Encana, the software company.

Word on the street is Encana has a large 200+ person software development project being sourced from the local market. Seems they want to be able to consolidate the financials of Oil-Co and Gas-Co, the two companies being created by splitting up the firm. Therefore they need to hire these people to make sure all their systems are speaking the right language and they can sing from the same song sheet.

Why would an oil and gas company hire from the market the individuals that are needed to build a small application. That's right a small application. This thinking goes back to the troglodyte age when oil and gas firms did everything for themselves. Now there are far more cost effective ways of doing things, but obviously Encana has size and scale on their side. Soon they will be manufacturing their own drill bits, they're invincible.

Just so happens that the Draft Specification includes the ability to conduct all those consolidations that Encana needs. That's right, using the SEC's just announced IDEA platform as one of the cornerstone applications of the Compliance & Governance module. This allows investors to have unlimited access and control to a standard tag library where they can query and develop any type of scenario on any number of companies. The combinations and permutations are unlimited.

So by the time the powers that be at Encana have blown 100% of the costs of developing their software, no one else in the industry will have access to it. Brilliant. Incur 100% of the costs because it is your core competency; and make sure it doesn't play well with others, even though the SEC standard is applicable to all companies. Encana must know something about the software business that I don't.

Here's an idea, I'd be willing to take a similar amount of money from Encana, and deliver a complete systems based on the Draft Specification. Now that's a modern value proposition that adds real value to an oil and gas producer.

It's comments like these that get me into trouble you see. I should learn to keep my mouth shut so that the IT Manager that christened this project doesn't get offended. And, by keeping quiet I would also make sure that IBM, CGI, EDS and the other TLA's (Three Letter Acronyms) don't get questioned on their business ethics by selling something to someone who should know they don't need it.

I wish to appeal to those that have an interest in making this software development project real. If you know of a producing company, or an oil and gas investor that is interested in sponsoring this project, please email the URL of the web log to them and join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Software Innovation Pig

Beyond the red Horizon.

Like CNRL's Mission Statement says, lets have some "fun". First off, with 3 Chairman and 40 vice-presidents is it any wonder they have such high stock option compensation costs? Think of it, that's 430 fingers (including thumbs) that can be pointed at the responsible culprit. Doesn't even include the C class executives.

As we look out just beyond the Horizon, (Horizon being CNRL's heavy oil project) I think we see some critical issues being presented to CNRL's politburo. Critical issues that may have escaped the central planners and I don't want to get into a finger pointing exercise as to whose fault it will be. The number one issue that I think this management is soon to face is the credit crisis that is brewing in Europe and the U.S.

Specifically I think that financial capital is in a state of seizure that is unlike anything we may have seen in the past. The impact of this credit crisis will be limited to those institutions that are involved in granting financial capital and those that need it. If you need financial capital don't bother knocking on the door, you won't know what the response will be.

CNRL is in the unfortunate position of needing a lot of capital. How this company thought they could reach this far beyond the horizon is a surprise to me. With $26 billion of debt on the books, a whopping $3 billion working capital deficiency, they head into the final stages of funding their largest project of all time. Not only is the capital necessary to finish off the project, the cost overruns of an additional $1 billion were recently announced with more schedule slip; and that doesn't include any of the operating costs necessary for start up. Yikes.

I think the analogy to the housing market in the states may be appropriate. Instead, we see an unused and unneeded heavy oil plant sitting idle. The only activity you'll see is the local welders taking back their unpaid work. The one thing we do know for sure is the bigger they are the harder they fall.

Lets assume for a moment that I'm wrong. And the project does start up as planned. Where are you going to put another 100,000 boe / day of production? Tanks? No pipelines currently exist to take the product out of the province. No refiners are able to take on more heavy oil production. This of course assumes they can find and finance the condensate volumes necessary to dilute the production.

This nightmare scenario assumes that the management has all the other aspects of the operation under tight control. Recall the losses that were incurred in the second quarter of this year from stock option compensation and hedging losses. CNRL reported a $350 million loss in the second quarter of 2008. But lets be serious, this high cost heavy oil production project will start with profits and cash gushing out of the ground just like Jed Clampett from the Beverly Hillbillies experienced.

I know if I worked at CNRL, I'd cash my options and start that retirement. When management are gaming the stock price with tours to Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, and lets not forget Paris or Britney. Goosing the price of the stock doesn't have the desired long term effect when Buffet can't follow the script. Jumping ship makes the most sense. Particularly when it becomes obvious the other 45 management types are out of good ideas.

I wish to appeal to those that have an interest in making this software development project real. If you know of a producing company, or an oil and gas investor that is interested in sponsoring this project, please email the URL of the web log to them and join me here.

Pig compliments of http://designedtoat.com/pig.htm

Technorati Tags: People's Management Failure Pig

Paris Hilton on Tuesday, and Britney on Wednesday...

We see the spectacular increase in the four little pigs stock as a result of the plant tour of Warren Buffet and Bill Gates. Such is the focus of this management that they know they can boost their stock price by inviting celebrities for plant tours.

I would suggest that Paris and Britney ask the four little piggies how it is they qualify for $3.3 billion in stock option compensation.

Technorati Tags: People's Management Failure

News Alert: Pigs can fly.

I have now, for all intents and purposes, completed the series of reviewing the four little piggies. What have we learned. I think the senior bureaucracies of the oil and gas industry have proven they are relic's of a time that has past. The points that I take from their earnings related comments are all slanted toward the positives in the oil and gas business. Positives that they have no direct effect over. At the same time they attempt to hide the difficulties that are a direct result of their greed and incompetence.

Lastly I suggest that they are unable to understand the nature of their business due to the speed and velocity of markets, and the archaic use of Information & Communications Technologies. Systems and procedures that were developed for businesses that existed in the 1980's and maybe the early 1990's. Items such as;

• Highlighting their revenue growth and operating profits.

This point I find particularly galling. The revenue's are up due to the prices. Production is actually down year over year in most instances.

• Noting the costs associated with hedging is unrealized.

And therefore not relevant to the earnings potential of the firm. These hedging losses to me reflect that the management are unaware of which business they operate in.

• Noting the costs associated with stock options are also unrealized in reporting cash flow numbers.

Highlighting cash flow numbers vs. net profit numbers has the ability to confuse the press and create a distraction to their "actual" performance. What the management seem unaware of is at some point those checks for hedging and stock based compensation will be written and will affect future cash flows. I suggest the time these cash flows are impacted will be well after the current crops retirements. Leaving the industry in complete shambles.

My ability to contrast the existing management failures with the vision and research conducted in this project provides the justification for proceeding with this software development project. As we move into discovering the sources of revenue that will fund this development in the long term, it should be clear that I have not received any support from the existing management. They are not interested in providing an alternative method of organization that would compete with their current methods. Methods that have been very lucrative for a management that does nothing positive.

Clearly the attention of the world is now focused on China. These Olympic Games promise to show the world how China has grown in their standard of living, and how it competes with us for energy. How the current crop of management was unable to see this trend is due to them being blinded by their stock options. There is nothing better then competition to bring out the best in human kind. Particularly, competition in methods of organizing an oil and gas firm. Therefore I will resume writing once the games have closed and we re-focus on these problems together.

Technorati Tags: People's Management Failure

What does Professor Carlota Perez have to say.

Professor Carlota Perez research shares a great deal of the founding and grounding of this software development project. Her influence can be seen in the current Draft Specification and the approach we are taking to build this software. The Perez label of this blog has nine items in which I reviewed a part of her many presentations and papers. Her ideas can be found in these articles, videos, slides and current papers, here, here and here. I want to review the last paper in this post, but first there is a video that she provides on her website that summarizes her research in ten minutes. That video is here and I highly recommend it for the interested users and developers of this software development project.

Her identification of the economic era we find ourselves in resonates with much of the disruption that we are seeing in the world economy. My initial introduction to her theories was in this 2005 Booz Allen Hamilton Strategy & Business article. I am particularly fond of the seventh slide in this series where she details the effect on our lives.

• A new way of living.
• New Ways of transportation and communication.
• New ways of producing.
• A new way of working.

Beginning with my review of Great Surges of Development and Alternative Forms of Globalization. January 2007. I am focusing more on Professor Perez' Section 5 "Why Globalization" and Section 7 "The Institutional Challenge" for new information and ideas based on her studies. Particularly with this jewel.

Why Globalization

Still, the question may arise as to why globalization should be inevitable. The answer is that reaching for giant global markets is a natural consequence of applying the potential of information and telecommunications technologies (ICT). Intangible products, not only recognize no physical frontiers by traveling instantly and invisibly through communications channels, they also have zero or negligible marginal cost and no structural limit to market growth. Yet they often have high research and development investment, hence the need to maximize markets. Moreover, the greater the number of users of a particular network or product the greater its value and the lower the prices can be, while maintaining growing profitability. p. 17

and

In terms of the size of firm they can accommodate, ICTs go well beyond the maximum size that the old international or transnational corporations were able to achieve with their pyramidal structures. Not only is it possible to guide, monitor and control a truly giant organization when it is networked, but territorial coverage and organizational complexity are relatively easy to handle with ICT and are likely to become much more so with further adaptive innovation. The technology itself is all-pervasive and can be incorporated into the most sophisticated processes for biotechnology, nano-technology or space travel as much as into the most traditional production systems, from global positioning of sheep to information about fishing conditions for small fishermen. The more varied the users the wider the innovation and wealth creating space. p. 18

In other words we are justified in including the entire scope of the globe in terms of our reach. And that an enabling technology, such as this project, will have a material affect on the oil and gas industry. This should be expected, I think, and the users and developers that get involved here will be provided with significant opportunities to expand their reach.

Regarding the size and scope of global firms, the logic of the potential leads to assessing the whole planet for comparative advantages and estimating production and transaction costs “as if” the economic space were unlimited. The greater and more diversified the economic space for global firms, the better for the production networks. p. 18

The research that was done on Professor Richard Langlois' papers and others on transaction cost theory was not a mistake in terms of the value that it will have on the oil and gas industry.

Thus globalization in some form or other is inherent to the nature of the current paradigm, as much as national economies were to the previous. The specific form that it takes in the future and the institutional framework that will guide it will depend on a multitude of factors, political, social, ideological, economic and even climatic. p. 18

The Institutional Challenge

I have been critical of the established oil and gas companies. They have refused to sponsor this software development project. Reviewing Professor Perez' research shows this is to be expected. They are dying off and the new will be built to move in and replace the old. If the International Oil Companies lost 600,000 barrels of oil per day in the last year, next year will see an ever increasing volume of decline. The investors in those companies should support this software development so that they have a means to manage those investments in the future. Investments that may be sold at fire sale prices by the IOC's. As Professor Perez' research into how previous situations developed

Unleashing all the growth potential of each technological revolution in the deployment period requires overcoming the basic tensions inherited from the installation period. A changeover of power would have to take place, turning over the helm of the economy from financial to production capital. In concrete terms this means favoring long-term over short term investments; stimulating production investment and employment-creation rather than feeding the financial casino or housing bubbles; aiming at innovations for true market expansion and not for quick financial gains; inducing the search for profits from real production and not from manipulating money; in short, favoring the real economy over the paper economy at all levels: global, national and local. p. 20

As mentioned in the previous post, as we search for forms of revenue to support these development, Professor Perez provides an interesting outlet.

The finance-led neo-liberal version of globalization applied up to now can be said to have accomplished the “destruction half” of institutional creative destruction. Perhaps that was unavoidable given the differences between the mass production paradigm and this one and the need to dismantle much of the institutional framework set up for the previous one. But, if “State fundamentalism” could have been seen as an obstacle during the installation period of the ICT surge, “market fundamentalism” is now a major obstacle for unleashing the deployment period. The continuation of unrestrained and unregulated free markets will only worsen the tensions that are the direct result of the operation of those very markets. Governments must intervene to shift the tables, not by reversing into the old mode but by creating appropriate institutions (and / or transforming the existing ones) in order to foster the deployment of the current paradigm. That is the creative half of institutional modernization. p. 20

This comment resonates with me. If the free market was working, this project would have been funded. But for the controversial nature that this project attacks the established power groups, this project will never be funded by those currently in power. Evidence of this is their ability to withstand production losses with no concern, other then for their stock options. Possibly many of the governments, such as Alberta's, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Britain and the U.S. will be the groups that realize the need for this projects funding. I think that this is a valid question to be asked. Are markets working? If so how in a free market economy could the global housing bubble be inflated so high. Professor Perez has a valid point in raising this controversial topic.

Professor Perez points to the methods used by President Roosevelt in the previous "turning". One could ask what is the need for Ben Bernanke to go so far in supporting the decline in housing. And the zeal at which each party's candidates are offering government solutions to fix the problems in the markets, so that the markets themselves do not collapse.

If it all sounds utopian, the reader might try to imagine the situation in the previous Turning Point. In the midst of the 1930s Roosevelt was being accused of communism for wanting the State to intervene in the economy to create employment and introduce various social security measures to confront the depression. At that time, few would have been ready to give credence to someone proposing the design of a Welfare State with full employment and with workers’ wages being sufficient to own a house full of electrical appliances and with an automobile at the door. p. 21

and

At the level of individual countries, or regions, opportunities are a moving target and action has to be designed for the conditions of tomorrow and not those of yesterday. There are three tools that can help visualize possible future directions and help viable design:

• understanding the process of assimilation of technological revolutions;
• grasping the logic of the techno-economic paradigm and
• searching the world for successful experimentation already underway.

Contributing elements for the first two has been the object of this paper. In the realm of social experiments there is much to analyze and reflect upon in today’s world. p. 21

If you are not familiar with the writings of Professor Perez, I hope this blog post provides strong motivation to begin a comprehensive view. I have highlighted many of the links in this post and hope that you find her work as stimulating as I do. It is pertinent to the users and developers in this project, pertinent because it provides a road-map for which they can follow through a rather turbulent time.

If you or someone you know can make this project real, please use the PayPal button on the left hand side, and join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Perez Market Failure

This little piggie built a house of straw.

Canadian Natural Resources Ltd (CNQ) have finally announced their earnings, or should I say losses. These were originally schedule for Monday this week, and for some reason they moved them to today. Hmm.

From a management point of view this company performed exceptionally. For just the second quarter of 2008 they recorded an additional $459 million in stock based compensation. We should all toast CNRL for their audacity and guts in providing these quarterly reports.

From a company point of view there is a lot to be concerned about. Not only is the management out to lunch with respect to lining their pockets. They insist on proving to the world that they have no idea what business they are in. The hedging got a little hairy, and as such they had to record a $2.369 billion charge for "risk management activities". I think they should call it "activities of a risky management".

Over the last 12 months the firm has realized a decline in production of 41,024 barrels of oil equivalent. Oddly enough I don't think this was the reason that management awarded themselves.

This company has stepped on the proverbial land mine and are about to be slaughtered like a pig. In this day and age with the credit crunch beginning to affect the general economy. This management took it upon themselves to bury themselves with debt. Just like a pig in a mud pit. I would say this firm is on red alert to try and save itself from the receivers.

How in the world could a firm run themselves into a negative working capital position of $3.1280 billion. Simply by going into a lot of debt. $26.260 billion total debt is enough to collapse the firm just from the juggling necessary to keep that much revolving.

The over reaching and bad management have come to the point where serious action should be taken. The stocks activities this past week will certainly have the Securities and Exchange Commission sending over some Wells Notices. So I'll leave it to SEC Chairman Christopher Cox, no relation, to do the heavy lifting on this one.

Oh and by the way the firm only lost $347 million for the second quarter of 2008. So the shareholders will have to be happy with that. After all what can they do about it? If you know of an investor or employee of CNRL give them a kindly email of this blog post so that they can donate to this worthy cause, and join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Management Failure

Marshall Carter on MIT Video

A new video worth watching from MIT has Marshall Carter, Chairman, Board of Directors, New York Stock Exchange Group, and Director, NYSE conducting a case study in the changes he implemented.

Before I get into this video I want to communicate the process this software development project is taking.

• May 2004, Publication noting the Joint Operating Committee was the legal, financial, operation decision making and cultural framework of the oil and gas industry. And was the means in which the oil and gas industry would become innovative.
• May 2004 to December 2007, research into the validity and requirements of a system to support the innovative oil and gas producer.
• December 2007 to July 2008 Publication of the Draft Specification.
• July 2008 Determine the current management, systems and leadership are failing societies demands for energy.
• August 2008 Define and develop sources of revenue. Commence development (defined below)

Marshall Carter in setting out his case asks the following questions. I have answered these same questions from this software development projects point of view.

1) How do we know when to change?

There has to be a wide consensus that now is the time to change the current management and systems within the oil and gas industry.

2) How do we know when to launch our new strategic direction?

When the problem is evident to every energy consumer and every energy investor that the current course is a dead end.

3) How did we do it.

In a few years we may be able to answer this. I would suppose that the timetable above adds some clarity as to what has been done and where we are going.

4) How did we convince employees.

Most of the users and developers are sourced from the energy companies themselves. This is necessary as they are the ones that know and operate the business. They are also aware of the current situation and direction at the oil and gas company is futile and may not survive the disruptive changes that the industry will be going through.

5) How much effort would be needed to ensure the changes stick.

I believe that the Draft Specification answers many of the questions of what fits where. It also answers many of the problems that are systemic in the industry today. This system is the most logical means for a producer to operate. Therefore the natural tendency of users is to default towards the Draft Specification.

Marshall Carter then states that it was necessary to "build a vision from the bottom up". If anything, I think the hostility that management has shown to this project, and the hostility that I have been able to return prove this is not a "top down solution".

Carter also states "show those that resist change, that change is irresistible." I think forward progress of this software development project will soon prove to the management their way is dying. The following eight items are what Carter suggests is necessary for leading successful change. My response to each point is provided.

Leading Successful Change

• Sense of Urgency

There is no greater sense of urgency then the one that the energy consumer currently faces.

• Guiding Coalition

The use within this project to use the collaborative tools and methods to make this project a result of the users and developers who work within oil and gas. What has not been expressed before is an appeal that I think resonates with the users. Users have ideas on how to make things better. They don't have access to change the Information Technologies that they are required to use. This software development project enables them with a software development capability, source of revenue and chance to affect change within their area of work.

• Vision & Strategy

A vision and strategy that is grounded in the research and academic thinking. A strategy and vision that captures the possibilities of the Information Technologies available to users today.

• Communicating the Change Vision

Blogs and Knol's are powerful tools for reaching out to like minded groups.

• Empowering Broad based action.

This is more of a personal decision for the users and developers to make. No company or manager needs to approve their participation here. People with Ideas and who need software Objects to help them do them their jobs.

• Short Term Wins.

We can move to provide the short list of development targets (listed below) within a reasonable period of time.

• Consolidate Gains and Provide More Change.

The development targets should enable the community to move further and faster then they ever believed they could.

• Anchoring new approaches in the culture.

Using the Joint Operating Committee is enabling the use of the culture of the industry. If this is a requirement of successful change, what does that say about this software development project?

Marshal Carter towards the end notes that what gets measured gets done. So I want to set out these short term targets for the community.

• Establish a user based definition of security and access control requirements.

• Establish "User Archetypes" that implement the Military Command & Control Metaphor.

• Develop and test the Security & Access Control module using Sun's Federated Identity and Project Hydrazine.
• Go live with the users of this systems as soon as possible. Iteratively improve the products user interface, performance and security to meet and exceed user based standards.
• Resell the security offering under license to other industries.
• User based Wiki development towards final specifications.

Lastly Carter notes "Engineering systems at this point is a thinking [and building] process which allows you to identify and solve problems". So lets get to work. Find people to donate and participate in this project, and join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's MIT Video Organizational Change

That's 3.7 million man years per day, lost.

In the book "Profit from the Peak" it was noted that each barrel of oil is leveraged to 18,000 man hours of equivalent labor. This is intuitively logical to most energy consumers. Based on Friday's New York Times, the one year 600,000 barrel per day production loss by the International Oil Companies (IOC's) translates into almost 3.7 million man years of work / day. That is each and every day from now on.

It's time to make this software development project real. Quoting Professor Murray Rothbard’s (1985, p. 283) words:

“Entrepreneurial ideas without money are mere parlor games until the money is obtained and committed to the projects.”

It is therefore time to stop playing parlor games and get down to the job of building this software development project. If the loss of 3.7 million man years per day doesn't quantify the size of this problem nothing else will.

Therefore I am asking everyone and anyone who has access to a budget, investor, oil and gas firm, energy consumer or friend. And would like to donate towards developing this project. Please click on the newly installed PayPal button to make a donation to this worthwhile project. The service accepts all major credit cards and since I will be declaring these donations as revenue, you will be able to deduct the donation from your taxes.

Most of all, thank you, and join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Call-to-Action

HBS Working Knowledge Forum on Stretch.

This forum is asking a critical question regarding the performance of firms and maybe more importantly, the performance of management. Click on the title of this entry to be taken to the forum. 

Can anything be achieved within a moment of time? Are quarterly and annual metrics obstructing what is possible? I know each day I struggle to move towards the goal of building the People, Ideas & Objects system. Each day I am frustrated by an inability to attain that objective. And each day I marvel at the progress we have been able to achieve in moving this software development project forward.

If I look at a moment in time, the moment that the May 2004 preliminary research report was published, as a fixed point in time. And I assume that it was a finding of substantial value for the oil and gas industry. Each day since I have risked the value of the idea by attempting to move it forward. What I have relied on is my education and experience to ensure that no risks would obstruct this community proceeding in the right direction.

As our speed increases and the challenges of blind bunny trails distract us from what is important. We must be aware of our risks to derail this train at all times. If we focus on the risks, then the train will derail for certain. No one individual, no one group will have that opportunity if we leave the future of this project in the hands of those that care the most, the users.

This post was motivated by an interesting offer from Professor James Hesketh of Harvard Business School. His offer is to debate these points in a forum until August 27, 2008.

Please, Join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Harvard Ideas Management

Exxon, Shell, Apache...

The issue of declining production has struck the majority of producers in the oil and gas industry. The New York Times suggests total production declines may reach over 600,000 boe / day. Exxon, Shell and Apache, just as many others have reported, are showing a trend that supports the hypothesis of this blog's preliminary research report. That being;

• The corporate hierarchical organizational structure is an impediment to progress and most particularly innovation.

• Determine if the industry standard Joint Operating Committee, modified with today's information technologies, provides an oil and gas concern with the opportunity for advanced innovativeness.

Producers have also been spending record amounts on capital projects. Much of this increased funding is diluted by the costs associated with too-much-money chasing too-few-skills. Nonetheless producers are involved in a record number of projects. How often in life has doing more of the same; worked to mitigate fundamental changes in an industry?

Within the interpretation section of the preliminary report I suggested;

It is suggested in this research that the speed that a bureaucracy can adapt and change is inadequate for the operational demands of a future oil and gas operation. Innovation within the oil and gas industry will be required in order to keep up with the natural and increasing rate of decline in production. Where the sciences of geology and applied sciences of engineering, which cover a broad range, will need to progress substantially in the next 10 years in order to achieve the demand requirements of the North American energy consumers. p. 71

This claim of mine seems to have a tenuous hold on the legitimacy of me asserting my hypothesis is correct. What evidence is there that the dynamics of the underlying earth science and engineering disciplines have expanded to a higher level of understanding? A level of understanding that a bureaucracy, however large, is unable to comprehend or implement.

Possibly one of the most appropriate statements that has developed in 2008 is "the easy oil is gone". Captures the entire situation very well in my opinion. I'll be the first to agree that the contents of the preliminary research report were only extensions of my "sensing" that the demands of the business were accelerating beyond the bureaucracies capabilities. After 30 years in the business it was generally known that things were getting tougher, much tougher.

And not to discount the research that was done in the preliminary report. That of Professor Giovanni Dosi clearly defining what innovation is and what is necessary to be innovative. Or Professor Anthony Giddens Structuration Theory. A theory that suggests People, Society and Organizations move in lockstep, or failure will occur. I think we clearly see the current demands of society and people being ignored by organizations. Although no failure has occurred, one does not have to look too far. And Professor Wanda Orlikowski's Model of Structuration which suggests technology is a defining and reinforcing component of society. A model in which I coined the phrase "SAP is the bureaucracy".

The subsequent discovery of Professor Richard Langlois research on Transaction Cost Economics, The Boundaries of the Firm, and Market definitions. Dare I forget McKinsey Consulting's grounding of these theories in the current business environment. That the hypothesis and conclusions are based on this academic foundation prove that the Joint Operating Committee is the key organizational construct of the innovative oil and gas producer. At least that is what is proven on paper. As we know the ability to subject a field of study to a paper document provides proof of the concepts contained within the written word. People are still trying to test the theories of Albert Einstien's, theories that he published in the very early 1900's.

Professor Thomas Davenport has also contributed to this research. His blog (his feed ) is frequently highlighted for some of the current thinking he has in business today. In the preliminary report I quoted him from "Strategy and Structure of Firms in the Attention Economy" stating;

Strategy and structure are mental constructs, important not in themselves, but for their impact on people in the organization. Strategy and Structure are also the vehicles for focusing attention. p. 51

But what tangible proof is there that these hypothesis, conclusions, research and concepts are valid? I sarcastically suggest two alternatives;

1. We continue the debate of these "theories" with industry for another five years.
2. We begin building the systems based on these concepts.

I naturally conclude that point two is the choice I would recommend. Producers are being allocated the financial resources to fuel the innovation that commodity markets are demanding. Since these financial resource's are being distributed to managements pockets, I ask what's the risk?

Still not satisfied? I suggest that you select the "Call-to-Action" label of the blog to review the 45 posts that provide even more grounding for these theories validity. Or, review the Draft Specification for this software development and see how fundamentally different and capable the JOC is to enabling innovation in the oil and gas industry. I have also posted the Preliminary Research Report on Innovation Within Oil and Gas in three knol pages here, here and here.(Editing not complete.)

Lastly, please join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Research Call-to-Action Plurality Strategy