People, Ideas & Objects Tactical and Strategic Changes, Part III
The stink coming out of oil and gas indicates that the situation is ripe. It’s my belief that People, Ideas & Objects have put forward a viable and credible solution to the issues that are more than evident to everyone now. I have and will continue to be patient however, the time necessary for me to act definitely is upon us. The industry can’t afford any further time wasted. Our case has also been made as to what the contrast would be between an industry operated under the Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers vs the current bureaucracy. We see today in the inactions of the bureaucrats nothing has changed. Their pursuit of consolidations, increased drilling activity, unauthorized clean energy transitions and the always hilarious “capital discipline” lasting for about a week is just more of the same. For the life of me I'll never understand why they consider that we're the bad guys for focusing on their profitability. As bad as it is, nothing will ever change. Therefore we’re changing it for them. From Forbes
The risk is that the surge in private shale activity overtakes the “restrained growth” narrative that has defined public operators since last year. Larger-than-expected production growth could depress WTI prices and hurt producers and oil services companies.
Much of what the Preliminary Specification does is define and support the oil and gas producer firm, industry and service industry around the use of the Joint Operating Committee. The legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural, communication, innovation and strategic framework of the oil and gas industry. Joint Operating Committees begin at conception, to represent the partnerships that are systemic throughout the industry for the variety of reasons they’re created. All of the actions involving engineering and earth science of the producer firm actively recognize the Joint Operating Committee. It is the administrative and accounting that has deviated from this business to focus on the accounting, tax, regulatory and compliance issues of the corporation. It is here that the communication between these two silos, the business of the Joint Operating Committee vs the administrative and accounting within the producer firms, ceased to effectively communicate. I believe the aggravating factor in this separation was the introduction of computers in the 1960s. When they arrived it was asked what would / should / could be done with them. The answer was accounting, tax, regulation and compliance for the corporation. And the producers' two silo's separated further each year from there. The adoption of the cultural means of the industry, the Joint Operating Committee, within the Preliminary Specification provides us with an extensive and productive opportunity to redefine the future work that is done throughout the industry and to do so profitably, and in the real sense of profits.
Since the late 1700s the source of all value creation has been a result of the further specialization and division of labor. The efficiencies are endless and therefore the Preliminary Specification has implemented high levels of specialization and division of labor, particularly in our user community and their service provider organizations. We have also developed an enhanced industry wide ERP software development capability and capacity in People, Ideas & Objects. These capabilities and capacities will be able to further iterate on the subsequent expansion of specialization and division of labor to cure the gaps that are discovered in the course of the day to day of the user community and their service providers work, and fill them with new roles and processes. Filling gaps is the method in which specialization is enhanced, this is simply done when the gaps that are identified are subsequently filled with new processes and resources. However without a purpose built software development capability, driven by an active user community and an enabling user community vision in which to enhance the software, no changes can or will take place. The software must be changed first in order for any organizational change to be lasting through to the next change or iteration. When people seek to change the organization without the changes to the software first, they’ll fail and regress back to the methods defined in the current software process. This is one of the many reasons that oil and gas has failed to change and progress. Producer bureaucrats have failed to sponsor any activity in the ERP marketplace for at least the past three decades. Therefore the status quo bureaucracy remains unchallenged in their methods of management and incapable of dealing with the issues and opportunities that stand before it. The speed and performance of their organizations are incapable of dealing with their environment and are represented in the financial statements which accurately predict the producers imminent demise. If producers were using successful ERP systems would their businesses be so unsuccessful? People, Ideas & Objects suggest that it’s not enough to own the oil and gas asset anymore. Access to the software that makes the oil and gas asset profitable will be the critical value generating element of the oil and gas industry.
Another aspect of our Preliminary Specification is that the overhead burden of each individual producer will be substantially reduced as a result of the changes we’re instituting. These changes are a result of the burden of the producers' fixed-cost, unshared and unshareable, administrative and accounting capacities and capabilities are reallocated to the variable-cost, shared administrative and accounting capacities and capabilities of the service provider organizations. Providing an industry based administrative and accounting capability that is variable in its cost, variable based on production. The other attribute we’re using to reduce the costs of administrative and accounting, yet increase the performance and quality of our offering, is to use specialization and the division of labor to do more with less. These two elements of the Preliminary Specification work to enhance the cost performance of the producers. We believe that overhead costs are substantial, and are another one of the reasons for the producers chronic unprofitability. We also apply the inverse logic of this principle in the area of software development. When each producer approaches the need to develop their own software the demand on the markets IT resources outstrips supply, escalating the costs of the resource. More importantly it is the unshared nature of this redundant spending on these costs within each siloed organization in areas which are not distinct oil and gas competitive advantages. The demands of highly specialized software developments are no longer a capability that can be attained in-house, we believe, by a commercially viable oil and gas producer. Therefore the Preliminary Specifications consolidation of the industries resources on one focused ERP software development in an objective, standard and compliant manner offers better functionality and capability at considerably less cost and higher quality to each producer.
There is a fundamental principle within the Preliminary Specification that governs how the producer will operate in the future. Essentially oil and gas will be operated as a profitable business. Novel concept I know. Bilking investors had a good run but Bernie Madoff is no longer with us. The legacy of his thinking remains in the industry and there will be no future investments made by any investors capable of funding the capital demands of the North American producers. Simply for the reason that there isn’t enough capital on the planet. The blog series in which we identified four new categories of incremental trillion dollar costs of paying for the unrecognized capital costs of past production, rebuilding, refurbishment and reclamation also need to be considered. The producers will need to prove they can be profitable in the real sense for at least a decade, and compete on the capital markets with all other industries before they can reclaim any renewed reputation with investors. Therefore People, Ideas & Objects believe the only source of cash large enough to satisfy the needs of the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas producer and industry are the consumers who will have to begin paying for the full cost of capital, operations, royalties and overhead costs of oil and gas exploration and production with an element of real profitability. The bureaucrats have rightly interpreted this not only as the demise of their franchise but also as really hard work.
All overhead costs should be passed on to the consumer in the current period. Not stored in property, plant and equipment for a generation as it is today. If oil and gas is a capital intensive industry, does that not imply that the majority of the costs that will be passed on to the consumers will also be capital in nature? Currently all of the costs including overhead and interest of the producer are capitalized and stored in property, plant and equipment for as long as possible by the bureaucrats. This enables the CEO’s to compare who has the biggest balance sheet among their peers. “Building balance sheets” and “putting cash in the ground” have become the talking points throughout the industry. These reflect the disconnect between those that are operating the industry and reality. It is lunacy and they should look critically at why these ever became the objectives they each parroted to one another in perfect harmony for many decades.
Cash is the hypercritical resource that never stays in one place for long in oil and gas. This is also the reason the investors were annually fleeced for another round of dilution of their prior years investments. The reason for the chronic demand for cash throughout the industry is easily understood if anyone were to apply basic cash management principles. Oil and gas bureaucrats operate a spending machine, money only goes out. The cash that comes in from the sales of oil and gas has to pay for everything each month. Nothing is ever returned. Producers are seeking to build balance sheets and put cash in the ground. Therefore none of these costs are being recognized in the commodity prices that are passed on to the consumers. Therefore these overhead monies are not replaced each month in the form of a “cash float” as it is known in business. For example overhead is capitalized to the tune of 85% on average across the industry. (Still waiting for evidence to the contrary.) Therefore none of these overhead costs, which include rent, salaries, Post-It-Notes, telephones, etc are ever recovered in the current period from the price of the commodity to cover next month's charges. These overhead costs represent the ever expanding, bigger, better, bloated balance sheet of the CEO. That’s their job! Therefore each and every producer has to start anew each month with the fresh challenge of finding cash to pay the light bill etc. Secondly when producers seek to capitalize everything to property, plant and equipment in order to emulate the value of the firms reserves, they’re not passing these capital costs on to the consumers. Therefore they are storing the cash literally in the ground. But then that is what they’ve been telling us. Cash goes into the spending machine. Needs to be reloaded with fresh cash from an outside source each and every month. I’m beginning to see why the bureaucrats have fought so hard to keep me quiet all this time. They either don’t understand what I’m saying, they don’t want to air their dirty laundry or they don’t want to get caught. I guess then I have one question. Why is it that we never see any details regarding the breakdown of overhead incurred in producers. Is there something in there they don’t want us to see?
While the investor watches the behavior of the oil and gas bureaucrat, causing them to nervously shuffle their papers about and begin sweating from simple questions such as what is it they're hiding? They may want to drop another quick question or two on them and ask. Why is it that they don’t use a first tiered ERP systems provider such as Oracle? Why have they stuck with the same systems that began in the 1980s and why is the Preliminary Specification, which is an Oracle based solution, the only solution being offered in the market? Where and what are the existing competitors proposing? Where are their solutions to the industry issues? A question for the vendors might be, since their product was being used in the market how is it, and why is it that the industry failed while using your product? Would the industry have failed if it had appropriate systems in place? And why is it that the industry does not have any tier one ERP systems provider implemented? Why would the bureaucrats, who I’ve alleged are operating a Bernie Madoff style of operation, want to have systems that have failed to make the industry successful? Why are they so satisfied with low quality systems and poor accounting practices? (Again this is not a comment on the high quality of the people who work within oil and gas.) Credibility is what the bureaucracy lost. People, Ideas & Objects provided a means in which they could re-establish their credibility in terms of real profitability. They’ve slammed that door shut on themselves. It’s now time to deal with that and that is what People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and service providers have done.
The Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations, everywhere and always. Setting the foundation for profitable North American energy independence. People, Ideas & Objects have published a white paper “Profitable, North American Energy Independence -- Through the Commercialization of Shale.” that captures the vision of the Preliminary Specification and our actions. Users are welcome to join me here. Together we can begin to meet the future demands for energy. Anyone can contact me at 713-965-6720 in Houston or 587-735-2302 in Calgary, or email me here.