People, Ideas & Objects Response to a Request for Proposal, Part I
Abstract
People, Ideas & Objects, our user community, their service provider organizations and Oracle Cloud ERP are based on providing the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil & gas producer with the most profitable means of oil & gas operations in North America. Our approach is business oriented to focus the industry on generating real profitability to ensure that society is provided with abundant, affordable and reliable energy to fuel their economy. The most powerful economy known to man. Our value proposition is derived from the disintermediation of the hierarchy. To fully adopt and integrate the industry standard Joint Operating Committee, the legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural, communication, strategic and innovation framework of the industry. Sound economic principles such as specialization and the division of labor and Professor Paul Romer's "New Growth Theory" regarding non-rival goods to establish our Cloud Administration & Accounting for Oil & Gas capability. Eliminating the need for each individual producer to build the same non-competitive capabilities of administrative and accounting expertise on an unshared and unshareable basis. Implementation of our decentralized production model as part of our business model ensures that "real" profitability will be earned everywhere and always. There are many other attributes of our value proposition such as innovation that can not be readily quantified and qualified. However, all of these are focused on generating value for all concerned. Where profitability in the primary industry of oil & gas is necessary to ensure that a healthy and prosperous, overall greater oil & gas economy is maintained and sustained for the long term.
There is no other source of financial resources to do so. Governments only spend money that is taxed from earnings and profits. Investors only allocate their investments from other profitable areas of the economy. Oil & gas producers participating in a primary industry must stand on their own and provide for themselves, the service industry and all the subsidiary industries that are dedicated exclusively to their success. They must provide value for their investors and bankers, their employees and ensure that a healthy prosperous industry is handed down to others. Profits are the only means in which anyone and anything can be sustained on this basis for the long term. To do so takes effort, skill, courage and perseverance. None of these attributes can be pointed to in the current officers and directors of the producers, who coincidentally hold all the authority and responsibility to ensure profitability and accountability are attained, and are the only group who've obtained any personal value from this industry for many decades. These are disconcerting and difficult words aimed directly at those who make the decisions as to which ERP system to use. However, the destruction and damage they've authored is a fundamental betrayal to all those who have worked to build the industry constructively. It is only the officers and directors that have the authority and responsibility necessary to make the changes and avoid a further catastrophe by choosing to implement People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and service providers Cloud Administration & Accounting for Oil & Gas service..
To resolve the current difficulties that plague the North American oil & gas industry demands that we organize an approach to how it’ll be resolved. That is the work that People, Ideas & Objects et al propose to do with input from the oil & gas, service and all the tertiary industries involved in the greater oil & gas economy. Readers will note our contradiction in that statement and the belittlement of SAP by commenting that their approach is "blind sleepwalking agents of whomever will feed them." Our approach follows the industry culture contained in the Joint Operating Committee and five other organizational constructs, the overall vision of the Preliminary Specification, our user community vision providing them with the authority and responsibility to implement it with the assistance they require from industry. SAP is following the officers and directors. Industry culture is defined in the Preliminary Specifications six organization constructs consisting of the Joint Operating Committee, Innovation, Markets, Intellectual Property, Information Technology and Specialization and the Division of Labor. The Markets being driven as an organizational construct on the basis of price.
This new oil & gas organizational structure will be the derivative software product of People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification and the services of our user communities and their service providers. What we describe as a rebuild of the industry on a brick by brick and stick by stick basis. We aren't trashing the industry to the dustbin of history. Unfortunately the officers and directors of the producer firms have already done so. Software is what defines and supports the organization in society today. Serendipity, spontaneous order, disintermediation and creative destruction have been hamstrung by the fact that software also constrains an organization in proverbial cement based on its current process management definition. To make any organizational or process change has to be orchestrated through the software first in order to have the change take effect. Otherwise the organization will quickly regress back to the processes existing in the organization's software definition. This is the consequence of our dependence on Information Technology and is what we’ve called a modern day software bug. One that has cost the industry its prosperity as officers and directors took this knowledge, never changed the organizations ERP software and therefore secured their methods of personal aggrandizement.
Fast forward to the third quarter of 2022 and People, Ideas & Objects believe this same logic is being used again. Oil & Gas investors are demanding producers move to tier 1 ERP systems to enhance their profitability and accountability, of which we qualify with Oracle Cloud ERP. Will producer officers and directors be using this logic to select SAP with their vision of clean energy and pliable "blind sleepwalking agents of whomever will feed them" approach to marketing in order to secure the sale? We believe this would have a detrimental effect on People, Ideas & Objects by eliminating the Preliminary Specification as an active software offering for at least a generation. SAP would have to deliberately avoid our Intellectual Property and that would be considered a feature, not a bug by these officers and directors. Providing them with another viable scapegoat as to why they can not provide the style of accountability or performance being asked of them. Lastly it would ensure the industry maintains the status quo strategy of "muddle along."
Regarding the difficulties we find ourselves with respect to energy. I feel we do not have a handle on the situation and control is out of reach of these current organizations officers and directors. Where we are at is maybe best explained in the Winston Churchill quote,
Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.
Background
As pertinent background information, I began this adventure in 1991, I spent the first year promoting Oracle to join in our development of client server systems for Canadian oil & gas. This initiative failed in February 1997 as a result of my firm's inability to secure any commitment from oil & gas producers. Or in retrospect, I believe now that producers rejected the system due to the high level of accountability being introduced. Oracle subsequently tried on their own with Oracle Energy and found the same outcome, no participation from the producers for the same reasons, and left in 2000. There is an inherent level of commitment evident in Oracle's near decade long actions regarding oil & gas ERP systems that is not evident in SAP’s. A 22 page white paper and three day conference are superficial in comparison to the Preliminary Specifications 330 thousand word, viable business model and an active user community that began its development in 2014. Accountable ERP systems have been deliberately avoided for at least the three decades of my involvement and those who offered such products have not benefited due to their specific pursuit of enhanced producer performance, accountability and integrity.
Oracle’s market capitalization is now $206 billion and is the premier ERP provider in the world according to Gartner, SAP’s is $109 billion. I do not recall SAP’s efforts to build an oil & gas solution in the manner that Oracle or IBM have. Together Oracle and People, Ideas & Objects can build the Preliminary Specification to solve these critical issues for the oil & gas industry. And do so by first avoiding the issue of these officers and directors of the North American based producer firms and their desire to maintain their systemic lack of accountability.
Looking at the decision to purchase and implement an ERP system. It’s expensive, it’s time consuming, it affects the management of the firm and tightens the compliance and governance of their actions. It holds the officers and directors accountable for their actions and decisions. Accounting is about the reporting of performance and as I’ve documented throughout these writings the oil & gas producer officers and directors have morphed the purpose of their accounting to recording value as they’ve chirped in their “building balance sheets” and "putting cash in the ground" mantra. People, Ideas & Objects believe that a capital intensive industry's products would contain high levels of capital costs. Which, if industry would adopt our methods by implementing the Preliminary Specification, would allow producers to perform and compete for capital on North American capital markets. The ERP decision is made at the board of directors level based on the officers recommendations. Due to the high cost, time and disruption that occurs in the producer firms that undertake ERP implementations, this level of the organization's involvement is mandatory to make the decision. Once the decision is made it would not even be considered again for at least seven years and only if management were dissatisfied.
I became aware of a specific ask for a tier 1 ERP implementation by investors a few years ago and am unaware of how long it has been since it was first requested. What we do know is that unlike the move to clean energy which was implemented the night the investors allegedly asked, and in what I’ve described was an unauthorized manner, we are unaware of any producer investing in ERP systems. This is wholly consistent with the refusal to provide competitive investment performance through appropriate profitability for the past number of decades. On the one hand moving into unrelated, uncompetitive industries that have no record of performance or value generation, no history of success and massive government involvement is done immediately. The producers, officers and directors will be able to justify these actions with the simple viable scapegoat that they’re “saving the planet,” and the reason they’re not profitable is “they haven’t figured it out yet” for their continuing poor performance. Focusing on oil & gas and enhancing its performance doesn’t intrigue them for some reason, they've abandoned shale as “non commercial” less than 2 years ago. Alternatively enhancing the level of accountability of their actions by implementing the August 2012 publication of the Preliminary Specification, our user community and their service provider organizations is obviously never going to happen if SAP meets the tier 1 ERP requirement demanded by their investors and selected by the producer officers and directors.
I’ll emphasize the year I started this was 1991, 1992 with Oracle and both ours and their initiatives failed due to the inability of producers to get involved? Yes, that’s a question. This isn’t an issue of the investors that began in 2020 or whenever they first requested the ERP system upgrade to tier 1. This is a culture, a behavior and an infestation across the North American producer population of officers and directors designed to maintain their enhanced personal financial compensation. It is a necessity that producer firms implement the Preliminary Specification in order to wrest control from the hands of a small cadre of officers and directors that have found the source of their personal wealth is through a deliberate, destructive and dangerous level of unaccountability. One that has caused enormous risk to now be realized in societies inability to source profitable energy independence from secure, reliable and affordable oil & gas and about to become permanent if they implement SAP’s ERP software.
I would like to take a moment to speak about those ERP providers that are in the market throughout this time and the stellar efforts they’ve done. It's one thing to avoid the tier 1 ERP providers and maintain the history as I’ve briefly described here. There are a number of ERP providers that cater exclusively to oil & gas that have been in the business for many years and decades. They too have experienced the abuse of the producer officers and directors who seek deceptive levels of accountability. To suggest these ERP providers have been put on a shoestring diet would be unfair and more appropriate to describe it as a second hand shoestring diet. Never paying for the application itself was a common tactic, only signing a service contract. Never sponsoring any changes to the systems they used. Producer officers and directors have the systems they want providing them with the obscurity they desire, why would they change that? Ensuring that their accounting and ERP systems were always inadequate. And I say that with all due respect to my competitors who have done the impossible in the most hostile of business environments. And should they have provided the accountability necessary, they too would have joined People, Ideas & Objects on the outside looking in.
Let me suggest a hypothesis that builds upon the situation that we have today. If oil & gas producers had the appropriate tier 1 ERP providers in place for the past decades of this history. Would the industry have fallen into the financial, operational and political crisis that we see the greater North American oil & gas economy has become today? Is it the lack of effective ERP systems, including SAP, that have reported inappropriate results of producer firms that enabled the industry to fall into the disaster and destruction that it currently is? I’ll reiterate that the lack of effective ERP systems is the deliberate and desired outcome of the producers' officers and directors actions over the course of these many decades.
The questions producer officers and directors should be asking themselves. Will consumers demonstrate the same tolerance, patience and perseverance that both their oil & gas investors and People, Ideas & Objects have displayed these past years? Or will they want answers sooner and hold producers accountable for their energy demands and whatever else may be on their minds? Will they demand more than “muddle through” as an answer, and who will they turn to to heat their homes and earn their living? Having a permanent, entrenched and SAP supported, unaccountable organization is a greater concern for the consumers than the oil & gas investor. Investors could always sell their interests. I would advise these officers and directors to rethink their approach and ask themselves, just because they can continue with their unaccountable ways, does that mean they should? No one questions that the oil & gas reserves are in place as a result of the shale formations. No one questions the oil & gas producers capacity to spend investor money to increase deliverability. What’s different today is that investors aren’t volunteering for the “dupe” role anymore. And producers have never been able to earn “real” profits. History may not repeat itself. Will it be a case of oil & gas everywhere, and not a drop to burn?
In writing this I fully understand the implications of doing so. Making this a self fulfilling prophecy is not what I’m intending to do. I am attempting to show the jeopardy we may realize as a result of cementing the established bureaucracy in a term that will last at least the seven years in which SAP will be current, with much longer term consequences. Who will step up after that to assert themselves if People, Ideas & Objects fails in the market, yet the IP of the Preliminary Specification will need to be accounted for in any future solution? And even if there was someone who felt they could provide a better solution, would they be leading their product forward with enhanced performance and accountability in the manner that both Oracle and People, Ideas & Objects were ostracized and vilified for in the past and today?
I also want to clarify, it should not be misunderstood that I’m conceding the point. After 31 years, that’s not even on the table. What I am stating is that the stakes for all concerned will be growing exponentially more difficult in what appears to me to be this next phase of our journey. More difficult for all those associated with People, Ideas & Objects but also for all those who are dependent upon the North American producers in some form. We are heading to what appears to me to be a “quick decision” being made by the producers to adopt SAP based on satisfying their “investors input” much in the manner they adopted investors' clean energy demands. We should ask these producers if those investors that demanded the transition to clean energy ponied up and actively supported these activities. After a year or more I thought there would have been evidence of that by now. That although SAP satisfies the investors general requirement of a tier 1 ERP system. It’s a decision that is made in the best interest of the officers and directors continued, deliberate and destructive lack of profitability and accountability and as with so much of their activities is specious. SAP will also be the least costly in the short term, however far more consequential to the outcome of the industries profitability, accountability and prosperity. To suggest that People, Ideas & Objects may benefit from the decision made from the producer firms is an argument that doesn’t comprehend the value that’s been destroyed by this deliberate bureaucratic sloth and doesn’t understand the relationship People, Ideas & Objects have with producer officers and directors.