Automation of the Compliance Frameworks

The question is, with the future of work being more and more self directed, and motivated through performance, and at the same time with the work of computers automating more of the lower level work, how does compliance and governance fit into this vision?

We will be highly successful in building the software described in the Preliminary Specification. And yet have a real mess on our hands in terms of compliance and governance if we don’t have an answer to this question built into that software. That is not what we are doing at People, Ideas & Objects. As much as everyone would like to ignore this difficult area of the business world it is a very necessary part of the business. And by saying that I know I have offended those people who are truly passionate about the business of compliance and governance. And its those people who will know how to implement these frameworks in the manner that solves the problem that we are discussing. As for every problem there are people who have a passion that will drive them to solve it. Such is the manner of user driven software developments.

I know enough of the topic that this can be done in a manner that makes the user aware of the compliance and governance requirements of their actions. Yet not mindlessly warn them with pop up windows every ten minutes of the day. Where decisions can be informed of the compliance and governance implications before they are made as opposed to after the fact. Where information can be contextually provided as opposed to having to be researched. The point of the matter is that the user interface should be a rich environment where the underlying intelligence of the system should be operating and providing much of these requirements. That is if we purposely set out to build it here in the Compliance & Governance module of Preliminary Specification.

One of the other areas that we discussed in the Compliance & Governance module was the scope of the regulations that the producer firm was now exposed to. A simple firm, well scratch that, there is no simple firm. A producer is required to meet quite a few different jurisdictions for a variety of different requirements. Staying on top of these requirements is  a full time job for many of the people within their organizations. If the trend is for more regulations then the demand for more people will increase, or alternatively, automation of the compliance and governance frameworks will become the necessity.

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.

Governance Over the Service Industry

We want to discuss the governance of one of the capabilities processes documented in the Research & Capabilities and Knowledge & Learning modules. The specific process takes the ideas that are generated throughout the oil and gas and service industries, funds them, develops commercial products and services, develops the producers capabilities, transfers those capabilities to the Joint Operating Committee and learns through their application. As we can see this is a long term process that has many open ended elements that could be lost in the shuffle, or has aspects of the process that are too tempting.

Its best to take a step back and discuss why we are implementing this process in the Preliminary Specification. Simply we have two choices for providing the producer firm with the products and services of the service industry. We can let the market provide for all of the products and services, or we can have the producers conduct all of the work from manufacturing drill bits to producing the oil. We currently have a situation where the producers are dissatisfied with the service industry and are micromanaging that industry through control of the market. When producers are not satisfied with the size of the drilling rig fleet, they, the producers will commission more rigs. Sending the wrong messages to the service industry entrepreneurs. Producers have to work with the service industry, not against them, and certainly they should not accuse them of being greedy and lazy. When you take away the incentives to build a drilling rig, don’t accuse them of being greedy or lazy.

It is here within this “capabilities” process that the firms governance must enforce the boundaries of the firm. The division between the market and the firm, and where that division lay’s, has to be enforced within this process. Simply the producer firm is only concerned with their asset base and their earth science and engineering capabilities. Everything else must be provided by the marketplace. The producer however has a role in providing a vision and leadership to the marketplace and seeding that market with funding. In a paper written by Professors Richard Langlois and Nicholas J. Foss entitled “Capabilities and Governance: the Rebirth of Production in the Theory of Economic Organization.” they note.

The organizational question is whether new capabilities are best acquired through the market, through internal learning, or through some hybrid organizational form. And the answer will depend on (A) the already existing structure of capabilities and (B) the nature of the economic change involved. p. 21

The economic change the producer is facing is the commodity prices are rewarding the innovative producer. To focus on purchasing more drilling rigs is not where a producer can generate value. The governance of the producer must maintain the focus on where the producer can generate the greatest value, on finding and developing oil and gas reserves, otherwise...

If by contrast, the old configuration of capabilities lies within large vertically integrated organizations, creative destruction may well take the form of markets superseding firms. History offers many examples of both. p. 21

I am going to suggest that reliance on the Work Order and Military Command & Control Metaphor of the Preliminary Specification be the means of how the producer maintain focus and governance on this process. Distraction away from the objective of the producer firm is a very real possibility in dealing with the noise of the marketplace. The Work Order will ensure that no work is done on unauthorized projects and that a chain of command is implemented in the administration of each project. This will help to ensure that each project is ultimately focused on providing the producer with earning greater returns on oil and gas reserves discovery, enhancement and production.

This discussion may seem like a fundamental contradiction as to what the producers involvement is in the service industry. I am critical of the way that the producers have involved themselves in the business of the service industry. The producers dissatisfaction with the costs, products and services provided to them by the service industry is as a result of the high levels of involvement of the producers in the service industries business. Micro-managing and cost control, as well as direct ownership of things like drilling rigs are counter to the producers interests. At the same time there needs to be stronger representation made by the producers in focusing and leading the service industry marketplace. This leadership is lacking and is sorely missed. My argument is that we need to remove the direct manipulation of the service industry marketplace by the producers and replace it with a more constructive leadership role so that the service industry marketplace can better respond to the needs of the innovative and profitable oil and gas producer.

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.

Governance Over Self Organizing Groups

The manner in which much of the work is done in the People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification resonates with the ideas of how work will be done in the future. Direct supervision is replaced by self organizing groups who are motivated and directed by the performance of their property. This creates the environment that people aspire to work for; and the governance issues that this creates for the firm. This discussion deals with the governance issues and how the governance areas of the Compliance & Governance module reels in the vision of self organizing groups to something that is more workable and sensible in the commercial environment.

First of all the Military Command & Control Metaphor is not just for the Joint Operating Committee. Although we have discussed it in terms of just the JOC, there is nothing stopping the firm from using the organizational overlay within the firm. This also applies to the Work Order system. These two tools would provide the firm with the ability to ensure that tasks were assigned and completed as budgeted and execution was consistent with the firms expectations. Recall by the use of these systems, it is understood that no other work is undertaken without the ability to charge time or costs to a Work Order. Effectively ensuring that no unauthorized projects are undertaken. The Work Order system would also provide the internal control necessary to ensure that the appropriate people necessary to achieve the governance are assigned to approved projects and are capable of meeting the requirements of the tasks. When “things” go wrong it’s usually at the beginning and having that “governance” information available is the objective of this capability.

When we talk about the firms and Joint Operating Committees internal controls, they seem to me to be a lost art in the tool kit of today’s management. The ability to set up a control to trigger a warning that something is happening that is inconsistent with normal policies, has been used more in the past then they seem to be used today. The power of technology seems to go hand in hand with internal controls. I think they provide a strong method of governance that should be built into the People, Ideas & Objects governance area of the Compliance & Governance module. That is to say that a section be devoted to building database “triggers” and “stored procedures” that are used by the firm to monitor areas of the firms activities. These of course being available to those individuals with the appropriate authority to access the data and information necessary to run the queries, and to fully appreciate the art and science of internal controls.

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.

Compliance for Everyone

In a capital intensive business such as oil and gas, access to capital is a critical capability the producer needs to develop within their operation. In order to have access to the capital you must meet the regulatory requirements and compliance needs of the capital markets. Therefore the Compliance & Governance module of the Preliminary Specification is a critical capability to all those that are dedicated to building an innovative oil and gas producer. That applies equally to ExxonMobil and the start up oil and gas operation.

And it should be a concern of ExxonMobil that the start up oil and gas operation has its compliance and governance in good shape. Why? You can't pick your neighbors and you can't necessarily pick all of your partners. Sometimes you have to deal with partners that you have no history with. You want to make sure that they are capable of operating in a fashion that is at least consistent with standard industry practices. It is those standard industry practices that include high levels of compliance and governance in today’s oil and gas industry operations. What about tomorrow’s environment?

As we have discussed the level of expectation by regulators with respect to the compliance requirements are high. It would appear that there is no sense that any relief will be forthcoming, on the contrary, we should expect the level of requirements to grow. This is the only reasonable expectation, however, I would ask, have we implemented these compliance frameworks correctly? Have the regulations which are submitted in technical frameworks, been “integrated” to the ERP system, or just attached?

We can see the answer to that question when we find that no current ERP system calculates the Gas Cost Allowance for royalty calculations. To conduct these types of calculations you would need to integrate the royalty frameworks deeply within the ERP systems, and that clearly has not been done. So when it comes to the automation of the compliance frameworks, which is the objective of the regulators in publishing these technical frameworks, nothing has been done from the industry side.

I have argued that there is two ways in which to approach the problems that we face in oil and gas. One is to automate the processes to high levels with systems. This requires the high capital costs of software development such as what People, Ideas & Objects have proposed. Or, you can employ the human resources to maintain the compliance requirements on a manual basis. This is the method that industry has chosen to pursue up to this point. I would ask in times where;

• The cost of capital is historically low.
• The demand for human resources is somewhat constrained.
• The regulators have published technical frameworks.

Why wouldn’t the oil and gas producers chose to develop the People, Ideas & Objects applications?

Automation of the compliance frameworks within the People, Ideas & Objects applications would provide many benefits to the innovative oil and gas producer. The costs of doing this engineering work is being amortized over the entire industry. Making these highly engineered software products, incidental in terms of actual cost to each producer. Access to these systems would be to the benefit of all the producers in the industry. Enabling the capability of each individual producer to meet or exceed the minimum standard of industry expectations. In a world of increasing demands, your partner's capabilities could become a critical issue to your operation. There is a compelling argument here in the compliance aspects of the Compliance & Governance module.

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.

Specialization and the Division of Labor

We noted the opportunity of centralizing the software development costs and efforts for Compliance & Governance frameworks under one roof. That is to say that instead of each producer building the in-house capacity to have their software and compliance capabilities maintained, it is preferable to have it centrally managed through People, Ideas & Objects. I want to take that concept a bit further and break down another element of the cost of compliance and discuss how that element could also be done in a centralized manner. That element is of course the accounting and administrative costs incurred in meeting the regulations requirements. The costs of which are incurred in the human resources and associated overhead. These costs are an area where specialization and the division of labor could be applied and build real value for the producer firms.

It comes down to the question of where is the compliance work done, at the Joint Operating Committee, or the firm? It has to be done at the firm as all the variables are unique to each producer. Within the Preliminary Specification we use the decentralized production model. This sees the prototypical producer firm reduced to the C class executives, the earth science and engineering resources, some land and legal and support staff. In the case of compliance and governance resources they are provided to the producer firms through industry based service providers. This moves the producers compliance and governance to be relied upon through the industries compliance and governance capabilities of service providers.

If we were to approach the accounting and compliance reporting requirements on an industry wide capability and used specialization and division of labor we could add significant value to the industry. Taking the organization of the accounting across the industry and building the accounting and compliance needs for all of the producers would provide that value at lower costs and better service because of the efficiencies from the division of labor and specialization. Where each individual accounting and administration service provider were specialized in one and only one compliance requirement. Particularly in the area of compliance reporting, especially royalty, where the knowledge of the people who were employed in the compliance service would be so specialized that they are able to ensure that their clients royalty obligations were the lowest possible. With royalties being the largest cost component of a producer this would certainly be of value but there are greater efficiencies than these available. There would also be the ability to manage the process with the most efficient team available.

These are the two elements of the costs of compliance. First, as we noted the cost of maintaining the software in compliance to the regulations. And two, the accounting and administration that is done in keeping the firm up to date by service providers. If the software can be maintained on a global basis on behalf of the industry by People, Ideas & Objects then the one time costs of the software can be amortized over the industry as a whole. And if the accounting and administration costs can be managed by also centralizing the accounting and administration function within an industry wide capability within service providers, and as a result, specialization and the division of labor coming into play. Then the industry is benefiting by reducing their costs by reducing the two largest components of the costs of compliance in the most cost effective way. Yet, they have also done so in the manner where their compliance quality is higher.

Another element of quality also comes into play as a result of the proposal from People, Ideas & Objects. That element is time. If the timeliness of the information that is provided is within the guidelines, or is earlier, than the quality of that information is much higher. I think that what is proposed here with the high levels of software automation, specialization and the division of labor provide an assurance that the timeliness of the information that the systems we are building will be better than the deadlines imposed by the regulators. This timeliness doesn’t appear to come at the expense of accuracy either.

Lastly when we discuss moving the compliance and governance frameworks of the hierarchy into alignment with the Joint Operating Committees legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural, communication, innovation and strategic frameworks. We state that this provides an increased speed, innovativeness, accountability and profitability. For when you align compliance and governance with operational decision making, accountability is the result.

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.

Introduction to Compliance & Governance

Compliance & Governance, the module everyone loves to hate. It is my hypothesis that it is here, at compliance and governance, that everything went wrong. What I mean by that is in the 1960’s when the first computers were being introduced into oil and gas companies. The question was asked what will we do with them? And of course the answer was accounting. Then as they became ever more powerful and more capable they began to add more tasks to their duties and added the natural follow on concerns of tax, royalty and compliance. Soon the culture became focused on those “compliance” requirements of the “firm” and the Joint Operating Committee became something that was used over there. Soon after this engineers and geologists began speaking a different language to the “business” types. Divisions grew and the business of the business was focused on the corporation and its need to file the appropriate paperwork to the appropriate agency in the appropriate time frame on the appropriate colored form.

Anyway the real business of the business, the Joint Operating Committee somehow survived. When we align the compliance and governance frameworks of the hierarchy to the Joint Operating Committees legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural, communication, strategic and innovation frameworks everyone can start speaking the same language as the engineers and geologists and start to get some real business done. And as People, Ideas & Objects research has shown this would provide the oil and gas producer with greater speed, innovation, accountability and profitability.

Compliance & Governance is the eleventh module in the eleven module Preliminary Specification. It’s also no accident that I added Compliance & Governance last, as the question that should be asked is. How are we going to ensure compliance to all the regulations for all the module specifications that we have discussed so far? And I would assert that is why these are user based developments. One thing governments seem to be fond of today is regulations on oil and gas companies. With Information Technology enabling various governments to issue technical business rules, technical specifications, XBRL syntax’s and other technological frameworks for these regulations. The ability to write these “frameworks” only seems to have encouraged governments to write even more regulations. The larger point is that these frameworks do provide software developers with distinct advantages in enabling the regulations within the software.

As we had indicated earlier regarding the user communities determination of the scope of the People, Ideas & Objects application. Part of that determination of scope will include which regulations it will need to be in compliance too. With so many jurisdictions requiring compliance, each transaction may need to be assured to be in compliance with multiple jurisdictions. Add to that the transaction may be generated through a Joint Operating Committee owned by a variety of producers. Who may be composed from an international background and the Compliance & Governance module takes on an enhanced importance.

From the point of view of a producer maintaining the database and applications for all of the compliance frameworks that you have to be concerned with is a difficult task. The number of people you need to have to keep your applications up to date is significant. However, People, Ideas & Objects, as one software developer acting on behalf of the industry as a whole, the job becomes much more specialized and therefore manageable. Then again if we were building these applications with the purpose of serving an industry we will use the division of labor and specialization to manage these tasks in a way that would significantly lower the costs of compliance, and increase the quality of the producers compliance.

I foresee just the royalty compliance requirements of these applications including dozens of different jurisdictions. To approach this from a software engineering point of view as a sole producer is not cost effective. To consider these costs are replicated within each producer firm, then we begin to see the costs of compliance escalating to the levels that they are today. There is another way, and that is we move away from the individual producer compliance and governance capabilities and rely on an industry wide capability. That is what is being proposed here in People, Ideas & Objects, along with the many other innovative ways we are proposing to deal with the issues of the oil and gas industry.

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.

Conclusion to Performance Evaluation and Analytics & Statistics

Work in the 21st Century will be different. The tools that people will use will need to be different as well. The Performance Evaluation and Analytics & Statistics modules are the beginning of these new era tools for the way in which people need to work. We frequently speak of specialization and the division of labor in the Preliminary Specification. There is also a specialization and division of labor between what the people and computers will be doing and that is reflected here in these two modules. Computers will be responsible for the storage and processing, and people will be responsible for the thinking, the ideas, the decisions, the creating, the collaborating, the innovation and the many other things we do well. Much of these things being generated based on the facts that are determined through the Performance Evaluation and Analytics & Statistics modules.

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.

Focused on Changing Capabilities

We are focusing the producer firm and Joint Operating Committee on its key competitive advantages. Those are its land and asset base, and their earth science and engineering capabilities it holds. These are the things that differentiate them from other producers and how they produce value for their shareholders. Everything else is secondary. We have adopted what Professor Richard Langlois calls the “capabilities approach” in his paper “Capabilities and Governance: the Rebirth of Production in the Theory of Economic Organization.”

When users are in the Performance Evaluation and Analytics & Statistics modules they will be able to look at a new type of cost that we have recorded in the accounts of the firm and Joint Operating Committee. That is the costs associated with “Dynamic Transaction Costs” which are the unique costs that are incurred during times of change. Professor Richard Langlois described these costs in his paper “Transaction Cost Economics in Real Time.”

Over time, capabilities change as firms and markets learn, which implies a kind of information or knowledge cost - the cost of transferring the firm's capabilities to the market or vice-verse. These "dynamic" governance costs are the costs of persuading, negotiating and coordinating with, and teaching others. They arise in the face of change, notably technological and organizational innovation. In effect, they are the costs of not having the capabilities you need when you need them. p. 99

The types of these costs will be varied and not necessarily the same in all instances. Within the Partnership Accounting and Accounting Voucher modules is the ability to tag a transaction. This tagging is irrespective of the account classification and has no accounting significance. It is for the user to aggregate types of costs for further analysis. In these instances these costs of change, the Dynamic Transaction Costs, will be tagged as such and therefore will be able to be aggregated for subsequent review. Having the ability to further analyse these costs when the time comes, from the Performance Evaluation and Analytics & Statistics modules could lead to further insight and learning into the organizational changes that might, or should, be occurring.

Indeed, in cases in which systemic coordination is not the issue, the market may turn out to be the superior institution of coordination. In general, the capabilities view of the firm suggests that we look at firm and market as alternative and sometimes overlapping institutions of learning. p. 99

and

Economic progress, then, is for Marshall a matter of improvements in knowledge and organization as much as a matter of scale economies in the neoclassical sense. We can see this clearly in his 'law of increasing return,' which is distinctly not a law of increasing returns to scale: 'An increase of labour and capital leads generally to improved organization, which increases the efficiency of the work of labour and capital' (Marshall, 1961, IV. xiii,2 p. 318) p. 101

We will need to have a page or screen in each of these two modules dedicated to breaking down these costs. Then a producer or Joint Operating Committee will have some point of reference to determine the state of change and its impact in terms of the costs, and types of costs, to the organization. How the transition in the firm or Joint Operating Committees capabilities is being managed.

F.A. Hayek (1945, p. 523) once wrote that 'economic problems arise always and only in consequence of change.' My argument is the flip-side: as change diminishes, economic problems recede. Specifically, as learning takes place within a stable environment, transaction costs diminish. As Carl Dahlman (1979) points out, all transaction costs are at base information costs. And, with time and learning, contracting parties gain information about one another's behavior. More importantly, the transacting parties will with time develop or hit upon institutional arrangements that mitigate the sources of transaction costs. p. 104

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.

Dynamic Data and Information

How the innovative producer attains a higher factor of innovation is through a constant search for more production, higher prices, lower costs and more effective management of their oil and gas assets. This search in many instances will begin with a query in either the Performance Evaluation module for the Joint Operating Committee or the Analytics & Statistics module for the producer firm itself. Having access to the data and information of the respective domain provides the user with the ability to formulate queries on the basis of different scenarios, what if’s, and other mathematical calculations. Big deal, something that most people can do with a day of training on a spreadsheet. And that would be part of the situation, however there is more.

If we go back to earlier parts of this module we find that performance is a key motivating principle behind the use of the module. People are using these modules to find the next increment in value. To determine where that value resides requires these specialized tools to find it. Recall that these are subject to the Security & Access Control module, therefore the data and information that they can access will be limited to the domain of the users authority. And the application modules will be collaborative, therefore they are able to interact with others.

Running a query is a fairly basic operation that is static in its output. The result just sits in the spreadsheet for the user to act upon. Within the Performance Evaluation and Analytics & Statistics modules we can invoke the messaging services which include the following processes: person to person, person to process, process to person and process to process, on any of the system processes. Therefore if you had a process that was running, and at any time that process attained a point in time of which you wanted to know, then you could have the system text you. Or if the same process attained its completion, then you could have it invoke another process to initiate some other action, or you could have the option of texting the system to invoke a number of different scenarios. Adding these messaging processes brings the power of the ERP system into play from the point of view of using these calculations to carry out some action.

Professor Giovanni Dosi (1988) states that profit motivated agents must involve both “the perception of some sort of opportunity and an effective set of incentives.” (p. 1135) Professor Dosi introduces the theory of Schmookler (1966) and asked “are the observed inter-sectoral differences in innovative investment the outcome of different incentive structures, different opportunities or both”? (p. 1135) Schmookler believed in differing degrees of economic activity derived from the same innovate inputs. The incentive to find the innovation, and the opportunity to find it are both contained within the Performance Evaluation and Analytics & Statistics modules.

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.

Collaborations Risks and Rewards

Working in isolation we can achieve a lot of what we set out to do. When we collaborate with others then the possibilities grow exponentially. Setting about to review a mountain of data seems like a fun task, for a few people I’m sure that might ring true. However, for most people the possibility that they will find joy in the task is somewhat limited. As a team however, the task becomes something of an adventure with the findings being a multiple of what one individual might discover. A collaborative capability needs to be a necessary part of the Performance Evaluation and Analytics & Statistics modules.

Professor Giovanni Dosi noted that a technological trajectory is the activity of technological process along the economic and technological trade offs defined by a paradigm. Dosi (1988) states “Trade-offs being defined as the compromise, and the technical capabilities that define horsepower, gross takeoff weight, cruise speed, wing load and cruise range in civilian and military aircraft.” People, Ideas & Objects assumes the technical trade-off in oil and gas is accurately reflected in the commodity pricing. Higher commodity prices finance enhanced innovation.

These trade-offs facilitate the ability for industries to innovate on the changing technical and scientific paradigms. Crucial to the facilitation of these trade-offs is a fundamental component that spurs the change and is usually abundant and available at low costs. For innovation to occur in oil and gas, People, Ideas & Objects asserts that the ability to seek and find knowledge, and to collaborate are two “commodities” that are abundant today. With their inherent low direct costs, knowledge and collaboration are the triggers for a number of technical paradigms which will provide companies with fundamental innovations.

Collaborating and sharing knowledge in the Performance Evaluation and Analytics & Statistics modules, as well as the other modules of the Preliminary Specification, will fuel innovation. Whether that collaboration is within a producer firm, a Joint Operating Committee or a working group that has recently been established through a Work Order. Access to these two modules should enable the participants to evaluate the data with the toolset provided in the modules. The only limitation that I would hope to impose on the use of these tools is a reasonable amount of free computer time.

Making these two modules collaborative will turn them into well used applications that will be used by many. Not the obscure applications used by the data obsessed. Remember Professor Dosi says that “In very general terms, technological innovation involves or is the solution to problems.” Discovery of those problems can be collaboratively done here in the Performance Evaluation and Analytics & Statistics modules.

What we do know is that “things” happen fast. Except in organizations. Providing the people with the appropriate knowledge and information for them to act in a fast changing environment is difficult. Some of the difficulty in getting the knowledge and information to the right people was to ensure the integrity of the information was not breached by those that were not part of the organization. And don’t get me wrong I’m not recommending an open information policy. The Security & Access Control module imposes high levels of integrity on all the communications and storage of data and information. The collaborations however between firms being open is where there may be some perceived leakage of proprietary losses of knowledge. And it is here in these open communications that I am asking if any information losses impose any risk to the innovative oil and gas producers competitive advantages of their land and asset base, or earth science and engineering capabilities, or innovativeness. No they don’t. As we have learned in fact the collaborations enhance the innovativeness and the capabilities of the firm.

The question therefore becomes how is this proprietary information and capability deployed on an as needed basis? Professor Giovanni Dosi notes that although the free movement of information has occurred in industries for many years, yet has never been easily transferable to other companies within those industries. The ability to replicate a competitive advantage from one company to another is not as easy, and may indeed be not worthwhile doing. Dosi (1988) goes one step further and states, “even with technology license agreements, they do not stand as an all or nothing substitute for in house search.” A firm needs to develop “substantial in-house capacity in order to recognize, evaluate, negotiate and finally adapt the technology potentially available from others.” Therefore why not focus on the need to increase the company's own unique and specific competitive sources and directions?

Collaborations in the Performance Evaluation and Analytics & Statistics modules of the Preliminary Specification will provide greater value in getting new and innovative ideas and information to the right people in the right place at the right time. These are the attributes the firm should be pursuing rather than any concern for any risks of losing any proprietary data or information. We noted that innovation involved the discovery of problems. It also includes change which Professor Dosi notes in the following.

Organizational routines and higher level procedures to alter them in response to environmental changes and / or to failures in performance embody a continuous tension between efforts to improve the capabilities of doing existing things, monitor existing contracts, allocate given resources, on the one hand, and the development of capabilities for doing new things or old things in new ways. This tension is complicated by the intrinsically uncertain nature of innovative activities, notwithstanding their increasing institutionalization within business firms. p. 1133

It would therefore seem prudent for an innovative producer to enable the collaborations in all of the modules of the Preliminary Specification as a key to their innovation strategy. And to focus on dealing with the change in the routines as a result of the discovery and solutions to problems and the changes in their capabilities. These are the areas where the innovative oil and gas producer is going to need to deal with the outcomes of the innovation, and the overall capability to continue to innovate.

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.