneurs acting in innovative and value generating ways. What becomes clear in this chapter is that the evolutions an industry goes through are usually brought about by unseen changes. I think that the unseen changes that the oil and gas industry will soon be faced with is the prospective decline in deliverability. This may appear to be an industry problem, but I think it is more of a societal issue in that reducing our energy demand will be problematic.

The bureaucracies that are in power today are unwilling to address the overall deliverability issue as theirs. If a producers production profile declines, they see that as a remote possibility and that would qualify as an isolated single event. If there is a potential decline of overall industry production, producers are unwilling to comment on the probability and don't see that as their problem. If unseen dangers lead to changes in an industries makeup, oil and gas might be in for a shake-up.

Nonetheless a decline, if it should occur, will be difficult to stop and impossible to reverse based on the current performance of the oil and gas firms. Five years of static deliverability is an ominous pre-cursor to a potential decline. The passing of these five years would seem to date how far behind the curve we are. With years of software development before we can exploit the Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the People, Ideas & Objects software application. We have much work to do. This morning the Obama administration have announced a six month moratorium on all offshore drilling. This may be the straw that breaks the Camel's back in terms of the U.S. energy consumption.

If one was willing to bet which group, the bureaucrats or the entrepreneurs will be the ones that solve this deliverability issue, I put my money with the entrepreneurs. Professor Langlois analyses Schumpeter's definition of the term.
The broad outlines of Schumpeter’s theory of entrepreneurship are of Weberian provenance (Carlin 1956). Indeed, one might say that Schumpeter’s schema is an application of Weber’s social theory to the problem of economic growth. Schumpeter’s innovation is to associate Weber’s category of charismatic leadership with the concept of entrepreneurship. p. 32
Weber is principally concerned with the religious leader or prophet, and to a lesser extent with military and political leadership; Schumpeter borrows heavily from that analysis in his characterization of the entrepreneur. Here we begin to see the outlines of Schumpeterian “personal capitalism,” which in its pure form is the antithesis of bureaucratic organization. Consider Weber’s account of the organization of charisma. p. 32
The corporate group which is subject to charismatic authority is based on an emotional form of communal relationship. The administrative staff of the charismatic leader does not consist of “officials”; at least its members are not technically trained. ... There is no hierarchy; the leader merely intervenes in general or in individual cases when he considers the members of his staff inadequate to a task to which they have been entrusted. There is no such thing as a definite sphere of authority and of competence. ... There are no established administrative organs. ... There is no system of formal rules, of abstract legal principles, and hence no process of judicial decision oriented to them. But equally there is no legal wisdom oriented to judicial precedent. Formally concrete judgments are newly created from case to case and are originally regarded as divine judgments and revelations. ... The genuine prophet, like the genuine military leader and every true leader in this sense, preaches, creates, or demands new obligations. In the pure type of charisma, these are imposed on the authority of revolution [sic] by oracles, or of the leader’s own will, and are recognized by the members of the religious, military, or party group because they come from such a source. (Weber 1947, pp. 360-361.) p. 32
Charismatic authority is thus outside the realm of everyday routine and the profane sphere. In this respect it is sharply opposed both to rational, and particularly bureaucratic, authority, and to traditional authority, whether in its patriarchal, patrimonial, or any other form. Both rational and traditional authority are specifically forms of everyday routine control of action; while the charismatic type is the direct antithesis of this. Bureaucratic authority is specifically rational in the sense of being bound to intellectually analysable rules; while charismatic authority is specifically irrational in the sense of being foreign to all rules. Traditional authority is bound to the precedents handed down from the past and to this extent is also oriented to rules. Within the sphere of its claims, charismatic authority repudiates the past, and is in this sense a specifically revolutionary force. (Weber 1947, pp. 361-362.) pp. 32 - 33
It is the charismatic, and therefore revolutionary, quality of entrepreneurship that makes it a source of economic growth, that allows it to play the role of “industrial mutation — if I may use that biological term — that incessantly revolutionizes the industrial structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one” (Schumpeter 1950 [1976, p. 83], emphasis original). p. 33
Recast in these explicitly Weberian terms, Schumpeter’s theory of entrepreneurship looks something like this. In its undeveloped state, an economy is based largely on traditional behavior, which bounds the possibilities for conscious economic activity. Under the right institutional setting — bourgeois capitalism — charismatic leadership arises, in the form of the entrepreneur, to break the crust of convention and to create new wealth by “‘lead[ing]’ the means of production into new channels” (Schumpeter 1934, p. 89). Charisma is personal and revolutionary; “in its pure form charismatic authority may be said to exist only in the process of originating. It cannot remain stable, but becomes either traditionalized or rationalized, or a combination of both” (Weber 1947, p. 364). In the economic sphere, of course, the tendency is toward rationalization. Not only do imitators rush in once the entrepreneur has blazed the trail, but also the problem of succession within the entrepreneurial organization leads (if the organization is to continue) to bureaucratization, that is, to the substitution of rules for personal authority; to the creation of abstract offices divorced from their individual holders; and to the increasing preeminence of specialized knowledge and spheres of competence (Weber 1947, pp. 330-334). p. 33
Langlois has captured Schumpeter's creative destruction and the business cycle in these quotations. If we agree on the problem that faces oil and gas, the decline in deliverability, it is reasonable to assume that we agree on the entrepreneur being a key to solving the problem. Langlois notes the change that needs to be brought about are initiated by the entrepreneur. Yesterday we discussed how individuals need to approach People, Ideas & Objects with a different mindset. [The cognitive and motivational paradox', the risk of becoming blind sleep-walking agents in the hands of whoever wants to feed us.] This mindset is accurately captured in Langlois discussion of the entrepreneur.

How I see this project developing is through the entrepreneurial efforts of the Community of Independent Service Providers. Each member of the CISP, SKIE, ID or BG would fulfill the role in making the necessary changes within the industry. Each member maybe supported by 5 - 10 support staff that are able to leverage the entrepreneur's talents. These groups would be part of the larger SKIE community that would work together through the enhanced Information Technologies they build with the People, Ideas & Objects software development capability. I think this is the logical and probable makeup of the service sectors of the greater oil and gas industry. What needs to be done today is that these members need to act.

I approach this environment with a sense of self preservation. There is an abundance of work that needs to be done. I have two choices in approaching this work, I can do it all, or I can do none of it. I choose the sane approach and find a role that I am best suited to filling. Raising the money needed for development and the CISP. To involve myself in the actually software development at this point is counter productive, or more probably destructive. My key role to date has been to ensure that the change as defined by the Draft Specification happens.
But — and this is the heart of Schumpeter’s thesis — once the hard work of crust-breaking has been done, charismatic leadership is no longer necessary, and the entrepreneur must ride into the sunset. p. 34
I can be a strong advocate for this software development. I am the one to encourage the investors and shareholders in oil and gas to fund these developments. I am the one who can direct the producers to involve themselves in the various communities working to build these solutions. That is the role that I feel I should fill on a go forward basis.
As we saw, however, Schumpeter’s claims are much different. He associates “personal” capitalism with charismatic leadership. It is the entrepreneur who makes dramatic, and often creatively destructive, changes. In Schumpeter, those who come along and fill in the details are important, but it is the changes that really matter. The obsolescence thesis is a claim not that large, fully articulated enterprises may be necessary to realize the vision of an individual entrepreneur; rather, it is a claim that those enterprises will be the sources of change. Let us put it succinctly. In Chandler, large organizations are the result of economic change; in Schumpeterian later capitalism, economic change is the result of large organizations. p. 36
Our appeal should be based on these eight "Focused on" priorities and values of how better the oil and gas industry and its operations could be handled. They may not initially be the right way to go, but we are committed to working with the various communities to discover and ensure the right ones are. If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags:
 

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Langlois Obsolescence

I am encouraged by the shareholder lawsuit against BP's directors. Each day there appears to be more and more people taking action to deal with these bureaucracies.

Chapter 2 of Professor Richard N. Langlois' book "The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism"  is entitled "The Obsolescence of the Entrepreneur" and deals with the Schumpterian Dichotomy. That dichotomy is the declining importance of the entrepreneur in the latter part of Schumpeter writings. This appears to be in contrast to his earlier writings in which he focused on the entrepreneur. What this post seeks to better define is Professor Langlois' vanishing hand hypothesis and its application to oil and gas. That is, the era of the large bureaucracy had its time and place. That era is now passing, to be replaced once again by the entrepreneur.
In the "early" Schumpeter -- Schumpeter I -- the innovation process might best be characterized as a linear one. Christopher Freeman (1982) describes it this way. Basic inventions are more or less exogenous to the economic system; their supply is perhaps influenced by market demand in some way, but their genesis lies outside the existing market structure. p. 21
Freeman notes that innovation is under the direction of no one group or individual. Adam Smith's invisible hand is present and the market provides. In this next quotation we see Chandler's visible hand.
“The main differences between Schumpeter II and Schumpeter I,” says Freeman, “are in the incorporation of endogenous scientific and technical activities conducted by large firms... p. 21
These quotations are noting the changes in the source of innovation. From the entrepreneur to the rise of the successful corporate Research & Development (R&D) arms of large firms such as Xerox PARC, Bell Labs and others. These firms R&D activities replaced the role of the entrepreneur during the middle of the last century. Langlois vanishing hand suggest that the role of the entrepreneur will rise again in prominence to the bureaucracy. Therefore it is reasonable to ask, what is the critical role of the entrepreneur?
Indeed, the job of the entrepreneur is precisely to introduce new knowledge. The “Circular Flow of Economic Life” is a state in which knowledge is not changing. Economic growth occurs at the hands of entrepreneurs, who bring into the system knowledge that is qualitatively new – knowledge not contained in the existing economic configuration. p. 27
Its more then just knowledge. Ideas have a critical role in economic growth. People, Ideas & Objects is derivative of Professor Paul Romer's "New Growth Theory" of People, Ideas and Things. The idea of using the Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the innovative oil and gas industry was in front of everyone in the industry. Why didn't this idea percolate to the top earlier?
There has to be a mechanism by which new knowledge enters the system. And that mechanism cannot be rational calculation, for as David Hume (1978, p. 164) long ago observed, “no kind of reasoning can give rise to a new idea.” p. 27
What has been done already has the sharp-edged reality of all things which we have seen and experienced; the new is only the figment of our imagination. Carrying out a new plan and acting according to a customary one are things as different as making a road and walking along it. p. 27
How different a thing this is becomes clearer if one bears in mind the impossibility of surveying exhaustively all the effects and counter-effects of the projected enterprise. Even as many of them as could in theory be ascertained if one had unlimited time and means must practically remain in the dark. As military action must be taken in a given strategic position even if all the data potentially procurable are not available, so also in economic life action must be taken without working out all the details of what must be done. Here the success of everything depends on intuition, the capacity of seeing things in a way which afterwards proves to be true, even though it cannot be established at the moment, and of grasping the essential fact, discarding the unessential, even though one can give no account of the principles by which this is done. Thorough preparatory work, and special knowledge, breadth of intellectual understanding, talent for logical analysis, may under certain circumstances be sources of failure. (Schumpeter, 1934, p. 85.) pp. 27 - 28
I read this as not being the role of one entrepreneur. I have identified that the Joint Operating Committee is the key organizational construct of an innovative oil and gas producer. I have taken that idea and formulated a vision, the Draft Specification, of how the idea of using the JOC could be incorporated in the day to day of the industry. From this point forward, it is the work of many entrepreneurs to develop the application and make the industry as innovative as possible. That is where the Industrial District (ID), Business Groups (BG), Small Knowledge Intensive Enterprises (SKIE) and Community of Independent Service Providers play a key and different role then what is done today. Langlois notes.
Entrepreneurship – introducing the qualitatively new – is an activity inherently different, it would seem, from the kind of rational calculation portrayed in the imagery of neoclassical modeling.
It is interesting that Schumpeter regards the entrepreneurial act as requiring in fact greater conscious rationality than routine activity (Schumpeter 1934, p. 85). This reemphasizes the empirical nature of his conception of economic knowledge. Routine behavior requires less conscious rationality because it is essentially “preprogrammed” through trial-and-error learning. Notice, of course, that, at least in “early” capitalism, the conscious rationality of the entrepreneur is not adequate to the task of innovation. This is why entrepreneurship requires intuition, the leap of logic. But – and here we get to the heart of the matter – conscious rationality, for Schumpeter, is in fact becoming increasingly adequate to the job of dealing with the radically new.
The more accurately, however, we learn to know the natural and social world, the more perfect our control of facts becomes; and the greater the extent, with time and progressive rationalisation, within which things can be simply calculated, and indeed quickly and reliably calculated, the more the significance of this [entrepreneurial] function decreases. Therefore the importance of the entrepreneurial type must diminish just as the importance of the military commander has already diminished. (Schumpeter, 1934, p. 85, emphasis added.)
Notice the syllogism. Because the unknown can be increasingly calculated rationally, the “extra-logical” function of the entrepreneur becomes increasingly unnecessary, and so the importance of the entrepreneurial type must diminish. p. 28
Placing the caveat "experienced entrepreneur" on the ID, BG, SKIE or CISP is a necessary. People who are able to see the forest for the trees in terms of what has to be done. As much as no one was in control of the innovation in the entrepreneurial era of Schumpeter's first writings, no one can influence the scope and scale of the project defined here. What we can do is share the understanding of how the industry operates, capture that in the software and apply it through the innovative tools that we develop.

We are at the beginning of this process. The bureaucracy remains in complete control. However we find encouragement in the ongoing activities in the industry. In these next three quotations Langlois provides us with an understanding of where we are in the process and how the transition will come about.
"Defenseless fortresses invite aggression, especially if there is rich booty in them. Aggressors will work themselves up into a state of rationalizing hostility -- aggressors always do. No doubt it is possible, for a time, to buy them off. But this last resource [sic] fails as soon as they discover that they can have it all" (Schumpeter 1950 [1976, p. 143]). p. 30
and
“Thus the modern corporation, although the product of the capitalist process, socializes the bourgeois mind; it relentlessly narrows the scope of capitalist motivations; not only that, it will eventually kill its roots” (Schumpeter 1950 [1976, p. 156]). Like Marx, then, he sees capitalism as leading to its own destruction. But unlike Marx, Schumpeter sees capitalism as the victim of its own economic success not its economic failure. This tale stands Marx on his head, its plot laced with a heavy and self satisfied irony. The tone is disinterested and the attitude fatalistic; but the message is largely cautionary. At base, Schumpeter is nothing so much as a neoconservative, perhaps the first neoconservative. p. 30
Lastly a word of caution to put these points in context.
In the end, however, taking all this too seriously puts us in danger of reading Schumpeter literal-mindedly. The force of the argument is in the texture of the landscape -- not in its details. Indeed, there is a sense in which the “Schumpeterian tension” -- the tension between the Schumpeter who comes to praise entrepreneurship and the Schumpeter who comes to bury it -- actually enriches the majestic irony of Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. p. 31
Our appeal should be based on these eight "Focused on" priorities and values of how better the oil and gas industry and its operations could be handled. They may not initially be the right way to go, but we are committed to working with the various communities to discover and ensure the right ones are. If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: