The Preliminary Specification Part CCVIII (FM Part XXV)
In this our fourth pass through the Preliminary Specification we are discussing capabilities. Here in the Financial Marketplace module the capabilities of the financial marketplace are provided to the producer and Joint Operating Committee through interfaces such as the “Marketplace Interface” and the “Gap-Filling Interface”. It is through dynamic markets that the innovative oil and gas producer will find that their financial needs are met. And that is the point of this fourth pass, it is that the innovative oil and gas producers capabilities will be sourced from dynamic markets.
This will be the last post of our fourth pass through the Financial Marketplace module. Tomorrow we will be taking a step backwards to pick up some items that were missed in the Resource Marketplace module, and then we will resume our normal progression to the Partnership Accounting module.
I have been critical of the management of the oil and gas producers. They have resisted the changes proposed in the Draft and Preliminary Specifications and have governed as if all is well. It needs to be asked if the oil and gas industry is the same industry when it receives $100.00 for its products when only a few years ago it received $25.00? I’m not of the opinion that it is the same. There has been a fundamental change from a low cost easy energy era, to an innovation focused dynamic producer. The type of producer that operates in these two domains is fundamentally different. The Preliminary Specification is designed for the innovative producer. To make the transition from the easy energy era to the innovation focused dynamic producer will require that we build the Preliminary Specification first. The Financial Marketplace module is a critical aspect of the Preliminary Specification. By aligning the financial framework of the industry with the legal, operational decision making, cultural, communication, innovation and strategic frameworks we will achieve the speed, accountability and innovativeness we desire. In his book “The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism”, Professor Langlois notes.
As soon as we go into details and inquire into the individual items in which progress was most conspicuous, the trail leads not to the doors of those firms that work under conditions of comparatively free competition but precisely to the doors of the large concerns – which, as in the case of agricultural machinery, also account for much of the progress in the competitive sector – and a shocking suspicion dawns upon us that big business may have had more to do with creating [the modern] standard of life than with keeping it down. (Schumpeter 1950 [1976, p. 82].) p. 2
My two criticisms of the management are that the velocity at which the management operates at is too slow, and the innovativeness is non-existent. In the financial marketplace the pace of activity will need to accelerate in order to address both of these issues. I think we have addressed these with the changes we have documented here in the Preliminary Specification.
Schumpeter’s account of progressive rationalization takes the form of a contrast between two modes of economic organization, modes roughly cognate to the difference between the small owner-managed firm and the large multi-unit enterprise. Characteristically, however, the issue in Schumpeter is a dynamic one: he is concerned with the respective merits of these two modes of organization not in the static allocation of existing resources but in generation of economic change and growth. The paradox of Schumpeter is that he famously defended, and has come to be associated with, both of these modes as drivers of economic growth. Schumpeter has returned to prominence today as champion of the role of bold entrepreneurs in creating new combinations and redirecting the means of production into new channels, to such an extent that he is revered as an inspiration to the present-day field of entrepreneurship studies (Shane and Venkataraman, 2000). In this (Schumpeterian) literature, the force behind economic growth comes from individuals or small groups of individuals who work mostly outside the established structure of organization rather than from within it. pp. 17 - 18
Big, small, lean or bloated with management I don’t care what configuration the producer firm is in. The future requires that we are able to provide for the markets demands for energy. If the financial crisis is waning then the economies of the world will begin to grow again. The increase in demand for energy is not something that we can currently contemplate. We need to get our head around this problem and start to deal with a solution. Muddling through just seems to be too much of a risk.
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 (private circle, accessible by members only) and begin building the community for the development of the Preliminary Specification.