Showing posts with label strategy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label strategy. Show all posts

Friday, April 23, 2021

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

Wednesday, April 21, 2021

People, Ideas & Objects Tactical and Strategic Changes, Part II

 In this the second part of a series defining the revised tactics and strategies for People, Ideas & Objects to ensure that the oil and gas industry will transition to the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable producer and industry we all need it to be. Patience has been applied, we’ve attempted to work with the bureaucrats, we might have said some things that offended them but so what, and even held out that we could be their best friend in light of the fact that they’re now in such legal jeopardy by not upholding their fiduciary duties. Using our car analogy to reflect the difficulties in oil and gas. The analogy being the car that was trailing oil for the past few miles, began steaming and then lost power. Parked at the side of the road, the owner tried to resurrect the forward momentum by using the battery to turn it over, which lasted about an hour. For purposes of this analogy that was approximately equivalent to the year 2015 in the oil and gas industry. It’s been seven days since the vehicle's breakdown and the owner's family are finding it more and more difficult to find the food and water they need to survive. They have the viable scapegoats of it being too hot and too far to travel to the next town and of course there is no reception. An aggravating factor is they’ve all had the flu this past week. Cars continue to pass on the highway but no one stops and even tow trucks looking for people to save, just pass them by. This family is hopeless and helpless and no one will stop or anything! This no doubt was OPEC’s fault. Other than muddle through there doesn’t seem all that much to do?

I could continue as the analogy to our good friends the bureaucrats never breaks down. “Muddling through” is a lifestyle choice that demands commitment. Just stay with the vehicle until someone rescues them. Conversely what do the producers expect to happen now? What’s their plan and will it work? 

The good news for the producers is that their share values have been rallying handsomely over the past six months. The reason why is an interesting question that we’ll no doubt learn in a short period of time. The week of March 8, 2021 established itself as the high point for our sample of producer firms. Covid has had a detrimental impact on the industry and for that there is no doubt. With the vaccines distribution, relief from the lockdowns and the resumption of “normal'' coming back into focus. This however doesn’t create any benefit for the producers. And just as the impact of the virus is waning across the globe, relief from the flu provided the same effect for our family over the past week they’ve been stranded at the side of the road. It didn’t solve their problem. 

Two of the kids in the back seat of the car decided they might be able to help their parents solve their problem and get them back on the road. One grabbed the playing cards while the other got hold of the checkbook. The first one, thinking that consolidation of assets was a good strategy, started distributing the cards in exchange for “assets” of the car. Representing each card as a share he started by buying the front seats and quickly moved on from there. The daughter began scribbling in the checkbook which caused a “feeding frenzy” between the kids as to who could consolidate the most assets the quickest. It soon turned out that the parents had acquired all the shares and junk bonds the kids distributed and ended up owning each part of the car that was sold. This provided the occupants of the vehicle with ample activity for the better part of each morning they were stranded. Eventually, in frustration the baby threw the cards and checks out the window on a windy day. Which began the kids' consideration of their next move in terms of financial engineering. 

What to do next in oil and gas? It doesn’t seem to be a question that is being asked across the industry today. Drilling is picking up and that is consistent with the actions of the great science experiment that involves acquiring land, drilling and producing, rinse and repeat. Bureaucrats will argue that this is the business and belittle the argument that accounting performance has nothing to do with the reality of the value they produce once they access those valuable oil and gas reserves. It is here that the cultural standoff begins between those that are running the oil and gas producers and the “accountants,” as we’re called. “Accountants should do their job, pay the bills and get on the bus with everyone else.” We are told. That those involved in the science experiment have not conducted any activity in the past four decades on the basis of a competitive operation, where financial performance was a necessary and primary criteria, is not relevant to them. When accountants bring in depletion costs and impairments they’re “non-cash attributes.” Allowing bureaucrats to convince themselves they’re not real costs, “they’re history.” That these costs were incurred as a result of the money handed to them from their investors is not understood or appreciated, and to account for that spending is something they have not done and will never do as far as they’re concerned. That was never part of the plan and they foresee no reason to change any of this. Eventually, as far as they’re concerned, investors will return and the industry will resume its way’s once more. Comprehension that the reserves that are revealed are useless and valueless if they’re consistently produced unprofitably is something that will not, and can not be heard or understood by bureaucrats. 

Let’s have a look at that plan and see how things are in terms of supporting it financially. During times of crisis it is considered prudent to survive in the extreme short term and to do so by not considering the cost of capital in the thinking of what is “financial performance.” The issue with oil and gas is that this is how the industry has been operated for the past four decades. Capitalizing every possible cost that is incurred by the producer and only recognizing the share of capital costs of production in relation to an allocation to the entire reserves base. Leaving as People, Ideas & Objects suggests an inordinate amount of property, plant and equipment on the balance sheet. This amount is in stark contrast to all other aspects of the financial statements and appears as a distorted figure that is not representative of the firm. We believe that it should be regarded as the unrecognized capital costs of past production. Therefore the industry has been operating in somewhat of a crisis mode by never recognizing the appropriate level of capital cost in the commodity prices it passes on to consumers. Instead storing these capital costs on the balance sheet on the basis of “building balance sheets” and “putting cash in the ground” as key corporate objectives. Producers now stand with distorted balance sheets that have become representative of the major issue in oil and gas. That being over reported assets beget equal amounts of over reported profits. Which attracts a disproportionate amount of investors creating over investment in the industry and subsequently suffering as a result of overcapacity and overproduction. In commodities that are price makers, such as oil and gas this overproduction has led to unprofitable prices being realized for 28 of the past 35 years. 

The overhang of assets on property, plant and equipment became a critical audit issue in 2020 for the producers across the industry. Will it be the same for 2021, or how about 2022. How does the industry deal with the legacy of this past that distorts their performance and is more representative of a culture that feigns it doesn’t know or understand the difference? Does it continue to accelerate the depletion and impairment of its capital costs to bring it in line with the market's understanding of what property, plant and equipment is? Or should they await the results of the SEC investigation into Exxon’s overreported asset allegation and potential shale producer review. If they do finally recognize these capital costs of past production the account of property, plant and equipment will come into line with the expectations of reality and can be relied upon as a reliable gage of the producers performance. It however will also eliminate retained earnings in every existing producer, if there are any retained earnings remaining today, and in most cases create a negative equity situation where the debt of the producer is higher than the value represented in total assets. Which begs the question what do the banks think of this situation? 

The majority of the producers would fall into the category of having debts larger than their assets once their unrecognized capital costs of past production are recognized appropriately. This alarms the banks and the regulators for two reasons. First the banks have clients whose leverage exceeds their lending criteria and demand that efforts be taken to remediate the accounts, write down the loans and seize their bank accounts in the most severe situations. More or less business as usual these past five years, only with a desperate sense of urgency on the banks behalf. The debts would then, and in some cases do so today, exceed the value of the reserves that are booked by the producer. Indicating to the bank their exposure exceeds what it is the producer would ever be able to generate and contribute towards the loan. I’m not a banker, but this may be a limit they’ll stop to think twice about crossing. When asked about these issues the bureaucrats will no doubt once again state that these are accounting issues and only represent “history.” Bureaucrats are correct about that however instead of calling it historical, I would suggest they think of it maybe in terms of legacy.

When questioned on the disproportionate valuation of property, plant and equipment the producer can make themselves a candidate for consolidation with another larger producer. This will restore the asset valuation as paper in the form of shares and Junk Bonds are passed about the oil and gas tycoons, much as the kids in the back seat did with the playing cards and checkbook. If they value the transaction for more than what the assets are listed at on the balance sheet, then those values will be what they’re recorded at in the consolidation process. Thankfully no one else in the world is interested in these assets otherwise the premium producers would have to pay would be so much higher. And to take the bureaucrats point of view this is all just accounting jibber jabber. The fact they’re spudding two wells next week in the Permian will be spectasmogorical. 

Performance is the purpose of accounting. The timing and accuracy of all costs incurred is what is sought by accountants. Performance based on falsehoods such as the over capitalization of costs will provide substantial value to an organization in its early years. They will be attractive to investors and appear to be doing well. The reality is that they’re poorly managed and the representations being made are lies and falsehoods, much as the situation we have today in oil and gas. A misrepresentation built upon earlier misrepresentations that are attempted to be concealed by further misrepresentations in the form of consolidations, as the current flavor of the day. Oil and gas overproduction in North America has been with us since at least July 1986. People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification has been available since December 2013. The alternative answer to these is consolidation? Just as our family that’ve been stranded at the side of the road are unaware why they have no help. They’re heading into another day and see their shortages of food and water coming to an end. What will they have to do, abandon their strategy of “muddle along” and get out of the car? Or will someone finally save them? 

We should all thank OPEC. Recently they increased their productive output by 2 million barrels and have 5 - 6 million barrels of oil remaining to provide for our needs in the future. Relying on North American based producers for that deliverability in the long run is not going to be possible. Bureaucrats are unaware of the situation they’ve caused and are causing. They only concern themselves with their personal financial position. We can also thank OPEC for the stern warning in the article of The Calgary Herald of July 26, 1986. The one entitled “OPEC Minister Can See Economic Destruction” and “Return to Glory Days Unlikely.” They knew the results of what was being pursued in 1986 was not going to be productive and were concerned about it. It’s probably a good thing that North American producers were always so much “smarter and better than the OPEC Ministers” were in 1986 isn’t it? Is it that bureaucrats don’t listen, don’t do anything or both?

The issues are evident to most people that have an interest in oil and gas. The investors left in 2015 and I began gripping on this blog a decade before that. What is it that I know now, what is it that the investors are thinking and what do most people have to learn about the level of destruction that has been caused by these bureaucrats? I think one of the key takeaways has to be that shale will eliminate any opportunity for any boom or upside in oil and gas again. When prices begin rising the rapid increase from shale production is the immediate response. This has now become a market signal that soon additional production will be on the market and the price adjusts accordingly. Limiting any upside in the price of the commodities. This is known as an inherent part of the producers business model which is assumed not to be changing. Distractions in the form of bright shiny objects to occupy time, such as consolidation and the pursuit of clean energy will satisfy the media and environmentalists. No one will stand up and say anything to contrast the bureaucrats logic, only to be publicly persecuted, therefore nothing will change in terms of the bureaucrats actions. 

The level of devastation that I see within oil and gas is more than what has been experienced in any other industry that I am aware of. It has been made possible by the large cash flows from being a capital intensive industry. These cash flows have enabled the bureaucrats to continue their methods of “management” and have proven they’re only interested in their own personal financial compensation. Diversion of these cash flows towards clean energy is only the most recent viable scapegoat that draws attention away from their performance. These diversions are not consistent with the oil and gas investors original intent in establishing these producers. I believe they should be stopped and let the bureaucrats pursue their clean energy dreams as startups and feel the rush of having no revenues to rely upon. People, Ideas & Objects will continue to hold them personally accountable for these actions and ensure that it is known that this issue was prevalent since 1986 or earlier, that our solution was available in the marketplace in December 2013 and producers have done everything in their power to avoid addressing either the issue or the solution, but also the continued destruction of the industry under their watch. If it appears as if this is a design feature of their system of self aggrandizement, you’d be 100% correct. 

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

Monday, April 19, 2021

People, Ideas & Objects Tactical and Strategic Changes, Part I

 In a recent eight part series we documented how People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and service providers were structured to achieve success in oil and gas across North America. This may have been mistitled as I was not so much documenting how People, Ideas & Objects et al were planning on being successful, but how it was that we were structured to ensure success in terms of profitable oil and gas exploration and production. This new series is taking that thinking to the next level to discuss how we have amended our strategies and tactics to deliver that success to an industry that is in desperate need of real profitability. That’s currently managed by a handful of self interested and conflicted bureaucrats who have proven they’ll do nothing about anything, except their enhanced executive compensation. Why are we doing this, what’s changed and is today any different than any of the past decades these bureaucrats have been in control? Yes, things have changed dramatically, and this post will document the situation. This series will also document what People, Ideas & Objects are doing as a result of these changes, and we are now making recommendations to others to begin their own personal processes of change and begin the transition to the environment we are building.  

In granting the bureaucrats the honor of proceeding with the development of the Preliminary Specification People, Ideas & Objects were able to provide them with the credibility they needed to move forward with their operations. Many may feel I’m overstating my case here, that I’ve inflated my self worth. I don’t think so and it is not my intention. What I’ve done is patiently waited for them to act and it is through their inaction that the Preliminary Specification as a solution to today’s issues came into clearer focus. The contrast is evident, dramatic and obscene due to their inaction. Bureaucratic resistance to our solution only increased and there was never any consideration otherwise. Their issues have now fallen well outside the domain of anyone’s control. 

Thucydides’s ancient warning that “It is the habit of mankind to entrust to careless hope what they long for, and to use sovereign reason to thrust aside what they do not desire”

Victor Davis Hanson

I am looking at the landscape of the oil and gas industry from the point of view of the destruction that has been caused by the inaction of these self serving bureaucrats. Profitability in an industry is the only worthwhile pursuit in business and anyone associated with oil and gas over the past number of decades will understand that principle intuitively from this point forward. We should thank the bureaucrats for their real life lesson on such an important topic. Without profitability within the producer firms everyone suffers. The shareholders pursuit of earnings is the reason the North American economy is the strongest ever and has the resilience and effectiveness that it does. It may appear selfish and narrowly focused on those with capital however it works out very well for all concerned. And when it is corrupted as it has been in oil and gas it is an ongoing tragedy of unending misery. It is not me who is overstating my case; it’s the bureaucrats that have abused their position to the greatest extent seen in North America. If I speak of granting the honor and credibility to the bureaucrats that they need, I am only representing all of those that have been affected by bureaucratic inaction and their corruption. Every opportunity has been granted to bureaucrats since I published the Preliminary Specification in December 2013. And they have abused them all. This last opportunity was an overt calling to proceed with the Preliminary Specification under the “issue mitigated, nothing litigated” expression. This began on June 2, 2020 and has been a constant theme on this blog. Seeking to provide the bureaucrats with a means in which to avoid their personal risk of being sued for their inaction regarding the July 1986 documentation of overproduction, or unprofitable production, by North American producers that OPEC had sought to resolve. This issue has so destroyed the industry and has been present each and every day since at least July 1986. And the fact that the Preliminary Specification was published in December 2013 as the solution to that issue. Our good friends, the bureaucrats who are the members of the Boards of Directors and Officers of the producer firms, have sworn to uphold their fiduciary duties and are therefore culpable and guilty. 

I still have not spoken of the change that I see causing the revised strategic and tactical changes People, Ideas & Objects are implementing. And it’s not to keep you in suspense but there are many things happening and we will get to the triggering event in this post. However, there will be more posts in this series that reflect the other changes that have been made. First I want to start by stating the conclusion of these changes and then get on to the triggering event. 

The first change People, Ideas & Objects are conducting is that we are cancelling our program of “issue mitigated, nothing litigated.” Bureaucrats are no longer welcome here to proceed with the development of the Preliminary Specification. They have done nothing, and the fact is they will do nothing so there is no loss here on their behalf. Their pursuit of consolidation, drilling, their unauthorized diversion into clean energy and “capital discipline” are evidence of their plans for the future. This was their choice to maintain the status quo. Therefore it will from now on be known as “nothing mitigated, issue litigated.” There are consequences to inaction, all of us who are associated with oil and gas are experiencing that. It’s now time for those who are actively engaged in inaction to feel it too. Our December 4, 2020 blog post asked “Who’s Going to be the Bigger Fool” in the future? Will we be sitting here in five, or ten years with the same set of circumstances and the same viable scapegoats being parotted by these bureaucrats? There is no question in my mind that the question stung and the answer was and is a resounding “not me.” The game is up for the bureaucrats and no one is being taken for a fool anymore. It’s also at this time that I’m reminded of a Winston Churchill quote. 

You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.

Who will proceed with funding the Preliminary Specification? To quote a famous politician “At this point, what difference does it make.” What People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and their service provider organizations need is access to the oil and gas revenues of the industry. Producers need to have some skin in the game. Otherwise we will fail as a result of a lack of their willing and necessary participation in the user community. They can not hand a critical aspect of their business off to someone else and expect it to be done appropriately. We also have no capacity whatsoever to provide any investor of ours with any means of a reasonable return or expectation of a return due to the destruction that has been caused in the oil and gas ERP market space as a result of past malicious actions by bureaucrats. 

In 2015 we saw the beginning of an investors strike that has continued and become a protracted issue for oil and gas. Producers had grown to depend on the annual stock offering as a means to literally pay the light bill throughout the entire calendar year. Dilution of last year's investors, and all their other investors, fell into the memory hole known affectionately as “history” by these bureaucrats, saying “don’t worry about it.” There is nothing more critical than investors abandoning management by walking out on them. The reason People, Ideas & Objects have had to be patient is due to the virus providing a viable scapegoat for the past year. But prior to that, a few years ago private equity and Warren Buffet saw an industry that was in pretty rough shape, in desperate need of some capital and rehabilitation. Warren Buffet made his “ultimate contrarian bet” as he called it into Occidental Petroleum and then promptly saw what obviously scared him to the point of quickly selling out of all his Occidental holdings. Private equity hung in there a little longer and have now exited the industry as well. Banks have extended themselves in the industry to the highest level they can tolerate. Producers working capital continues to evaporate. It is for the lack of a better saying, the end of the road for our good friends the bureaucrats. Maybe the Biden administration will help? From Forbes.

The demand for shale producers to become self-sufficient with less reliance on outside capital is intensifying.

The withdrawal of private equity, long a crucial investor in the shale sector, will take a significant toll on many shale companies, particularly smaller producers that lack strong balance sheets.

Why is it that People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and their service provider organizations are standing there, at the ready, hat in hand, offering our services in hopes that the bureaucrats who caused all this damage, do the right thing and fund the Preliminary Specification to save the bureaucrats personal empires for them? I can’t find a reason why we’re the last ones here in support of these despicable people. By supporting the bureaucrats and offering them the Preliminary Specification we are working at cross purposes to those who are the shareholders of the producers. It is the investors that we have supported and identified as the critical resource that the industry needs to guide it through these difficult times. Their actions, and their ultimate action of leaving the industry is fully supportive of what we needed to happen for our Preliminary Specification to become a reality. Profitability is the only criteria that is going to resurrect the industry and provide the financial resources for all those that have been so betrayed by the despicable self dealing bureaucrats. Why is it now that People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and service providers are actively betraying those that we’ve needed, wanted and indirectly participated with us in removing the bureaucracy. Our olive branch to the bureaucrats would have given them a life line that may have instilled another generation of their franchise with the caveat that they would have been able to “muddle through” more easily, and enjoyed the bounty of a truly profitable industry at the expense of those shareholders. 

What needs to be done is a purge of these people from their lofty positions and away from the producers check books. It’s time to choose sides in America, are you with the shareholders, which after all are John Q. and Jane P. Public, or are you with the bureaucrats? Corporate America who recently came out in favor of political initiatives that have nothing to do with their products or services profitability. Who’s corporate objectives have morphed into the Democratic Parties key issues of race and climate. To suggest they’ve lost the script is undeniable. It’s time for change.

The long and short of all of this is the declaration of total, irredeemable failure of the North American producers at the hands of the bureaucratic mismanagement. People in the industry who want to stay with the status quo are able to do so, and participate in the development of the Preliminary Specification as their long term career transition away from these failed organizations. Please follow the application process defined here and understand that the user community has always been considered to be part-time positions. The source of user community members long term value and day to day compensation is designed to be fulfilled through the service provider organizations you’ll need to develop. Don’t let the bureaucrats' disease of inaction infect you. 

We’re setting out the framework of two different types of producers in the oil and gas industry. The first type will be bureaucrat free and as a result successful and profitable oil and gas producer by using People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and their service provider organizations. The second will be an extension of what exists today in the slow process of chronic destruction. I see the bureaucrats as the chaos and we’re the opportunity. When bureaucrats find themselves alone, and not just alone but wrong on so many fronts, I’m not going to be their last good friend that’ll help them out. 

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

Thursday, September 18, 2014

There is a Precedent

There is a precedent where the investment community was able to pressure the bureaucracy to change their business model to one that was more amenable to the interests of the investment community. This is the strategy that People, Ideas & Objects are employing in having the Preliminary Specification, the user community and service providers implemented within the North American marketplace. Our business models value proposition provides trillions of dollars in incremental profits to the investors if the producers change their business model to the Preliminary Specification. This strategy on the surface seems to be a chance in a million that will never have the desired effect. However, there is one pertinent example that is directly on point and occurred in the 21st century. It is the Canadian Royalty Trust example.

Royalty Trusts were enabled in Canada through tax legislation in a number of administrations. It was felt that it provided a means for smaller oil and gas companies to provide their investors with a means to recapture their investments from the oil and gas producer in a safer and quicker fashion. This involved the Royalty Trust declaring monthly dividends to the investors that represented a taxable income to the investor. Essentially the producer firm was not having to pay income tax or what is commonly believed to be the double taxation normally associated with the traditional corporate model. In the early part of this century the pressure to convert your organization into a royalty trust was quite strong. And if the firm did convert, the results were that you would receive a higher stock market valuation and greater access to capital. Those that resisted were treated poorly by the investment community by way of receiving little attention in terms of new capital investment.

The trend therefore became quite strong to convert to a Royalty Trust in Canada. The pressure then grew to the intermediate producers with the majority of them converting. Then it became fashionable to employ the business model outside of the oil and gas arena and other industries began actively pursuing this corporate model. It wasn't too long afterward that even large producers were contemplating the conversion to a trust model, and even large corporations outside of the oil and gas industry began converting. It was at that time the Canadian government stepped in and announced an end to the tax legislation defining and supporting the Canadian Royalty Trust model. Effective as of 2011 all active Royalty Trusts have had to convert back to regular tax paying corporations. This was done by the Federal government to mitigate the large and growing loss in their corporate tax base.

Here we have an example of the ability of the investment community directly pressuring the organization to make the necessary changes to affect their business model. If they didn’t make the changes then the producer was somewhat ostracised in their ability to raise capital in the investment community, and their valuations were encumbered by the premium that was attached to the Royalty Trust model. In the financial investment community you have to compete. By opting out of the Royalty Trust model you essentially stated that you would not compete for capital.

We can, and we are implementing this same strategy. The investor can state that they want their producer firm to implement the Preliminary Specification in order to provide for the most dynamic, innovative, and profitable means of oil and gas operations. The material affect of our value proposition is significantly more pronounced than it is in the Royalty Trust business model. We provide real value increases, not just a minor reduction in the taxes that would otherwise be paid. As each individual producer converts to the Preliminary Specification. A conversion that is done by simply paying their share of our development costs and issuing a press release stating that they have done so. It will be at that point that the investor will begin to see the benefits of the pressure that they put on the producer through the fact that the valuation of the producer firm will have been adjusted to reflect the new realities. Then the pressure will build on the other producers to convert to the Preliminary Specification as well.

The decision to support People, Ideas & Objects in January 2017 doesn't seem to far away, nor as impossible now. Investors do have power to make the changes that we are asking of them. And we will continue to appeal to them to make these changes at their producer firms.

The Preliminary Specification and user community provides the oil and gas producer with the most dynamic, innovative and profitable means of oil and gas operations. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in these user defined software developments. Users are welcome to join me here. Together we can begin to meet the future demands for energy. And don't forget to join our network on Twitter @piobiz anyone can contact me at 403-200-2302 or email here

Monday, August 11, 2014

No More Muddling Along

The traditional operational strategy of the oil and gas industry is to muddle along. This is a throwback to the days when there was no opportunity to do anything but to accept the situation as fact and deal with it. Get through the day and survive to tell about it. However is this still appropriate for a $4 trillion industry? An industry with the issues and opportunities that the oil and gas producers have in front of them? An industry where the financial engineering of “cash flows” is the science that dictates operations. Where profits are of no concern, and for those that are focused on profits, they are accused of not truly understanding the nature of the business. It is a fool who tries to argue that profits are not a concern in oil and gas.

The beginning of the end of the muddling along strategy is People, Ideas & Objects. And that starts specifically with our Revenue Model. You can't expect that People, Ideas & Objects will be done on behalf of someone else’s dime, or on someone else’s time. The investment community have tired of the “opportunities” in oil and gas ERP systems. And they certainly have no appetite for our budget. Particularly if it were to be done on a speculative basis. Clearly there are no free lunches when it comes to having the budget for this software development paid for by others on behalf of the producers. If producers want it producers will have to pay for it themselves.

Assuming the producers are putting their hard earned money into something that is potentially valuable to their firm, I would also assume I have the producers attention. That is I think they will be an active and willing participant in our user community. It’s their money, it's their system and it will be their profits when the systems are built. This is the reason that our Revenue Model is not structured to motivate someone else to build it for them. There is really nothing in it for anyone else. All the value is skewed towards the producer. Hence the need to dispatch the muddling along strategy to the scrapheap of history and begin your active involvement in the operational strategy of your business.

It is the user community that holds the power and authority regarding the ways and means of the administration and accounting of the oil and gas industry under the People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification. Producers may resent this fact and chose to fight against it. Or they can accept it and realize that participation in the user community is the appropriate and constructive role that a producer should consider. Either way it will be pleasant to see them get up from their muddling along strategy.

Sitting back and doing nothing about the problems that the industry faces will be the way that things were handled in the past. When natural gas prices decline into unprofitability, producers will have the decentralized production model to reduce production immediately to remediate the price declines. When the engineering and earth science resources of the industry are challenged they will have the ability to use specialization and the division of labor to reorganize them in ways to make them more productive. In essence they will have the tools at their disposal, active participation in the user community and a software development capability in People, Ideas & Objects to deal with the issues and opportunities that face the industry as they occur. No more muddling through no matter the consequences to profitability. But this requires the first act of independence and renouncing of the muddling through strategy. And that is funding this initiative and participation in the user community. No one is motivated by the profits that they'll earn if they make these changes, and no one else is going to do it for them.

The Preliminary Specification and user community provides the oil and gas producer with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in these user defined software developments. Users are welcome to join me here. Together we can begin to meet the future demands for energy. And don't forget to join our network on Twitter @piobiz anyone can contact me at 403-200-2302 or email here

Tuesday, June 10, 2014

Lou Gerstner on Strategic Planning

McKinsey Consulting have republished an article written by Mr. Lou Gerstner of IBM fame. Originally published in December 1973 when he was a McKinsey Consultant the topic of discussion is strategic planning. It seems pertinent today to the oil and gas industry in terms of the decision they should undertake to proceed with People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification. So I thought I would take the material and apply the knowledge to the situation in the industry and use Encana Corporation as the example firm in my calculations.

One of the first things you notice in this article is that its 1973 and there are no personal computers and spreadsheets have not yet been developed. The entire point of the article is to take the strategic decision that an organization could make and run a number of different scenarios regarding the changes that it would have in the business. To make those changes reflective in the financial statements on a proforma basis. The difference between 1973 and today is that these are done constantly vs. what appears to be a rarity in the period of time that Mr. Gerstner is discussing.

However the point is valid particularly for running the scenario of “what if” the firm adopted the Preliminary Specification as the business model for the organization. We have claimed that the scope of the changes are responsible for $705 billion in opportunity costs for the period between 2009 and 2019. Therefore it should be incumbent on each organization to run the calculation on their own financial data to determine what impact the Preliminary Specification and the user community would have on their organization.

As an example we have selected Encana Corporation and run the business model against their financial data for the period between 2014 and 2019. We chose Encana as it is predominantly a gas producer and their operations are marginal at best. Without too much surprise the total incremental value that is generated by using the Preliminary Specification and the user community is $17.1 billion for that period. It is made up of two components, the increase in revenues of $15.8 billion and decrease in G&A costs of $1.3 billion. With value increases of that scale it would be worthwhile for Encana to fund 100% of People, Ideas & Objects and the user community. If they did they would still have $13 billion left over.

Calculations for Encana are included in the Preamble Wiki page. It is important to emphasize that these are only the values that we are able to quantify. Further quantification of the value from specialization and the division of labor cannot be determined at this time. However it is believed to be as material. The value from specialization and the division of labor enable the industry to expand its output from the same resource base. Enabling it to approach the goal of energy self sufficiency for the North American marketplace.

We will continue to look for ways in which to ensure that we, People, Ideas & Objects and the user community, provide the oil and gas producer with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. We have the business model of the Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the dynamic, innovative and profitable oil and gas producer. It is the means in which this value is being generated, and it will be the means in which future value is generated. For when we move the compliance and governance frameworks of the hierarchy into alignment with the legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural, communication, innovation and strategic frameworks of the Joint Operating Committee. We attain a flexibility, accountability, speed, innovativeness and profitability in our producer organizations. We have only begun to fully explore the potential of this model. In the hands of the user community there will be an unending flow of innovations that provide real value for the oil and gas producers.

The Preliminary Specification provides the oil and gas producer with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in these user defined software developments. Users are welcome to join me here. Together we can begin to meet the future demands for energy. And don't forget to join our network on Twitter @piobiz anyone can contact me at 403-200-2302 or email here

Wednesday, May 07, 2014

A Different Tactical Approach

We see in the natural gas storage volumes a rebound forming from last winters significant drawdown. Due to much prayed for cold winter. Natural gas storage volumes were drawn down substantially and were the primary reason for the increases in the natural gas prices. Prices remain higher than they were last year as the storage volumes remain below their five year average. However their trajectory appear to be putting the North American storage volumes on target to breach above their five year averages sometime this summer or fall. A complete reversal of the situation. This is as a result of the enhanced prices that are still being realized, the production that has come on stream as a result of the higher prices and the prolific nature of the shale gas reserves.

I would propose an alternative tactical approach be taken by the oil and gas producers. If the Preliminary Specification and decentralized production model were the business models that were operational in the industry. This drawdown in the natural gas storage facilities would be the opportune time in which the producers could establish control of the natural gas prices and become the price makers that the decentralized production model enables them to be. By removing the unprofitable production from the marketplace at this time the buildup in the natural gas storage would lead to higher prices at a much more rapid pace. Now would be the time to implement the decentralized production model and establish the price maker strategy that the producers would have under the business models available with the Preliminary Specification.

What we have learned however is that bureaucracies don't change. They certainly won’t come within a million miles of People, Ideas & Objects or its Preliminary Specification. We have also documented the accounting and logistical difficulties that the bureaucracy would have in trying to conduct a reduction in G&A costs. And that volunteering for any work is counter to the best interests of the atypical bureaucrat. So instead they will continue to produce at capacity until the natural gas prices collapses some time in August or September and in the mean time practice that deer in the headlights look in the mirror.

Being profitable is for fools anyways. The oil and gas industry has cash flow. The practice is you report the cash coming in and don't say anything about the commitments or the flows going out. And it seems that everyone buys it. The only thing you have to do is be able to stand up during annual report season and have a “plan” that sounds reasonable for the next year. And you're good. Party on till next year. This is how its done in the oil and gas industry. So instead of thinking about a different way to deal with the natural gas storage volumes, forget about it. Thinking hurts don't you know. Just go with the flow and don’t say anything that upsets the show.

And another year of shale gas reserves are wasted in a long procession of wasted shale gas reserves. It is the investors money, and there are a lot of them remember. So we should not worry about it. The inertia that is behind this continuous waste of resources is quite surprising. With $705 billion in opportunity costs for the decade of not using the decentralized production model. You would think that there would be adequate motivation for the bureaucracy to do something about it. But after almost four years of expressing the value of this model, the only interest generated by the bureaucracy is to take the Intellectual Property. And we know that the taking of the IP was not to develop the idea it was only so that it could be proven to be unworkable.

One day we will have put together our user community and presented it to the investors as a viable solution to the issues that we are discussing here today. And the investors can choose which form of administration they want, the bureaucracy or People, Ideas & Objects with its Preliminary Specification, the user community and the service providers that offer a better way to administer the oil and gas industry. And we can be done with these foolish ways of losing money.

The Preliminary Specification provides the oil and gas producer with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in these user defined software developments. Users are welcome to join me here. Together we can begin to meet the future demands for energy. And don't forget to join our network on Twitter @piobiz anyone can contact me at 403-200-2302 or email here.

Friday, February 28, 2014

One Implication of the Decentralized Production Model

We saw last week Canadian Natural Resources Ltd purchase the conventional assets of Devon Energy Ltd for $2.6 billion. I wonder if CNRL knows something about conventional gas assets that Devon doesn’t. Like what the implications are for implementing the decentralized production model in the oil and gas industry. By doing so, conventional assets become much more valuable as a result. Making this transaction favor CNRL in the long run.

What the decentralized production model does is turn the oil and gas industry into a price maker. This leaves their history as a price taker far behind. And it does it in a way that doesn't require them to collude or break the law in any way. All they have to do is focus on profitable production. If a property doesn’t produce a profit, shut it in and try to innovate ways to bring it back on production profitably.

People, Ideas & Objects decentralized production model works by stripping the innovative producer down to the C class executives, the earth science and engineering resources, land and legal and some support staff. Reallocating the remainder of the firms resources to service providers who are focused on a process or subprocess and are using the entire industry as their client base. The service providers are then able to provide their services based on a heightened level of specialization and division of labor. Providing their services, such as lease rental payments, production, revenue or royalty accounting etc. directly to the Joint Operating Committee that incurs the service. The fee for the administration and accounting services goes directly to the Joint Operating Committee that incurs the service.

As a result when the property is shut-in there are no activities that invoke the various processes for administrative or accounting service providers to incur any of their services. And hence none of their services are charged to the Joint Operating Committee. Therefore during times of shut-in production only the costs of capital are uncovered. There will be no operation, administration or accounting charges to the Joint Operating Committee. And the property will report a null operation. No profits but also no losses. The reserves will be held for a time when they can be produced profitably and the natural gas marketplace has a floor placed on the gas price.

The net result is that the pricing model of the industry is changed to higher values to enable the profitable production. The dynamic that exists in the marketplace today is that there is enough shale gas making up the production profile that it will be more than just the swing production. It will define what the level of profitable production will be, based on shale gas costs.

Therefore the conventional gas costs, which are substantially lower, will not factor in to what the pricing model requires. They will be profitable, highly profitable at all times. This assumes that the conventional gas properties can maintain reasonable production profiles and keep their operational costs low.

The decentralized production model is a business model for the innovative oil and gas producer. It is also a new economic model for the natural gas business. One that is based on the highest cost production. As it is only that high cost production that will come on to the market when a profitable price is received. And since shale is already approximately 40% of the North American production profile. Its costs will be the determining factor to its arrival on the marketplace.

Therefore CNRL’s acquisition of conventional assets at this time may be timely if the decentralized production model becomes the business model that operates within the industry. Maybe they know something that Devon and I don't know, a guy can always dream.

The Preliminary Specification provides the oil and gas producer with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in these user defined software developments. Users are welcome to join me here. Together we can begin to meet the future demands for energy. And don't forget to join our network on Twitter @piobiz anyone can contact me at 403-200-2302 or email here.

Monday, January 21, 2013

Costs and Strategies Can Be Different.


When we look at the costs and strategies of the participants in a Joint Operating Committee we see these two things that are rarely the same. Each of the producers are pursuing their own strategic and tactical interests in the region and they may not necessarily be consistent with any of the other participants in the Joint Operating Committee. This will lead to different costs of capital and operating, and this fact is recognized and is consistent with the capabilities of the People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification.

One or two of the producers in the Joint Operating Committee may have it as a key region and therefore have invested in infrastructure to support the production in the area. Other producers may be new to the property having recently purchased the property with no other interests in the region. Or, may have been with the property since the beginning but limited their investment to the producing assets. There are a variety of operational possibilities in terms of what could make up a producers interest in the region. These will have an effect on the costs of the property in terms of whether they pay for gas processing, or, are able to use their capacity in a gas plant. Naturally this reflects on the amount and types of capital investments they have made in the region. This also applies to their motivation of expanding their reserves or increasing their throughput. Therefore it is difficult to determine the costs and strategic makeup and motivation of the partners that are resident in the Joint Operating Committee that you are a participant in.

This lack of strategic transparency is something that exists in oil and gas. However, everyone’s motivation should be consistent. And that is to expand the return on investment in the properties that they hold in the region. That way consensus can still be attained with the various different strategies in play. The open collaborative ways of the Preliminary Specification. Particularly within the Knowledge & Learning module provide the opportunity for innovative producers to collaborate on the possibilities that are open to them. This can be done without exposing the strategic direction the producer firm is taking to the other members of the Joint Operating Committee. Assumptions can be made, and they may be correct, however, they may also be wrong. The companies strategic direction can not be interpreted through a more open and collaborative footing within the Joint Operating Committee.

One thing that is unique about the Preliminary Specification is the Strategy Interface within the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module. It contains the strategy that is held for the participants interest in the Joint Operating Committee. This may not seem to be too innovative of a feature within an ERP system, however, until you realize that each Joint Operating Committee within the producer firm has its own unique strategy. That’s correct the existence of one size fits all corporate strategies ceased to be effective some time in the past century. The innovative oil and gas producer must maintain multiple strategies for their properties at all times. Each property must be able to employ their own unique strategy in order to optimize the assets or reserves of that property. Generic corporate strategies are inappropriate for the 21st century and you must have an ERP system that can accommodate these needs. People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification provides the ability to maintain unique strategies for each and every Joint Operating Committee through the Strategy Interface in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module.

The Preliminary Specification provides the oil and gas investor with the business model for profitable exploration and production. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in these user defined software developments. Users are welcome to join me here. Together we can begin to meet the future demands for energy.

Sunday, September 11, 2011

The Preliminary Specification Part XXII (PA Part VIII)


Last Friday we noted that the cost structures of each producer within a Joint Operating Committee could be unique and mutually exclusive to each of the other producers in the property. When we expand the geographical view of the facilities owned in the area we see that the ownership by producers can be remarkably different. This cost situation provides us with an opportunity to discuss the strategic choices that producers have within a Joint Operating Committee -- and adjoining facilities which are their own JOC’s -- and how each producer can maintain their own unique strategy.

In addition, since each JOC is autonomous to each other, a producer is able to choose unique strategies for each JOC they have an interest in. That is not to suggest that each JOC within a facility would have their own strategy. They could, however that would be unproductive. What is suggested is that a producer could have each of their major properties operated under their own unique strategies that are developed to optimize the assets unique character. To reiterate, that's each producer within a major area pursuing their own unique strategy irrespective of each others strategy.

Lastly we most recently noted that the JOC was the strategic framework of the producer and it joined the legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural, communication and innovation frameworks within the JOC. This framework alignment has been unrecognized in the existing ERP systems that operate in the oil and gas industry today. People, Ideas & Objects (PI&O) is the only system to recognize, identify and support the Joint Operating Committee’s frameworks. In addition, PI&O aligns the hierarchies compliance and governance frameworks into alignment with the seven frameworks of the JOC. This alignment provides the innovative oil and gas producer with the speed, innovativeness and accountability necessary to compete in the complex era of oil and gas exploration and production.

Application of global or generic corporate strategies are what companies did in the twentieth century. Today producers need to respond at the asset level in order to ensure the optimal value is realized. These findings are based on the extensive research that has been conducted here at People, Ideas & Objects. That although we have sworn off our focus on research we are still able to refer to it. Those posts that refer to our work in strategy would be best sourced from these labels, Strategy, Langlois, and Dosi.

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.

Sunday, August 28, 2011

McKinsey, The Perils of Bad Strategy


This McKinsey paper is a must read. Written by Professor Richard Rumelt it provides a critical review of strategy. A review of which we can evaluate our strategy of using the Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the innovative oil and gas producer. In this paper entitled “The Perils of Bad Strategy” Professor Rumelt states:

A strategy is a way through a difficulty, an approach to overcoming an obstacle, a response to a challenge. If the challenge is not defined, it is difficult or impossible to assess the quality of the strategy. And, if you cannot assess that, you cannot reject a bad strategy or improve a good one.

The challenge that I foresee the oil and gas industry experiencing is the heavy demand for the commodity. In most situations this would be considered a positive thing with the positive effect on prices and the resulting windfall profits that would naturally arise. However, a second sober look at the implications of the high demand shows the activity levels will need to increase. Next, the fact that each unit of energy requires an ever increasing level of earth science and engineering effort for each unit of production. These two facts demand more of a critical human resource that is difficult to increase to meet these demands. More earth scientists and engineers are not readily available to satisfy these new demands. Therefore we need to deploy the resources we do have more strategically.

In the Resource Marketplace module we have talked about a revised boundary between the market and the producers. Where the producers are focused on their asset base, consisting of their leases and physical assets, and their science and engineering capabilities which they apply to their asset base. The rest of what they need has to come from the marketplace. There are companies like Encana Corporation that feel they can do it all. Encana has dozens of drilling rigs that they own and operate, I assume because the drilling firms are unable to drill Encana’s wells to Encana’s standards. Soon they’ll be opening a drill bit division. This is the point that Professor Rumelt is making in this next quote.

Good strategy, in contrast, works by focusing energy and resources on one, or a very few, pivotal objectives whose accomplishment will lead to a cascade of favourable outcomes. It also builds a bridge between the critical challenge at the heart of the strategy and action—between desire and immediate objectives that lie within grasp. Thus, the objectives that a good strategy sets stand a good chance of being accomplished, given existing resources and competencies.

Focusing on finding and producing the oil and gas is the key value add for an oil and gas producer. Everything else is secondary and should be provided to the producer through the market mechanism. People, Ideas & Objects also provide the opportunity to pool the earth science and engineering resources represented in the Joint Operating Committee’s participants to further ease the demand on these resources. This is done through what we call the Military Command & Control Metaphor. Building the earth science and engineering capabilities necessary within each producer firm creates unnecessary competition for these resources. Pooling increases the supply / availability of these resources to the producers, therefore eliminating waste, excessive demand and redundancies.

Despite the roar of voices equating strategy with ambition, leadership, vision, or planning, strategy is none of these. Rather, it is coherent action backed by an argument. And the core of the strategist’s work is always the same: discover the crucial factors in a situation and design a way to coordinate and focus actions to deal with them.

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.

Sunday, August 21, 2011

S + B, Three Paths to Open Innovation


Strategy + Business published “Three Paths To Open Innovation” a few months ago and I thought that I would highlight it now. We recently discussed the Resource Marketplace module and how innovation at the service industry level, and within the producer needed to be handled within that module. This article helps to further define these needs.

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.

Thursday, July 21, 2011

S + B, Stop Blaming Your Culture



Over the past few years of this blogs discussion around the impact of the Draft Specification, and the use of the Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the innovative oil and gas producer. And how these changes would have an impact on strategy at the producer firm.  We have discussed many specific points that include;

  • a firm is able to employ different strategies for individual JOC’s based on the optimal strategy for each property. 
  • each producer within a JOC can pursue their own individual strategy irrespective of the strategies used by the other participants. 
  • the strategies are unique to each firm and are mutually exclusive, based on the unique asset makeup of each individual producer. 

What today’s post realizes, suggests or otherwise makes known is that the Joint Operating Committee is also the Strategic framework. So when we state that we are moving the compliance and governance frameworks from the hierarchy to the legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural, communication and innovation framework of the Joint Operating Committee, we can and should include the strategic framework as the seventh framework of the Joint Operating Committee.

Booz & Co’s periodical Strategy + Business have an article entitled “Stop Blaming Your Culture” that pairs the cultural and strategic frameworks.

Leaders like Gray understand the value of an organization’s culture. This can be defined as the set of deeply embedded, self-reinforcing behaviors, beliefs, and mind-sets that determine “how we do things around here.” People within an organizational culture share a tacit understanding of the way the world works, their place in it, the informal and formal dimensions of their workplace, and the value of their actions. Though it seems intangible, the culture has a substantial influence on everyday actions and on performance.

The Joint Operating Committee is culturally systemic throughout the oil and gas industry. It establishes the basis of the culture for the legal, financial, engineering, geo-technical and every other individual that works within the producer firm. The partnership, which is the JOC, has the rights and opportunities embedded within the culture of how the industry operates. People, Ideas & Objects is using this culture, capturing it within the software we are proposing to build in the Preliminary Specification. But the question is how does this affect strategy?

Importantly Booz & Co make the following statement.

When a new leader’s strategy puts the culture of a company at risk, the culture will trump the strategy, almost every time.

Therefore, the Joint Operating Committee, being the cultural framework of the industry has significant influence on the strategic framework of the oil and gas producer. This is in addition to the JOC being the strategic framework itself. This would imply that the global or overall corporate strategy, since it may not recognize the culture of the partnership or JOC, will fail when it does not consider the JOC’s culture.

What I am suggesting here and is being enabled in the Draft Specification may seem unreasonable. Having a unique strategy for each participant in each JOC seems to be inconsistent with efficient and effective management of the oil and gas resources of the producer firms. I would argue that each producer needs to focus on the optimal strategy for each JOC in order for the property to be optimized from an innovation and financial return point of view. Nothing short of this strategic focus will provide the producer with the ability to mitigate the risks and realize the opportunities of the oil and gas business.

The alternative open to the producer would be to change the culture of the firm. Which would involve removing the JOC from their operations, which I would wish them the best of luck.

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, July 20, 2011

Copyright Notice

Politics, can’t live with it, can’t live with out it. This post is about the political realities around the use of copyright in the oil and gas industry. Specifically the copyright that I hold in the research around using the Joint Operating Committee. There are two key points that need to be considered, again, as there seems to be some belief in the marketplace that actions taken by industry members are not subject to the political or legal realities of copyright law.

First of all let me restate the copyright notice. Look at any and all blog posts and knols that contain any of my writings and you will see the copyright for these published works. These are all based on the original idea of using the Joint Operating Committee which originates in my September 2003 research proposal to industry. Now on with the politics.

Producers management and specifically the C class executives, will not wish to "break the (copyright) laws" by using any other software that does not comply with my copyright. This isn’t in a producers best interest due to the fact that it could be financially costly for them to proceed with the development, implementation or use of any other software that violates this copyright and therefore would be unusable. The financial costs of these activities, the time lost in implementing them and the potential loss of further time when the software would not be available for use could be severely detrimental to the producer firm. The software marketplace could be an organizational graveyard for the unaware or careless management.

The second area where intellectual property can be politically disruptive to a producer is when dealing with the hardware, software and services of major vendors like SAP, IBM and Oracle. They have no interest in diluting the legal value of their assets by belittling or diluting their assets by contaminating them with software that is not supported by associated research. That is to say they live and die by the value of copyright and have as much interest as I do in seeing that my copyright is upheld. It in fact supports their copyrights indirectly. They also have no interest in contaminating their IP with IP that may be in direct breach of someone else’s IP, and therefore indirectly becoming party to a breach. It was with this in mind that I informed these firms of my copyright, based on the Preliminary Research Report, in an email dated October 15, 2004 and cc’d to many of the CEO’s of the major Canadian producers.

On a related point. Oracle recently was awarded $1.3 billion in litigation with SAP for their breach of Oracle’s IP. Two very clear points are noted as a result of this. As I noted in the previous paragraph, no software vendor will violate another vendors legitimate claim. And secondly, this is now being extended so that customers don't want to be party to illegitimate use or violation of others IP.

Customers of People, Ideas & Objects can rest assured that the clarity and pristine nature of our IP is impeccable. The value of the idea of using the Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct is immense, and the development of that idea is evident and available for anyone to review through this blog and the referenced knols. There are over 800,000 words, 6 good sized text books, that support the work that has been done and that is reflected in the Draft Specification. This effort has been undertaken to ensure People, Ideas & Objects customers of our ability to compete in this marketplace.

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.