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.

Technorati Tags: People's CISP Revenue-Model User Organization

Our Revenue Model Part II

In this our second instalment that details our Revenue Model, we apply and extend Professor Jurgen Habermas’ 1960’s theory of different knowledge interests. Building on yesterdays discussion of People, Ideas & Objects value proposition, and targeting the oil and gas producers as the sole source of revenue, this post will delve into the difficult question regarding what we need these systems for.

We need to ask ourselves what we need these systems for. Are we developing systems that manage the commercial operations of an oil and gas producer? Of course we are, but that does not address the societal and individual needs of these systems. If we continue to look at just the needs of the producers, then we are leaving many needs unaddressed. Society and individuals are critical elements of a successful oil and gas industry. For example society benefits by having producers and the service industries efficiently interact and develop profitable operations, and individuals create innovative solutions to the demand they see for their services. Overall organizations, individuals and society benefit by an increased and expanding division of labor and specialization.  In today’s globalized, high technology workplace, an expanded division of labor and specialization can be more efficiently created through a software development capability like that described by People, Ideas & Objects in its Draft Specification.

When we concern ourselves with the economic output of the oil and gas industry. To expand that output requires that we organize based on greater levels of specialization and a further division of labor. The responsibility for increasing output does not fall to society, individuals or organizations in isolation but to all three. Therefore it is reasonable to state that what we need these systems to address society, individuals and organizations needs. I do not foresee the further development of the division of labor occurring without the active involvement of systems development. In a somewhat deliberate manner where all groups are represented.

If we look critically at the division of labor, and eliminate some of the constraints to expanding it further. Constraints like the limitations of working within one firm or one Joint Operating Committee (JOC). If an individual has the capacity to apply their skills to a task for a geographical region that includes 100 producers and 200 JOC’s, the efficiencies could be substantial. The ability to manage a task in this fashion doesn’t exist within our current organizational context. Maybe it should.

Following on the logic of the previous post, where the producer firms are the sole source of the revenue for People, Ideas & Objects and associated communities. Sharing the input of these systems development across society, individuals and the organizations might appear to be inconsistent with the reality that 100% of the funds are coming from the producers.

That’s why the People, Ideas & Objects revenue model shares the one time development costs across the subscribing producers. Just because the producer firms receive 100% of the proceeds of oil and gas sales, doesn't mean that they earn 100% of the revenues of the oil and gas sales. Individuals and society have a role and responsibility in these systems and therefore, these need to be considered irrespective of the desires of the producer firms. We’re not going to develop systems that address the needs of society, individuals and organizations when producers have a disproportionate influence due to their control of the revenue stream.

To sustain this software development requires that we cease being subjected to the individual decisions of one or more producers. A company that chooses not to proceed with the development or implementation of these technologies can not hold up the greater benefit of all concerned. Essentially I am stating that the decision to support these communities needs to be made where appropriate representation considers the needs of all concerned. Looking at the cost benefit analysis of supporting this software from the point of view of only one producer misses the benefits to society and individuals.

Habermas theories deal with the issues of power, influence and most importantly emancipation.

But when it comes to using science or computers to change the relations of power in our society, when emancipation is put forth as a knowledge or development interest, then the question of values becomes more controversial. Who is to be emancipated, and from whom? Who is to loose power, and who is to gain? And how can it be the business of scientists or computer professionals to take part in a political struggle for power?

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: People's Revenue-Model Development Organization Orlikowski Value-Proposition

Hofmeister on BP's plans

Former Shell Oil Company president has the following comments on Bloomberg today.

It's very important for BP to turn the page so to speak, although they still have the well to put out, and hopefully that will go according to plans over the next couple of weeks. But they have to turn their attention to the future. And part of that future in addition to the asset sales is getting on with what I call the boring bits of business, and that is, under John Browne they did a great job of expanding the portfolio and growing the company. But I don't think they ever integrated the company and turned it into a high performing institution, that takes a lot of time and Tony Hayward saw this and started the process but didn't get far enough. Now I think its time to really get into the structures, processes, systems the procedures so that the whole company operates the same way all over the world. 

Makes at least two people that think the boring bits of business are needed.

Technorati Tags: People's Change Energy Firm Ideas Management Organization

The China Syndrome

In a recent post we highlighted the EIA’s revised energy supply forecast. The chart from that post shows a 1 million barrel per day reduction in current production volumes. Econbrowser is now publishing anlysis of the EIA’s energy demand forecast, focusing on the impact that China will have in the marketplace. 

Providing the market with adequate energy supplies would be a difficult issue on its own. Adding the unprecedented demand expected from China, provides a real opportunity for the innovative oil and gas producer. The author of the econbrowser article, Stephen Kopits notes an interesting characteristic of energy demand.

Oil demand does not grow linearly with GDP. Rather, the bulk of oil demand growth occurs in the two decades during which societies typically acquire motor vehicles, after which per capita oil demand flattens. For example, per capita oil consumption in the United States is today lower than it was in 1979, even though per capita income has increased substantially since.

That is not to say that the U.S. demand for energy has dropped. The focus on motor vehicles alone, which is what Kopits reviews, would therefore limit the potential demand from China to just that form of consumption. If we are to gain an understanding of the volume of potential demand from China, motor vehicles will be a portion of that demand, but not the sole source of the demand increase. Now the scary part of the analysis. Comparing the per capita increases in energy use of Japan (1960 - 1973) and Korea (1976 - 1996) and using either of those trajectories in China’s situation shows...

In any event, without delving deeper, we might expect China's steady state demand for oil could prove not less than that of more advanced Asian nations. Based on the experience of Korea and Japan, China's current population would be expected to consume approximately 55 mbpd at steady state (when per capita consumption plateaus), or nearly 2/3 of current global oil production, were the supply available.

One might argue that this is an unreasonable amount of energy consumption. It imputes systemic gridlock throughout China, and therefore would define the upper limit of what is possible. Nonetheless the volume of energy demand will be substantial. In this next quotation Kopits argues that the EIA’s forecast demand is similarly too low.

By contrast, the EIA sees China's oil consumption at only 10 mbpd for 2015, a growth rate of approximately 2.7% from current levels, and at only 16 mbpd by 2030. Is this consistent with a country whose vehicle sales are up 56% in the first five months of the year? Where sales of Audi's are up 77% and those of BMW have doubled compared to the first five months of last year? Is China truly going to be satisfied, as the EIA would have it, with less than 1/5th of the per capita oil consumption of Korea in 2030, even though they should be similar by that time?

and

The differences in views about China's oil demand outlook have enormous policy implications. If the EIA is right, and China will forget how to grow, then pressures on the oil supply will be modest. On the other hand, if China is to develop like other countries in Asia, the pressure on the oil supply will be crushing, with oil shocks, recessions, and war all conceivable outcomes. The energy--as well as the economic and security--policy differences between the two scenarios are like night and day.

I don’t think it has to be that way. Call me an optimist but I think that whatever China, the U.S. and all others need in terms of energy, it is possible to supply them at prices that reflect that demand. The costs associated with the exploration and production will be substantially higher then what they are today. The easy stuff is gone, that is something that we can all agree on. The prices and volumes of production are unknown at this time, with demand growth from China, the oil and gas business has moved into a different era of operations. We know that a commodity like oil or gas is affected by the demand from China no matter where the source of production is. 


Today’s oil and gas firms, particularly the large Independents and International Oil Companies are having difficulty generating value. The cost structures have caught up to the commodities prices and the performance of these bureaucratic firms is diminishing rapidly. If we look forward to 2030 we can assume that the way these firms are managed today will be history. No one would establish a firm today to operate in the fashion of the bureaucracy in 2030. 


What we do know about 2030 is that the industry will be using advanced systems to manage their operations. It is also reasonable to assume that the Joint Operating Committee (JOC) will be the key organizational construct of the innovative producer. The use of both the technology and the JOC will be decided upon today. Approaching issues that are as broad in scope as the supply and demand of energy, that present this level of opportunity, can not be approached in the same old bureaucratic fashion. We need to pursue a definitive course of action, by developing the Draft Specification 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 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: People's China Economics Energy IEA Leadership Organization Vision

Location, location, location.

As in the retail business, location is the key. With January 1, 2011 being the start date of the development of the Preliminary Specification. We need to consider the locations in which the People, Ideas & Objects operations will be based. Settling on which areas of operations helps to further define the “what” and “how” of the applications development. The choice of locations will also have influence on the many positions that will be available with People, Ideas & Objects.


The two areas we are able to settle the location are; the region for the developers and the location for the cloud computing infrastructure. Dealing with the computing infrastructure first, it has been decided that these resources will be based in Houston. Although the speed of light would limit the choice of location anywhere on earth, Houston provides several advantages. The primary reason is of course that Houston is the centre of the energy universe. Establishing a central location for the People,Ideas & Objects infrastructure and staffing is the second reasoning for choosing Houston. Whether it is supporting users and members of the Community of Independent Service Providers, Houston will be the base for these resources. The specific positions that are based in Houston include, the Chief Operating Officer, Vice-President Business Development, Vice-President Community Development, and Vice-President Infrastructure.


The development group is likewise constrained by the speed of light. Setting up a primary location for these resources needs to consider access to a large community of developers. That’s Silicon Valley. Recall we are Oracle customer. And when we consider the location of Oracle’s resources, headquartered in Redwood Shores California, Oracle has the majority of their development and technical resources available in Silicon Valley. These resources will be headed up by the Vice-President Development position noted here.

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: People's Community Development Organization

Economics as Astrology

Richard Fernandez is right. Talking about economics in his Belmont Club blog, Fernandez raises many valid points in this recent post. A frequent contributor to Pajamas Media, he is responding to Paul Krugman’s comment that now is the beginning of a Third Depression. Fernandez equates Krugman’s comments to astrologist Madame La Zonga, he has a valid point. When Nobel Prize economists suggest that more spending of borrowed money will save us, it is economic voodoo.

The fact that experts cannot settle on the proper prediction suggests the model they use can give rise to multiple or even contradictory predictions, like a compass needle that spins with alacrity of the second hand of an analog watch. The physicist Frank Tipler says that with a compass like that you should start worrying. He argued that since Nobel Prize economists could manifestly rise only to the level of predictive competence of astrology, they should exhibit the same modesty as Madame La Zonga.

People, Ideas & Objects could be accused of falling for, or prescribing the same economic voodoo. We have relied heavily on the analysis of Professor Carlota Perez in predicting the economic environment that we now find ourselves in. A key difference between Krugman and Perez’ commentary is that Perez is looking at the historical record and suggesting patterns that have occurred before, and that are systemic over time. She is not suggesting a formula for how the future will unfold, only that in certain situations, history shows these events occur with predictable regularity. Krugman on the other hand, believes his prescription is the only valid remedy.  



Up until June 1, 2010 we have focused on the academic aspects of this project. Now, in phase two, we are focused on commercializing the research that has been undertaken. In our defense I would assert that we are actively providing a solution to what we see as happening in oil and gas. We have suggested that the oil and gas firm may be economically challenged unless they changed their key organizational construct to the Joint Operating Committee (JOC). If we look at the example of Shell, who recently completed a comprehensive restructuring of their organization, yet, based on today’s energy prices, are unable to earn a profit on their overall operations. This same scenario is, and will be played out across the industry. An industry that I have accused of muddling through as opposed to actively invoking the changes prescribed by adopting the Draft Specification. Fernandez notes.

Leaving economic policy to common sense might actually be the safer course. Wikipedia described an experiment in the 1980s which suggested that because macroeconomic models performed so poorly, the best course was often to leave well enough alone and muddle through rather than relying on ‘activist’ or ‘visionary’ prescriptions.

People, Ideas & Objects is based on the vision as described in the Draft Specification. Taking the situation at Shell, a prescribed course of further muddling-through might resolve their lack of profitability. On the other hand, using People, Ideas & Objects vision of using the Joint Operating Committee provides an alternative designed to solve exactly that lack of profitability. What was once an economic prescription, that being People, Ideas & Objects vision, was “speculation” on one of many of the possible outcomes of the industry. That speculation has now become the solution to what the industry is ailing from. Some would call this prescient, I call it lucky.



There are those areas (macroeconomics) of the economics profession that equate well with the astrological practices of Madame La Zonga. There are however, other areas (microeconomics) of the economics profession that are fact based, such as specialization and the division of labor, these are the areas that People, Ideas & Objects have focused on providing value.  Our prescribed solution may yet prove to be voodoo, however, I wonder what Shell thinks.



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: People's Economics Organization Change

The Division of Labor

The question has been asked, how does the Draft Specification implement a renewed division of labor and specialization? This is a good question, and one who's answer is not fully described in the Draft Specification. I want to be mindful that I don’t interfere in the development of the Preliminary and subsequent specifications. These developments are user driven developments, for me to interfere by commenting on certain aspects would have serious consequences. Users need to know it is they who have the power to make the changes they need. I see this question as being a further clarification of the Draft Specification, and since there are no developments currently being conducted, I do not see any risk in answering this question at this point in time. I will however mention that my perspective may be limited, that the community will be able to add substantially to these points.

To revisit why the division of labor and specialization are important to the oil and gas industry. It simply is the sole source of any economic development. As time passes and the reorganization of industries continues, a further division of labor through greater individual specialization increases the economic output of fixed resources. Therefore to increase the volume of oil and gas production, it is necessary to reorganize the industry based on a more defined division of labor. In this globalized economy, the need to employ software to manage the division of labor is a necessity. The energy industry therefore needs a software development capability, such as that offered here by People, Ideas & Objects, to expand its output.

In our recent review of Professor Langlois we stumbled upon the solution to this difficult question. Recall his words were “gap-filling” in terms of Industrial Districts and Business Groups. The filling of gaps is the process of identifying areas where work needs to be done. The process of going about and filling those gaps is how the division of labor is expanded.

The primary People, Ideas & Objects software modules that enable the identification of gaps is in the Resource Marketplace, Knowledge & Learning, Research & Capabilities modules and the Military Command & Control Metaphor. The Draft Specification is silent on this capability and as I mentioned earlier, this posts content should be considered clarification and possibly an addition to the spec.

Imagine for a moment that the Joint Operating Committee (JOC) has a distribution of the people that are assigned specific tasks to be completed. These can be seen as within the Military Command & Control Metaphor (MCCM) that details the organization and the roles and responsibilities of the people involved. Imagine for a moment that the makeup of the MCCM in the JOC can be compared to a “template” of the optimal distribution or known division of labor. A software driven comparison of the two charts, the MCCM to the template, shows the “gaps” that need to be filled. This same analysis could also be applied in the same fashion for the roles and responsibilities of an individual producer.

How much of this analysis is unique and confidential to the applicable JOC or producer is unknown at this time. It is reasonable to assume that their might also be prototypical industry division of labor templates that are developed within the Community of Independent Service Providers. Where members of the CISP have specialized in increasing organizational output through analysis of the division of labor of JOC’s and producers.

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: People's Langlois Organization Community Military-Command Specification

Positions, positions and more positions.

First of all, let me note for the record, we are not in a position to hire anyone. We have no financial support from the industry and expect no one to have to incur any risk in the development of these systems. There are times when writing this blog seems like I have become completely delusional, this is one of those posts. The purpose in mentioning these positions is to provide the readers of this blog with an understanding of where and how they may be able to fit into the developments, when they are funded.

In past blog entries we have been able to list a small number of positions that are involved in the development of the application. These previously noted positions are as follows.

Product Owner

When we begin development, we will be looking for these somewhat new and interesting positions. With the number of development teams approaching the low twenties, each with their own Product Owners, we will be looking for a large number of people to fill these positions.

In a previous blog post, we documented some of the work that is carried out by Product Owners.

Account Manager

A little bit of chaos never hurt anyone. Too much chaos and we run the risk of disrupting the communities involved in this development. That’s what the Account Manager position is designed to deal with. Ideally these people are seconded from the producer firms that they will represent as an Account Manager. In a previous blog post, we documented the work of the Account Manager.

Agile Team Business Analyst

We highlighted the Agile Team Business Analyst position in another recent blog post.

We also have the following executive positions available, when we are funded that is.

Chief Financial Officer

As all good firms have, financial management is an inherent part of success. As someone who has been a CFO, I have a strong perspective on the position. The CFO of any firm has to be the one that is ultimately responsible for the financial success. And they have the power necessary to make this so.

A difficult task of this position will be the compensation provided to the Community of Independent Service Providers. That is to say with so many participants in the development and the CISP, managing the work flow of these communities will be an important aspect of the success of this position.

Chief Operating Officer

Keeping all the balls in the air is the skill that these people provide their firms. COO’s have the ability to anticipate the needs of the organization and prepare the way for the smooth implementation of those capabilities.

Vice-President Development

Heading the software development effort of People, Ideas & Objects will be the responsibility of this position. From managing the “Agile” development team, which is expected to grow to 300 developers, to maintaining the development tools. This position is responsible for anything and everything to do with the software.

Since we are an Oracle customer, this person will need to be well versed in those technologies. Recall that our strategy regarding Oracle is that we use their technologies from stem to stern. It would therefore be incumbent on this position to use the Oracle resources to the utmost. Having a large team of Oracle developers and consultants would therefore be expected to be employed by the Vice-President Development of People, Ideas & Objects.

Vice-President Community Development

Working with the resources as presented by the Community of Independent Service Providers. This person will need to ensure the CISP develops in the best interests of the innovative oil and gas producers. The Account Manager positions noted earlier in this post will also report to the Vice President Community Development. Therefore there will be a large emphasis on policies and procedures to ensure these large populations of people are prepared, motivated and capable of meeting the demands of the innovative producers.

Vice-President Business Development

We are committed to the oil and gas industry as software developers. We are not, and will not entertain the thinking that we can provide service to other industries. With this in mind, the Vice-President Business Development is seen more as a resource that is available to the executive team. Added bench strength in areas of issues and opportunities will serve the firm and the innovative oil and gas producers well.

Vice-President Infrastructure. 

I had previously detailed the hardware policies and procedures of People, Ideas & Objects. The oil and gas industry is expected to provide the individual to head the hardware infrastructure to run the People, Ideas & Objects software applications. This is done to ensure they have the means to have their applications run in a manner that is consistent with their compliance and governance needs.

The president of the hardware firm is also the Vice-President Infrastructure for People, Ideas & Objects. As a member of the team this individual will have to have an intimate understanding of the software and its needs.

Director Research

When you look at the organizational chart in this post. The position of Vice-President of Research is held by myself. The Director Research position therefore needs to be capable of working with me to guide the firm on its long term path.

Members of the Community of Independent Service Providers

And one’s imagination is the only limit to the types of work that can be done as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers.

One of the attributes of the work at People, Ideas & Objects is the range and scope of understanding. We need to know the business of the oil and gas industry, the advanced hardware and software technologies and the academic sciences of organizational economics as well as other disciplines. A very challenging and rewarding group of positions in these fast paced times.

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: People's Business-Analyst Account-Manager Community Product-Owner Organization

Energy demand in 2030

An interesting comment is made on the BBC regarding the projected 2030 demand for energy.

Oil found in deep waters is needed because the world will need 45% more energy by the year 2030, BP's chief of staff, Steve Westwell, earlier told the World National Oil Companies Congress.

The past five years has seen the global production of oil stall at around 85 million barrels per day. And in 2010 we know that global oil production has declined by one million barrels. Therefore it would seem this comment appears rather optimistic.

How will producers increase production by 45% in the next 20 years when they haven’t been able to sustain 2005 production volumes. Is it expected that the bureaucracies will suddenly begin to substantially outperform their recent past?

The appropriate thing we need to do is to begin the development of systems that define and support the innovative oil and gas producer.  Systems that use the Joint Operating Committee in the manner that is described in People, Ideas & Objects Draft Specification.

To approach a problem of this magnitude, of meeting the markets demand for energy, without first organizing ourselves for the challenge will only lead to disaster.

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: People's Energy, failure, Innovation, organization

Approaching regulatory issues

Many of the ways that problems are solved in the Draft Specification might lead to issues with the current regulatory frameworks. This should be expected. We are building a system that is designed and intended for the 21st century. Retrofitting 20th century regulatory frameworks into these systems is going to create some friction. Where conflict and contradiction exist, creative and innovative solutions can begin.

We have a variety of ways to deal with these issues, if and when they arise. We can take the literal interpretation and implement the compliance feature in much the same way they would be implemented today. We can design new and innovative ways in which compliance can be achieved and alternatively we can influence and change the compliance framework itself.

Of these three different approaches we should aspire to attain better compliance and governance of the producer and market firms. This clean slate approach is one of the advantages that we acquire, we should optimize it. Sounds like a job for the Community of Independent Service Providers.

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: Strategy Organization Leadership Change
 

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: Community CISP Ideas Innovation Organization Value-Proposition
 

Langlois, Innovation and Process Part II

Today we discuss the second part of Professor Richard N. Langlois' January 2008 working paper "Innovation Process and Industrial Districts". A summary of the first part of this series would highlight how the service industry, Community of Independent Service Providers (CISP), users and producer firms would re-organize themselves to facilitate innovation. With the producer firms focusing on their core competitive advantages of 1) a unique asset base and 2) application of the scientific and engineering capabilities available to them. Producers would be able to increase their reserves and deliver-ability. The knowledge, tacit and codified, residing in the "Industrial District" (ID), or Small Knowledge Intensive Enterprise (SKIE) of which the CISP would be considered a part of. As Professor Langlois noted, these communities may be organized in local, regional, national and international fashion with communication being encouraged between each.

Today we are discussing the enhanced division of labor and specialization necessary to expand the economic output of the oil and gas industry. With energy demand projected to be insatiable, the focus of the industry is changing. The scientific capability of the oil and gas industry is somewhat fixed and to increase output will therefore require new forms of organization. People, Ideas & Objects proposes to build the software that identifies and supports the industry standard Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the innovative producer. Within the software it is implicit that the enhanced division of labor and specialization is a key output of the Draft Specification.

2. Specialization and Embeddedness in Industrial Districts

Differentiation, Specialization and Integration

It is an economic fact that growth is achieved through Adam Smith's division of labor and specialization. To take the energy industry to drill a well may currently require over 1,000 specialized individuals when we consider the scope of individuals from the drilling firms billing accountant to the rig hands, to the geologist engineers and staff at the member firms of the Joint Operating Committee. To move to a higher level of performance will require a more defined and broader division of labor and specialization. How this comes about is suggested in Professor Langlois' discussion of ID's. Moving the majority of the science based capability to the market is the logical choice when we consider the real competitive advantages of producers are resident in their asset base.

The Resource Marketplace module of the Draft Specification facilitates Langlois' ID's. The point that I am attempting to focus on is the need to have the necessary systems in place to support the innovation based market. In addition, a software development capability such as contemplated by People, Ideas & Objects, is necessary to continue the iterative developments within the marketplace, based on the ideas of the greater oil and gas community. 

As adaptation usually takes time, a system that is optimized in the sense that there is near-perfect efficiency in the integration of inputs is probably not only stable but static and hence endangered if the surrounding environment is unstable (as is almost always the case). It is important, therefore, that an industrial district actively generate change in its internal relationships and in those with the outside world, and that it is flexible enough to absorb change without serious losses in efficiency. Inability to change either or both of the internal and external relationships contributed to the decline of such industrial districts as the textile and fashion district of Como (Alberti, 2006) and the eyewear manufacturing district of Belluno (Camuffo, 2003). p. 4

Flexibility has its costs and these directly affect performance. That is a given, and a static industry is a dying industry. I think that Professor Langlois clearly shows the risks and shows that a balanced approach may be the best strategy. We run risks and rewards in whichever direction we take. And maybe the optimal strategy is an ability to pre-select the balance of these criteria within the systems we build. Irrespective of the choices made. The key criteria is an enhanced specialization, division of labor and a capability to further enhance the division of labor and specialization.

Embeddedness and Centralization

In our first quarter 2010 budget drive we proved the management within oil and gas will not act to develop the Draft Specification. Alternatively we have turned to the investor / shareholder as the source of our budget funding. Oil and gas investors have the opportunity through People, Ideas & Objects to build the infrastructure necessary to manage their oil and gas assets in the most profitable manner. [The stated objective of the CISP.] Langlois ID's and Perez' SKIEs facilitate this form of organization through the industry standard JOC.

Because of their structure, industrial districts offer important benefits in innovation processes. For one thing, the high levels of differentiation and specialization allow firms, in the Smithian fashion, to focus on aspects of the supply chain in which they are especially competent. p. 5

What was able to be achieved through the hierarchy and "bigger is better" organizational thinking has been lost in the past 25 years. Bureaucracies were known to be inefficiently efficient, and for the past 100 years society has benefited greatly. We now see the multitude of stakeholders of these large corporations disenchanted by the performance of these organizations. Society is concerned about the environment, consumers are demanding more, better and faster service, and shareholders are being treated as poorly as could possibly be conceived of just a few years ago. The only benefactors appear to be the management. Their lack of financial support for the ideas represented in People, Ideas & Objects ensure that their way will remain unchallenged.

I see the future in many ways being an extension of the individual. The scope of an investors domain would be much smaller and be a direct function of his / her own capabilities. A move toward a much more hands on type of operation. Management is redundant, compromised and has lost the motivation to act on its stakeholders best interest. I foresee the management role being codified in the People, Ideas & Objects software that the investor uses to manage their operations. This assumes substantial administrative performance is provided to the investor.

The stakeholders that would benefit from this need to orchestrate this monumental change through active financial support of People, Ideas & Objects. With the Community of Independent Service Providers being a critical element of the embeddedness and a "virtual" Industrial District. 

Strong ties (Granovetter, 1973) among workers, including managers, can increase the amount of information available to firms and the readiness of people to share what they know when relationships gain a dimension of friendship to counterbalance the competitiveness among firms. p. 5

Communities of Practice and Knowledge Diffusion

To suggest that the oil and gas investor / shareholder, organized around the JOC, supported by the CISP and other ID's -- as represented in the Resource Marketplace module of the Draft Specification, is a fundamental and bold redrawing of the ways and means of the oil and gas industry. One that is based on an understanding derived from 30 years of working in oil and gas, utilizing the capabilities of the mature Information Technologies and steeped in the academic research conducted here. One sees a vision of how the industry could operate in a more natural and logical manner. One consistent with the culture of the industry, the JOC, that is summarily ignored by SAP and other systems vendors. A vision that deals with issues and opportunities that are open and available to those in the changed oil and gas industry. However, does this vision provide the enhanced division of labor and specialization that we are seeking?

When embeddedness is strong, the creation of communities of practice (Wenger, 1998; Brown and Duguid, 2000) generates competences that, although possessed by individuals, are collective in that they are based on a set of practices that is common to all members of a community. These competences (both tacit and codified) can transcend firm boundaries and become characteristics of an entire industrial district. As Marshall (1975, 197) wrote of nineteenth century Britain, “To use a mode of speaking which workmen themselves use, the skill required for their work ‘is in the air, and children breathe it as they grow up’”. p. 6

Langlois defines a risk associated with a limited distribution of the Industrial District. The limited division of labor and lack of significant levels of specialization obstruct the opportunity for this type of community to develop to their full potential.

Relationships within industrial districts therefore lead to diffusion but also to the creation of new knowledge through shared preoccupations. Because many people or firms can work on a problem simultaneously, a number of different solutions may be found (Bellandi, 2003b). The results is a larger and stronger "gene pool" within the sector (Loasby, 1990, 117), with the further advantage that solutions that are originally regarded as competing may turn out to be complementary and well-suited to different niches within the district.  p. 7

Although Langlois talks about networks and IT, not at the level needed for this discussion. Critical to the success of this type of industry re-organization will be a software development capability that is an active and involved member of the communities, ID's, SKIEs, CISP etc. This software development capability is what People, Ideas & Objects is proposing we build for these communities.

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: People's Langlois Capability Science Engineering Funding Organization