Focused on the User

People, Ideas & Objects are focused on the user. The user is the person who works in oil and gas and is involved in the commercial operations of the producer, or Joint Operating Committee they are employed or otherwise engaged by. Whether that is in production, exploration, accounting, legal, land, personnel or any other department or classification that may have been used before. Our primary users hold the tacit knowledge of how the industry operates. One of the many things that we have learned in this blog. Is that tacit knowledge drives software definition. To preclude the user from the software's development precludes success, literally. With People, Ideas & Objects developers, users define and build the software tools they need to employ their tacit knowledge and ensure the producer maintains the most profitable means of oil and gas operations.

There is a second classification of user in the People, Ideas & Objects communities, that of a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers (CISP). CISP's are application specific resources that are generally employed through contractual arrangements with users, producers, JOC's and People, Ideas & Objects directly. CISP's provide services such as help-desk, accounting systems installation and integration, accounting service provider, training, or conference planner, to name just a few, on the People, Ideas & Objects applications.

All users maintain a relationship within the community through the license agreement between themselves and People, Ideas & Objects. Through the license users are provided with unlimited access to any and all of the Intellectual Property (IP) contained within the applications and communities. Access is provided at no cost to the user. This access to the Intellectual Property enables the focus of the users and CISP to be dedicated in an unconstrained manner to the issues and opportunities of the producers and JOC's.

It is through the license between People, Ideas & Objects and the producers that we are able to generate the software development revenues from this IP. Users and CISP's are free to generate income from the associated services they provide with the software. Producers and JOC's who's users use the applications will be required to pay for the use of the software. This is to ensure that the developments of the software and communities are not restricted in terms of what is possible.

One of the advantages of handling the IP in this manner is the producer and JOC's level of collaboration is facilitated around one software development vendor. Having different software applications operating in the industry limits the quality of the interactions between the producers represented in each JOC. These limitations can be seen in the following two expamples. Imagine if Exxon was the software provider, would any other producer be interested in using the applications? Or, if each member of a JOC were using a different software vendors applications, would each participant be able to use the new technologies as effectively as if they were all using the same system? Using one software developer, based on its IP, puts all the producers and users on the "same page" in terms of technical capability.

With the development of technologies, new ways of working together are being developed. As noted here, Sun Microsystems / Oracle has developed Project Wonderland that provides People, Ideas & Objects developments with the ability to have Avatars represent members of the user communities. Users Avatars could be deployed to negotiate agreements in a virtual environment, or deploy clones to actively market an oil and gas property in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace. The point of this discussion is to show the difference in terms of what can be done when applications are dealing in metaphors of Avatars and Marketplaces. For example, yesterday we discussed the new form of economic organization for the oil and gas investor, shareholder or director. The users in these communities are also reflective of this new economic organization.

People, Ideas & Objects are able to maintain their user focus as a result of the uncompromising manner in which this project is financed. Producers pay for the development and use of the software. The software and developments are not constrained by any debt or equity markets that People, Ideas & Objects may have participated in. Ours is an IP based constraint or opportunity. The focus can therefore remain on the user, the producer, the JOC and the innovative nature of the industry. Not on People, Ideas & Objects need to meet the next quarters reporting requirements.

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's User CISP Community IP
 

Proof

Our 2010 budget campaign is now over. We've raised the total of $0.00 and documented over 30 compelling reasons that People, Ideas & Objects should be funded. Yesterday we saw that management have many alternatives at their disposal, all of which distract their focus from the issues facing the business. Shell's CIO accurately reflecting how lost management has become.

I feel the evidence that we have provided in this web-log, over just the past 90 days, proves that management will never fund these developments. Their situation is comfortable, therefore People, Ideas & Objects shares many of the same complaints about management as the directors, investors and shareholders in oil and gas.

It is therefore in our best interests that we cultivate this community and establish a long-term funding, and mutually beneficial, relationship with directors, investors and shareholders. The stated purpose of doing so should be to eliminate the type of self-serving management and bureaucracy that is the source of our mutual difficulties.

Getting back to the business of the oil and gas business is an urgent requirement of society. Management feel they have the capabilities to raise the global production profile at will and that is their stated position. I believe there is money to be made in the energy business and the need to organize ourselves for the task at hand is our first priority. Organizing ourselves in the manner as defined in the vision of the Draft Specification.

So with this post, I want to formally recognize the director, investor and shareholder as forming a community that we represent here at People, Ideas & Objects. With this post I will aggregate all the discussions around the label Ownership-Community. As we focus on the process of building the User, Community of Independent Service Provider and Ownership-Communities for the remainder of 2010. It is with regret that we can not fund any developments until we have sourced adequate funding, however, there is still much that can be done.

It is reasonable to ask if this is a new form of economic organization? Yes, it most definitely is. And therefore, we begin to look at the works of Alfred D. Chandler. With the hope and understanding of determining new research and ideas from a review of corporate history and its development, we will continue onwards.

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Budget Funding Ownership-Community
 

Focused on the Energy Business

The purpose of this post is to highlight the differences between the systems that People, Ideas & Objects proposes to provide in the Draft Specification, and what management are providing the producer firms today. With this being the end of our 2010 budget drive, the contrast is surprising.

Within the Draft Specification we set out to build an application that deals with the issues that the innovative oil and gas producer is facing. Keeping up with the demands in the earth science and engineering disciplines. Basing the system on the Joint Operating Committee and designed to facilitate a greater level of speed and innovativeness within all producers. Providing the producer with the most profitable means of operations.

Today, I stumbled upon this McKinsey article that documents the state of affairs in Royal Dutch Shell. The interview is with Mr. Alan Matula, Executive Vice-President and CIO. I think it is best to read the article first, and then watch the video below to try and get a feel for what Mr. Matula is talking about.



What planet is Mr. Matula from? Is he serious? And if so, what industry is he in? My god, I can't believe that Shell would even hire this guy, unless of course, they all speak that way!

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Budget Funding Management
 

Last day of our 2010 budget drive.

There is little time remaining in which we could raise any money in our first quarter 2010 budget drive. The consequences of not having our budget funded are many. The two critical consequences are the probable loss of one years time in which to bring the application to market. The second is the imposition of penalties to all producers for the 2010 fiscal year. These penalties are set at 300% of the fee, and therefore, effective April 1, 2010 the total costs of participation to each producer will be $4.00 per barrel of oil per day of production.

There may be a period of time in September 2010 when we can fund our budget, but based on the effectiveness of this past quarters budget drive, the probability of that remains low. Realistically, 2011 will be the earliest time in which we have the opportunities present themselves as they are here today.

What will happen in 2010 will therefore be of limited value in terms of progress. Development of the community is one of the limited options we have, limited in the sense that the community needs to see the producers support these developments. Participation by the community will be crippled without the producers financial resources.

In terms of postings to this blog, I don't see any reason why the pace and frequency can't continue. There is much to discuss in representing the variety of technology and research topics that we follow, and how the Draft Specification could fit into the industry. Besides writing on these topics is too much fun to quit.

So here is to a less pressured 2010. We did what we could and the producers don't share our concerns. Should they change their minds they'll know where to find us. To those who are regular readers, please stay tuned as the desire to continue with this project is strong. Just because the producers don't share our concerns, doesn't mean they won't come around. After all, we have now proven to the investors and shareholders that the bureaucracy won't fund this software.

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Budget Funding Failure
 

Agile Teams - Business Analyst Position

Version One provides software for agile development teams. We have, and will continue to highlight a series of .pdf's they publish to help describe the various roles and responsibilities of agile team members. These are contained in blog posts here, here and under the Agile-Scrum label. Today we are highlighting another position thanks to Version One's .pdf "The Agile Business Analyst". [Note the link takes you to a page where you can request downloads of all their .pdf's.]

How many Business Analysts positions will be on People, Ideas & Objects twenty development teams depends on a number of factors that can't be determined at this time. There are however, many things that we can learn about the agile methodology and the work that will be done on those teams by reviewing all of Version One's .pdf's. So what is a Business Analyst on an Agile development team.

Agile development is having a significant impact on the Business Analyst community. Agile introduces a significant shift in how teams look at requirements and when they are defined in the process. Agile Business Analysts are an integrated part of the team throughout the life of the project and facilitate collaboration across a broader cross section of the project team and the business.

and

Collaboration, facilitation, leadership, coaching, and team building become significant new skills required for Business Analysts on Agile projects. Leadership and collaboration are key components critical to their success.

Gone are some inherent assumptions about the Business Analyst. The following list shows the difficulty in the position as has been defined in previous software development methodologies.

• Assumes that the customer can definitively know, articulate, and functionally define what the system or software should do at the end of the project
• Assumes that, once documented, the requirements will not change – at least not without potential project delays, budget overruns, or stunted feature sets
• Assumes that the requirements process is confined to a single product owner who sits apart from the development team envisioning the product
• Does not acknowledge the inherent uncertainty in software development that Agile methodologies seek to embrace

These four items are flawed from the outset. The agile team can not make these types of assumptions. It is certainly beyond the scope of reasonableness to assume that the Business Analysts can deal with this much ambiguity. Recall our recent blog post entitled "Designed to hit a moving target" that highlights a 47 minute presentation of the Agile Software Development Methodology. Version One then summarizes Agile Project Management in terms of what is possible.

Agile Project Management assumes that the processes required to create high-value working software in today’s economy are not predictable: requirements change, technologies change, and individual team member productivity is highly variable. When processes are not static and outcomes cannot be predicted within sufficient tolerance, we cannot use planning techniques that rely on predictability. Instead, we need to adjust the processes and guide them to create our desired outcomes. Agile project management does this by keeping progress highly visible, frequently inspecting project outcomes, and maintaining an ability to adapt as necessary to changing circumstances.

People, Ideas & Objects Draft Specification seeks to provide an overall vision of how the application would define and support the innovative oil and gas producer. This vision is the key input of the Preliminary Specification. This next quotation from Version One accurately captures what I think is a necessary deliverable from the Preliminary Specification.

To effectively deal with scope on an Agile project, specifications must be considered in two dimensions: breadth first and then depth. It is essential that we understand the breadth of what we want to build early in the project. Dealing with the breadth of the solution helps the team understand scope and cost and will facilitate estimating and release planning. The breadth of a project begins to frame the boundaries of the project and helps to manage the organization’s expectations. Looking at the breadth of the requirements is a much smaller investment of time and resources than dealing with the entire depth. The details are most likely to evolve as we progress through the project so defining them early has less value.

The Draft Specification is the vision, the Preliminary Specification is the breadth and the Detailed Specification is the depth. It's almost like we knew what we were doing! But seriously, the breadth of the application is of key concern to the producers in the oil and gas industry. If you want the application to mirror accurately what your organization should look like, then participation is mandatory. Participation requires that the producer firm fund these developments, and secondly get involved in these developments and help to define the breadth of the application within the Preliminary and Detailed Specifications.

Having a solid understanding of the breadth of project requirements early in the life-cycle helps the development team begin to define the set of possible solutions. The Business Analyst plays a key role facilitating the conversation between the product owner, executives, the technical team, and the QA team. The BA is a key player in ensuring that the full scope of requirements has been defined and balanced by an overall technical understanding of the solution.

The Business Analyst Position begins to have a significant impact on the quality of the developments from this point forward, the Detailed Specification.

Once the team has established the breadth of the solution, it is time to begin incrementally looking at the depth of the solution. The BA will typically take the lead helping the team bring the requirements down to this next level of detail. To incrementally look at the depth of the requirements, we have to abandon our traditional notions of the Marketing Requirements Document (MRD), Product Requirements Document (PRD) and the list of “the system shall” specifications. Instead, we focus on how the system is going to behave.

and

Much like the Agile Project Manager, the Agile Business Analyst will rely much more on people facilitation skills than they may have on traditional projects. The BA’s role is to facilitate a discussion between the product owner and the technical team. The BA will typically bring a tremendous amount of system knowledge to the discussion and is well positioned to draw out functional requirements from the product owner. BAs can also help translate user needs into more technical language for the developers.

People, Ideas & Objects assumes that the energy producer is organizationally constrained. The organizational ability to keep pace with the underlying changes in the earth science and engineering disciplines needs to be purpose built through the vision of the Draft Specification and this software development methodology. To suggest otherwise assumes that we have the time to contemplate alternatives, or to continue to muddle through. As is stated in Version One's conclusion to the Business Analyst Position, that is not an option.

Success in today’s economy requires us to respond quickly to changing market conditions. Traditional product delivery methodologies cannot deliver fast enough in highly uncertain project domains. Agile processes allow teams to meet the changing demands of their customers while creating environments where team members want to work.

March 31, 2010 is the deadline for raising our 2010 operating budget. After which a variety of consequences, such as financial penalties and a loss of one years time will occur. Our appeal should be based on the 30 compelling reasons of how better the oil and gas industry and its operations could be handled. They may not be the right way to go, but we are committed to working with the various communities to discover and ensure the right ones are.

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Agile-Scrum Development Business-Analyst
 

McKinsey Three Executives on Strategi...

McKinsey have an article entitled "How we do it: Three executives reflect on strategic decision making." Two of the executives, Randy Komisar of Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers and Anne Mulcahy, Chairman of Xerox make comments that are pertinent to the work we are doing here at People, Ideas & Objects. I highly recommend downloading the entire document and reviewing it. It has several points and ideas that should be added to your decision making tool kit.

McKinsey continues on with their discussion around the theme of behavioral strategy. Mr. Kosimar raises an interesting point in making decisions.

What makes this culturally difficult in larger companies is that there is often a sense that Plan A is going to succeed. It’s well analyzed. It’s vetted. It’s crisp. It looks great on an Excel spreadsheet. It becomes the plan of record to which everybody executes. And the execution of that plan does not usually contemplate testing assumptions on an ongoing basis to permit a course correction. So if the plan is wrong, which it most often is, then it is a total failure. The work has gone on too long. Too much money has been spent. Too many people have invested their time and attention on it. And careers can be hurt in the process. To create the right culture, you have to make very clear that a wrong answer is not “failure” unless it is ignored or uncorrectable.

The Draft Specification is most definitely Plan A. Plan B is the Preliminary Specification and each of our last months blog posts have concluded with the following comment. "Our appeal should be based on the 30 compelling reasons of how better the oil and gas industry and its operations could be handled. They may not be the right way to go, but we are committed to working with the various communities to discover and ensure the right ones are." Which goes directly to "create the right culture" for success for those involved in People, Ideas & Objects.

Anne Mulcahy has guided Xerox from bankruptcy in 2001 to the firm that it is today, a success story. She reflects on her leadership throughout this period. And provides us with an understanding that few can articulate and most can appreciate.

This was the first of many lessons about how to ensure high-quality decision making that Mulcahy would go on to learn during her nine years as CEO. In a recent interview with McKinsey’s Rik Kirkland, she distilled five suggestions for other senior leaders.

I'll leave it to the readers review of the document to reflect on the five suggestions. Applying these suggestions to the work at People, Ideas & Objects provides substantial value and that is reflected in the following quotations of Ms. Mulcahy.

Decisiveness is about timeliness. And timeliness trumps perfection. The most damaging decisions are the missed opportunities, the decisions that didn’t get made in time. If you’re creating a category of bad decisions you’ve made, you need to include with it all the decisions you didn’t get to make because you missed the window of time that existed to take advantage of an opportunity.

I hope that industry adopts People, Ideas & Objects Draft Specification. It's timeliness is reflected in the way that it resonates with the issues and opportunities in the oil and gas industry today. To take this opportunity, that took five years in the making, and the behavioral strategy that we have adopted in getting this solution right, right for the producers and right for the users of the applications, "trumps perfection", and the remorse "because you missed the window of time that existed to take advantage of an opportunity".

Proceeding with People, Ideas & Objects is risky, and as the previous quote reflects, not making the correct decision in the right time frame creates its own risks.

These days, everyone is risk averse. Unfortunately, people define risk as something you avoid rather than something you take. But taking risks is critical to your decision-making effectiveness and growth, and most companies have taken a large step backwards because of the current climate. I was CEO of Xerox for five years before we really got back into the acquisition market, even though we knew we needed to acquire some things rather than develop them internally. But we got very conservative, very risk averse, and also too data driven. By the time we would reach a decision that some technology was going to be a home run, it had either already been bought or was so expensive we couldn’t afford it.

The oil and gas industry has changed. Since 2005 our global productive capacity has stalled. Prices reflect this reality, and prices are re-allocating the financial resources to the most innovative producer. With this fundamental change in the business, we need to define and build the systems that define and support the innovative producer. That is the Draft Specification and the process of finding the right solution with People, Ideas & Objects.

Decisions have shelf lives, so you really need to put tight time-frames on your process. I would so much rather live with the outcome of making a few bad decisions than miss a boatload of good ones. Some of it flies in the face of good process and just requires good gut. So when trying to take bias out of decision making, you need to be really cautious not to take instinct, courage, and gut out as well.

March 31, 2010 is the deadline for raising our 2010 operating budget. After which a variety of consequences, such as financial penalties and a loss of one years time will occur. Our appeal should be based on the 30 compelling reasons of how better the oil and gas industry and its operations could be handled. They may not be the right way to go, but we are committed to working with the various communities to discover and ensure the right ones are.

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's McKinsey Strategy Change Failure
 

Comments from the Oil & Gas Journal

Some interesting comments are being made in an article from the Oil & Gas Journal. Comments that reflect that our revised approach may find an audience. Entitled "Shale gas plays seen reshaping research, relationships", the article notes elements in play in the oil and gas industry that are 100% consistent with the assumptions that went into the development of the Draft Specification.

Focusing on the Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the innovative oil and gas producer provides many benefits. One is the ability to enhance the quality and speed of the decision making processes around the property the JOC represents. Each producer has the same motivation with respect to the property. Financial interests drive consensus. Suppliers are critical elements of the quality of operations. The Resource Marketplace Module recognizes these facts and builds a collaborative, transaction-oriented marketplace environment to enable the development of the earth science and engineering innovations. The Resource Marketplace Module is integrated with the Accounting Voucher Module to design the transactions between the producers of the Joint Operating Committee and the suppliers they choose. Transaction design is the future producers greatest source of value-add.

Comments from the Oil & Gas Journal:

Shale gas, said Jonathan Lewis, senior vice-president of Halliburton’s drilling and evaluation division, is “fundamentally changing the energy landscape in North America and is doing so with unprecedented speed.”

Other likely areas of technical and scientific progress he cited for shale development are basin-scale modeling, formation evaluation, drilling optimization, underbalanced drilling, borehole steering, multilateral completions, and collection of data in real time.

Lewis also predicted a “new generation” of numerical simulation techniques and said that, beyond science and technology, shale plays are encouraging new “operations optimization and collaboration” as operators seek ways to “drive waste and idle time out of the process.”

The efforts have increased collaboration between operators and service companies, Lewis said. They also have increased the use of packaged services, such as drilling and completion, and of incentives in contracts.

All of which are comments that show the direction of the industry and the Draft Specification resonate.

There is also the market that People, Ideas & Objects have identified for use of this software. The Joint Operating Committee is globally systemic. Start-ups, National Oil Companies (NOC's), International Oil Companies (IOC's) and Independents have all been targeted for use of this software. The Oil & Gas Journal has something to say regarding this changing dynamic as well.

G. Allen Brooks, managing director of the investment banking firm Parks Paton Hoepfl & Brown, said the restructuring results from expansion of activity by national oil companies, the “struggle” by international oil companies “to find a new business model,” the movement of gas into its role as a transition fuel, and politics and taxation.

Gone are the days where the NOC's were operating all elements of the industry themselves. They too need the oil and gas producer and service provider to enhance and optimize the resources of their countries. It's a new day where a new approach appeals to all countries.

If the IOC's are struggling to find a new business model, may I suggest they review the Draft Specification. This specification has the cumulative efforts of five years of research into using the industry standard Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the innovative oil and gas producer. In an industry where the scientific and engineering demands in each barrel of oil produced, are escalating, People, Ideas & Objects provides the technical infrastructure and software development capability to mirror the energy producers innovations. Most importantly, this five years of research is reflected in the Draft Specification. And therefore, producers can re-capture this five year period by subscribing to People, Ideas & Objects.

March 31, 2010 is the deadline for raising our 2010 operating budget. After which a variety of consequences, such as financial penalties and a loss of one years time will occur. Our appeal should be based on the 30 compelling reasons of how better the oil and gas industry and its operations could be handled. They may not be the right way to go, but we are committed to working with the various communities to discover and ensure the right ones are.

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Innovation Specification Change
 

A new approach.

There is another way. That is to say, I have been focused on the motivation people need to make the changes to build this software application. Thinking that the decline of the bureaucracy, through economic atrophy was the only way, is myopic thinking. Certainly there are other ways, however, I have failed to consider them and have become unnecessarily pessimistic.

The fact of the matter is that change can be made through a variety of different ways. Lets take this time, post budget drive, to explore the possibilities and discover other ways in which we can constructively build the support for this project. If you have ideas or comments please use the comment feature on this blog or email me.

March 31, 2010 is the deadline for raising our 2010 operating budget. After which a variety of consequences, such as financial penalties and a loss of one years time will occur. Our appeal should be based on the 30 compelling reasons of how better the oil and gas industry and its operations could be handled. They may not be the right way to go, but we are committed to working with the various communities to discover and ensure the right ones are.

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Change Communication Management
 

Postings to resume...

I've had some rather extensive surgery on my eye. Over one and a half hours for the surgical procedure, and I can see better then I ever have. That was my seventh cataract or related surgery. And the first time that I have had the opportunity to have Dr. Howard Gimbel perform the operation. If you are looking for an eye surgeon, I don't think there is any better, look him up.

I'll resume regular posting tomorrow and continue on with the work that we are doing here at People, Ideas & Objects.

Thanks

Technorati Tags: People's

Alfred D. Chandler, an introduction

There are a large number of papers that have been published highlighting the work of Professor Alfred P. Chandler. Chandler's work can best be summarized as providing an historical context of the American corporation over the 19th and 20th Centuries. To start this review I want to highlight a few papers of interest, the reason we are beginning this review, and what we hope to gain from a review of the history of the corporation.

Our review of Chandler has been rather limited for such an important topic. Other then reviewing a number of Professor Richard N. Langlois' papers which built on Chandler's "The Visible Hand, The Managerial Revolution in America", no direct research of Chandler has been conducted for People, Ideas & Objects. I expect to read his three premier books "The Visible Hand", "Scale and Scope", and "Strategy and Structure" as well as a handful of his papers.

The first paper provides us with an understanding of the scope and scale of Chandler's historical work. The paper is written by Professor David C. Mowery from the University of California at Berkeley. The paper is entitled "Alfred Chandler and knowledge management within the firm". This will be the first paper we review as it provides a strong basis of the historical record that Chandler established. This paper also acknowledges Richard R. Nelson, David Teece, and William Lazonick for comments.

The second paper to be reviewed is written by Professor William Lazonick and is entitled "The Chandlerian Corporation and the theory of Innovative Enterprise". Mowery's and Lazonick's papers will be the first two papers that are reviewed. All of Chandlers works can be aggregated by using the Chandler label when the reviews are published.

The reason to go back and look at the history through the works of Chandler and others is to gain an appreciation of why things are done the way they are today. As Mowery states: "By highlighting the historical forces that underpinned the growth of the large industrial firms that dominated the global economy for much of the 20th century, Chandler's work will enable future scholars to better understand the new factors that are transforming the 21st-century economy." Or in other words, those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

These reviews will be conducted in addition to a number of other researchers works. We have a large, strong group of authors that we are now following, and I have over 20 papers that I will be reviewing.

March 31, 2010 is the deadline for raising our 2010 operating budget. After which a variety of consequences, such as financial penalties and a loss of one years time will occur. Our appeal should be based on the 30 compelling reasons of how better the oil and gas industry and its operations could be handled. They may not be the right way to go, but we are committed to working with the various communities to discover and ensure the right ones are.

If your an enlightened producer, an oil and gas director, investor or shareholder, who would be interested in funding these software developments and communities, please follow our Funding Policies & Procedures, and our Hardware Policies & Procedures. If your a government that collects royalties from oil and gas producers, and are concerned about the accuracy of your royalty income, please review our Royalty Policies & Procedures and email me. And if your a potential user of this software, and possibly as a member of the Community of Independent Service Providers, please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Chandler Research