McKinsey on Risk

McKinsey Consulting are providing a 14 minute video of Peter L. Bernstein talking about risk. This is a fascinating and valuable video that I promise you will learn one or two things about risk. It's unfortunate that the video marks the passing of Mr. Bernstein, but I have put his book "Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk" in my library.



Technorati Tags: People's McKinsey Algorithms Learning Video

What's holding the project back?

Well there is that budget. We currently stand with no commitments to proceed with the development of these applications. I have established December 31, 2009 as the start date for the Preliminary Specification, however, this will be delayed if the funds are not secured by September 30, 2009. Delayed for approximately one year, or the end of 2010. I see the producers, and particularly ExxonMobil, Shell, BP and Chevron having a role and responsibility to ensure this project does not get delayed any further. I will continue to impress upon them, and other producers, that they have the most to lose and the most to win in the new energy era.

 

The budget has been set for the Preliminary Specification at $30 million. This represents 30% of the study or definition phase of the project and 3% of the proposed preliminary budget of $1 billion. Companies may argue that these costs are too prohibitive. I would point them to the People, Ideas & Objects business modeland value proposition to show them how these costs are actually the least expensive IT expenses they've faced in many years. I would then ask them how efficient are their organizations today. Give them a copy of Adam Smiths "The Wealth of Nations" and highlight the division of labor and specialization theories. And lastly ask them how, in the near future, are the most efficient organizations going to spontaneously appear in a global economy?

 

Tying together the role and responsibilities with the budget needs is the plain hard facts. If we want to skip portions of the Preliminary Specification, then we can increase the overall developments time, accuracy and costs to accommodate that. The point being the most effective time and energy to get it right is at the beginning. Skimping on the costs here is the wrong direction to take. And what are we talking about, if we were to source funds from only the four companies mentioned this would be a one time cost of $7.5 million each.

 

And for that there is no guarantee. If we subsequently choose to travel further down the development road. The value for these producers will exist in the applications ability to meet their unique organizations needs and asset requirements. What I am saying is, the onus falls on the producer firms that commit to this project; to not limit their contribution just to capital. The effort and understanding of their operations must be represented and operational within the finished software. I see this responsibility being the subscribing producers as much as it is the user groups. Success will be a matter of the collective will of many people. Please join us here.

 

Technorati Tags: People's Community Development Economics Funding Value-Proposition
 

Exxon's Annual Meeting.

On MasterResource, "a free market energy blog", the author Robert Bradley has a summary of the ExxonMobil Annual Meeting. First of all it is satisfying to see an energy company that doesn't indulge in the politics of climate change or the folly of alternative forms of energy. Those within the industry that are in the know, know that the exploration and development business has entered a more scientific level of complexity.

The metrics of success and failure in the oil and gas industry have therefore changed. Metrics that will determine the winners and losers on a far different basis then the metrics that brought the industry leaders to their lofty heights. ExxonMobil's, BP's, Shell's and Chevrons. The Draft Specification is based on the understanding that I gained from over 30 years of oil and gas experience, the research into innovation and organizations that has been published on this blog, and a passion for Information Technologies.

If we approach the energy problems that we have today with yesterdays organizations and approach. Then it is reasonable that we will fail in this "new" business. If however, we understand that software defines and supports the organizations, then we need to build a software application that will enable the oil and gas producer to achieve the speed and innovativeness necessary to continue to succeed in this business.

I find ExxonMobil's CEO Rex Tillerson's comments in the Annual General Meeting refreshing. Comments that reflect his concern, focus and understanding of the energy business is consistent with the Draft Specification.

Comments such as;

Petroleum as a primary energy source is the future, not only the recent past. (Comment: renewable energies once had a 100% market share, corresponding to mankind’s energy poverty era.)

Although renewables and alternatives are growing, their overall piece of the energy mix will remain small until they reach the massive scale at which fossil fuels are used. And Exxon won’t invest beyond research until renewables are profitable without subsidies, Tillerson said.

The situation before all of us is very difficult. The solution starts with action, action by individuals who join this user group, and producers such as those mentioned in this article, working together to solve these problems. On a related note I am reminded of Ray Kurzweil's comments of how we solve large problems through exponential developments. Please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Energy Management Organization Innovation

Google's Wave

With Google Wave I think we have a clear direction where the future of Information Technology is headed. There is an hour and twenty minute video of the Google Developers Conference announcement of their Wave product. Although it is early, I do not see to many hurdles to having the product shipping. Clearly the technology is not the key attribute of the value of the Wave product, its the implementation.

Lets quickly dispatch the techno speak with this one paragraph. Wave is open source, Java and uses the Google Web Toolkit. (Renders browser based code from Java.) All within the technology stack used by People, Ideas & Objects. The one technology that is not available is the W3C's HTML 5. I do not foresee HTML 5 having too much difficulty in being implemented quickly. HTML 5 provides some persistent data storage which is provided by the able Google Gears in the product demonstration.

So why is Google Wave an important technology for users and producers of People, Ideas & Objects. I will be augmenting the Draft Specification to include the video and this text. If we go back through this blog and the ideas that were used to build the Draft Specification. We focus on three key areas and some minor additional points. The three key areas in descending order of relevance are the Accounting Voucher Module, Military Command & Control Metaphor and Security & Access Control Module.

Recall in the Accounting Voucher we are capturing the changes in the business on a month to month basis. As "things" happen they are captured and recorded in the Accounting Voucher for future use. If this isn't making any sense then please review the Accounting Voucher part of the Draft Specification to better understand what it is that I am saying. The accounting changes that are captured in the Voucher are the discussions, documents and decisions that are made. The Accounting Voucher is capturing and recording the financial impact of these changes. It is the Google Wave infrastructure that we inherit, by using its open source code, and enhance it to incorporate the ability to capture these financial changes.

As the video reflects, we acquire these in a unique interface provided by Google. Representatives of the various producers on the Joint Operating Committee (JOC) interact on the topics of interest in the JOC. These are in documents, asynchronous communication, synchronous communications and in all the media available. The mode of these interactions are person to person, person to process, process to person and process to process as I noted in the Preliminary Research Report. A rich environment that provides the media, mode and method of communications that are necessary to support the innovative oil and gas producer.

The Military Command & Control Metaphor is used throughout the Draft Specification as the means to provide the dynamic resources provided by the producer members of the JOC. Much as the pooling of military resources is done by the NATO forces, the People, Ideas & Objects application is able to dynamically assign the corporate governance, authority, role and responsibility necessary to efficiently and innovatively manage the Joint Account. This Metaphor is used throughout the application, but most importantly one that controls the interaction of the communication and documentation contained within the Google Wave open sourced code.

Lastly I want to reiterate the importance of the Security & Access Control Modules use of Sun Microsystems Federated Identity software as the means to ensure these corporate governance needs are maintained in such a dynamic manner. I would encourage readers to spend some time in these elements of the People, Ideas & Objects application. It is an area that I think the innovation could and will prosper and is ripe for the users to exploit for their advantage; and please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Military-Command Development Specification

Changes at Shell.

A number of articles are appearing about the announced changes at Shell. A new CEO Peter Voser takes over July 1, 2009 and has announced a major overhaul of the firms operations. Fox notes:

Oil giant Royal Dutch Shell on Wednesday announced a series of changes to senior management roles and responsibilities, which it said were aimed at creating a sharper focus on operating performance and technology.

I interpret these changes as an admission that the engineering and earth sciences necessary for each barrel of oil produced are increasing. The Calgary Herald reported that Voser said:

"Organisationally, we are too complex, and our culture is still too consensus-oriented. Our costs are simply too high," Voser said in an email to staff, excerpts of which were seen by Reuters.

Details of the changes include the consolidation of divisions into operating units around geographical locations. North America being one in which I would assume Houston will take the lead role in. It is also reported that many lay offs will occur throughout the company. 

The Calgary Herald notes many of the differences between Shell, Exxon and BP's announced reorganizations. These are all ongoing and reflect different characteristics and management styles. 

Exxon is renowned within the industry for its strict management practices and insisting employees do not deviate from standard operating procedures. BP, on the other hand, had a risk-taking culture that allowed considerable freedom to managers of units or fields, and Shell had a culture of making decisions by consensus.

What does People, Ideas & Objects offer firms such as Shell, Exxon and BP.

• The Preliminary Research Report provides:
  
• A focus on the expanding earth science and engineering demands of each barrel of oil.
• A focus on innovation and its iterative impact on science. 
• How a firm can adopt an innovative footing.
• A greater focus on the business of the business through the five frameworks of the Joint Operating Committee.
• Providing the innovative footing and science based strategy.
• The legal, financial, operational decision making, communication and cultural frameworks of the industry. 
• A global dedicated oil and gas software development capability.
  
• Unconstrained by the paradox of code and customers. 
• Draft Specification.
• Eleven modules based on the research contained in the Preliminary and Final Research Reports.
• Firm focused application modules.
• Compliance & Governance 
• Research & Capabilities 
• Analytics & Statistics 
• Marketplace focused application modules.
• Petroleum Lease Marketplace 
• Resource Marketplace 
• Financial Marketplace 
• Joint Operating Committee application modules.
• Knowledge & Learning 
• Performance Evaluation 
• Accounting application modules.
• Accounting Voucher 
• Partnership Accounting 
• Generic
• Security & Access Control 

It's interesting the three methods that are used by Exxon (Strict Management Practices), Shell (Consensus) and BP (Risk Oriented.) Neither of these management practices or strategies are precluded in the People, Ideas & Objects. It is very clear that a unique strategic identity is enabled in each producer through this system. This also does not preclude a strong governance structure. With the reduction of the hierarchy an alternate form is required and one has been developed. That is the Military Command & Control Metaphor used within the Joint Operating Committee affording the pooling of resources and reducing the redundant capabilities built within each silo'd oil and gas firm. 

Lastly I would point to how this project is a commercially viable one by pointing out the business model of People, Ideas & Objects and the Community of Independent Service Providers. And the Technical Vision  of where the Information Technologies promise the greatest value and how this product is supported technically. 

These firms are a part of the global oil and gas industry and therefore part of the focus of this development. I encourage you to forward this post to the people you know at Shell, Exxon or BP and have them read for themselves what is possible. I would also encourage you to get involved in moving this vision forward by joining in this process. 

Technorati Tags: People's Capabilities Changes Engineering Geology Governance Specification

For the last time.

This royalty "debate" in Alberta has to stop. We consistently are told by the Calgary Herald, who for some reason are beholden to the venture capital groups, that the Provinces royalty regime is the reason for the economic difficulties. Are we to assume then, that the Alberta Governments royalty regime is the source of the global meltdown. 

The issue is there's money on the table. Billions and it belongs to the resource owners, the people of Alberta. It goes back to the battle of Alberta in 1972. Our Premier Peter Loughheed was not going to allow the Federal government, represented by Canada's version of Obama, Pierre Trudeau to abscond with the resources that belonged to the people of Alberta. Trudeau mania, as the Obama nation will do for the U.S., destroyed Canada. Loughheed was successful and the bitter Trudeau in retaliation changed the tax laws to disallow Alberta royalty payments as deductions from income taxes. Never before has a tax been implemented is such an unfair and unreasonable basis. 

Fast forward to today, our new Prime Minister Stephen Harper from Calgary quietly reversed this injustice two years ago. The tax deduct-ability of Alberta Royalties was brought back in line with all other industries and jurisdictions. Therefore creating a huge after tax benefit for the producers. What is not remembered is that the Alberta government had to reduce their royalty take in order to remain competitive in the industry. Not reducing the royalty take would have left Alberta a ghost town.

Enter the 1980's and Trudeau is up to no good again. This time implementing the national energy program. This much hated program disallowed producers from selling their production at world prices, and received a regulated price dictated by Ottawa. A wellhead tax of 12% and the discriminatory ownership rules that disallowed anyone but Canadians owning oil and gas producers. Lougheed countered this, again, with the Alberta Government granting up to 35% of capital costs to producers that remained active. This also stopped the province from housing only ghost towns. 

In the 1990's we found ourselves in debt and had a budget deficit of mammoth proportions. Our new Premier Ralph Klein implemented an austerity program that enabled us to live with in our means and indeed reduce our debt. Note at no time were the producers subjected to any changes in the royalty framework or taxes in order to balance the budget. This was done on the back of taxpayers who went without education and health benefits. Civil servants by the truck load were laid-off and eventually the government finances recovered. 

In this past decade the province has prospered due to their fiscal house being in order. We became debt free and were the benefactors of an appropriate fiscal discipline and increasing energy prices. What throughout this period back to the 1970's provided was a stable royalty regime for the industry that existed since 1972. My math may fail me but that is 37 years ago. Has the industry changed? Does the Alberta government have to keep its hands off the windfall the producers are realizing from the federal tax changes? I wouldn't think so either. 

What the Calgary Herald seems to be unable to comprehend is the royalties are the fair value consideration the producer pays to earn title to the product. It is not a tax. Royalties belong to the people of Alberta and the producer must purchase those commodities from the people of Alberta. The Alberta Government acts as an intermediary to administer and distribute this value back to the rightful owners. I have repeatedly made comments to the Calgary Herald over the past year about these points and have never seen any of these facts appear in the paper. I find it ironic and typical of the Herald is not permitting any comments on this point in today's' on-line version. 

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers have been running this campaign for the industry. Recent defections of their members are showing that cracks are appearing in this facade. Husky and Paramount have both ceased to be members of the association. It is not clear why they declined their membership, but the "rumor" is it's over the handling of this royalty situation. Paramount' founder and leader is on record as saying the royalty changes are positive. Therefore, I think the Calgary Herald, who are soon to meet the great printing press in the sky, will have the Calgary people cheering their demise for their representing only CAPP's point of view to the real owners of the oil and gas resources. 

Technorati Tags: People's Government Leadership

Sources and costs of energy.

Reason Magazine have published a summary of the various costs, advantages and disadvantages of the various forms of energy. This summary is very educational and shows in stark terms the energy problems we face. It makes it clear where we should putting our capital and our efforts. It also shows that when man attempts to best mother nature, it usually turns out bad. Have a look here.

Technorati Tags: People's Engineering Energy Environment

Welcoming Jeff Rubin to the club.

Today's Calgary Herald has an article on Jeff Rubin former Chief Economist and Strategist at CIBC World Markets. He has been prescient in his predictions of oil prices over the last two years. Accurately predicting both the rise and recent fall in the prices. The statement that he makes is as follows:

Everything we have taken for granted is about to change. Our cars, our homes, our whole world has been getting bigger in the cheap-oil era. Now it is about to get smaller - and, greener. Much greener.

Rubin's problems, and his joining the "club", is as a result of the recent publication of his book.

Why Your World is About to Get a Whole Lot Smaller: Oil and the end of globalization. 

Seems his employer didn't want to have anything to do with the book!

Rubin, who spent 20 years at the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce unit, said he quit to publish his book after the Bay Street firm didn't want to be associated with it. 

I went through the same process in May 2004 when I published the Preliminary Research Report. The report that is the basis of this software development project; and is where it was proven the Joint Operating Committee is the natural form of organization for the innovative oil and gas producer. As a result of the publication of this report, I have not worked in the oil and gas industry for five years. I know what it's like to be ostracized for your ideas. It's not the most enjoyable process, it is however, very liberating. 

As more voices start down the difficult road that I, and now Jeff Rubin have taken. It's important that the people who join this development are not subjected to this archaic and destructive process at the hands of the vested interests. I have set up the system here in such a way that the only way your employer can know you are participating in this development, is that they are here too. So please follow this process and join us here. 

Technorati Tags: People's Community Energy Change

A Failure of Capitalism.

A fascinating debate is taking place over on Professor / Judge Richard A. Posners second blog . I mention his "second" blog as his first is a weekly debate between himself and Nobel Prize winner Gary Becker. Each week they debate a finer point of economic interest on the well read Becker-Posner blog. Posner's second blog is an extension of his recent book "A Failure of Capitalism: The Crisis of 08 and the Descent into Depression."

In this blog he has solicited some interesting commentary and dialogue. Recently he received a comprehensive reply from former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan. Greenspan's points are here, here and here. Posner responds to Greenspan here . 

I highly recommend that you subscribe to both of Posner's blogs and read the debate that is taking place around this fascinating time of economic renewal. 

Technorati Tags: People's Economics Community Leadership Change

Exploration facts.

There's news from Reuters and the Calgary Herald that Canadian oil and gas companies costs of finding and producing oil are expected to fall this year. What has to be record prices is the announcement that the cost of replacing one barrel of oil rose to $22.72. It does not mention whether this was attributable to the higher level of engineering and earth science per barrel of oil, or, the lower volume of discoveries of reserves from exploration and production activities.

Irrespective of the specific reason why the price is rising, the same costs in 1999 were only $4.38. (All prices are reflected in Canadian dollars.) What the two articles subtly suggest is the costs associated with drilling and field work were up substantially. I have mentioned many times that the oil and gas company manager operates more as a Seal trainer then someone interested in developing the business they are in. They are only more interested in making themselves look more important by doling out the fish food to the service companies based on a "what have you done for me lately" basis. Between holding their captive audience over lunch to hear how wonderful they are, and talking to the press about how greedy the service industries have become, these oil and gas company managers pretend to have a full slate of work. Nothing could be further from the truth and I would suggest, again, that these people be shown the street as soon as possible. 

I have addressed these issues in the Draft Specification. The ability to develop the service industry is a critical part of an innovative oil and gas industry. The constant boom and bust cycles, and the "this quarter closing" ritual have made it difficult for service companies to develop any long term vision. Make hay while the sunshine's and hunker down when the storms role in are the only two operational strategies. To move forward from an engineering and earth science point of view. The oil and gas companies must approach the service industries with an eye to developing usable and innovative technologies together. The companies receive 100% of the revenues associated with producing oil and gas. When it comes to paying the royalties for those that are entitled to them, or the service companies that help in the exploration and development, the oil and gas company manager treats them as if they are a leach on their otherwise unearned fortune. The Resource Marketplace Module and Research & Capabilities Module address these issues and offer a solution of how the oil and gas and service industries can achieve greater throughput, innovation and capabilities. 

To speak to the elements in the main part of the Reuters and Herald articles. I suggested in the Preliminary Research Report that the engineering and earth science costs per unit of production were going to escalate as a result of the lapsing of the cheap energy era. This difficulty is showing itself in the five fold increase in costs over one decade. If anyone believes this trend will continue, that would bring a $110 / barrel of oil cost within the next decade. I happen to believe the number will be substantially more then five fold, although I have given up my gambling and fortune telling careers.

The power hungry primates that serve as managers at the Canadian oil and gas companies will have much larger budgets to play with. People, Ideas & Objects research shows that oil and gas companies are organizationally constrained. For them to increase their throughput requires more resources. Consistent throughout the Draft Specification is an understanding that re-organization is the only proven method of increasing productivity. Adam Smiths pin shop proved this in the 1700's and we have benefited from specialization and the division of labor since. The need is evident to me. Please join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Accountability Engineering Exploration Geology Innovation Leadership Management

Google's Schmidt

Eric Schmidt is the CEO of Google and is making the keynote presentation at Carnegie Mellon Universities Commencement Ceremony .

Contained within this address is a summary of how an individual can compete in the future. I think Schmidt accurately details what it is that will provide an individual with the necessary tools to build value for themselves. Just as buying a house was a good investment in the past, these tools may be the key to your future. This summary includes:

• The culture of Carnegie Mellon is one of getting things done. And how the importance of getting things done is in today's marketplace. 
• You think friend is a verb.
• George Bernard Shaw "all progress is made by unreasonable men".
• It's all about opportunity and you make your own luck. 
• You can not plan innovation, you can not plan invention, all you can do is try to be in the right place and be ready. 
• If you live your life and forgo your plan, you can also forgo fear. In some sense you have been penalized for making mistakes. Now you have to go out and make them, because mistakes enable you to learn and to innovate and try new things. And that is a culture of innovation that is going to create all the great opportunities. 
• Do things in a group, don't do things by yourself, groups are smarter, groups are faster, groups are stronger, none of us is smarter then all of us. 
• Some truths endure. Leadership and personality matter. Intelligence, education and analytical skills matter. 
• In a world when everything is remembered and kept forever, you should live for the future and the things that you really care about. Curiosity, compassion 
• Resilience in the human spirit is amazing. It is what got us through WWI and WW ll.
• You'll find today to be the best chance that you have to be unreasonable. To demand excellence, to drive change to make everything happen. 

Schmidt's comments about being unreasonableness resonate with me. I wrote the following on this blog back in April 2006.

"There is a saying by George Bernard Shaw...

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

I am an unreasonable man".

And I would invite those interested in this software development project to take these points from Dr Schmidt, and join us here in this most unreasonable of tasks.

Technorati Tags: People's Community Google Strategy

More comments on the 36 hour work day.

Last year I noted the pace of development of this software's development was accelerated through what I called the 36 hour work day. A global application developed by the global oil and gas industry has the benefit of accessing more regions simultaneously. Earlier I wrote the following;

Lastly I want to add fuel to the fire of my adversaries by noting that the compression of time is something that will be implemented in this application. Instead of budgeting for four years, I think it can be done in two and half years to initial commercial release. (Maybe even less!). We are approaching a systems use that may start the day in Russia, China and India, move to the Middle East, Europe and then the United States. Users from these regions will be able to collaborate in an asynchronous manner. Hence providing for potentially a "day" of user driven development that totals 36 hours. 

The more that I have thought about this type of development, the more I have difficulty in recommending any other method. Software development has been, for at least a decade, a collaboration by individuals and groups that are scattered around the world. Many never meet, ever. Whether the development team is just outside the door to your office, or the other side of the globe. It makes no difference in the methods used to develop the applications. The Open Source model has proven time and again to be the superior means to develop software. 

Since I first wrote about this concept the main issue that I have focused on is the User / Developer interactions, and I have the following comments. The Draft, Preliminary, Detailed and Final Specifications aggregate the industries knowledge in the form of wiki's and globally accessible medium. Starting with the text of the Draft Specification, Users will build the detail, UML, diagrams, voice, picture and video mediums to express their understanding and needs of the system. As the Developers interact with the Users through these rich media, it matters not where the individuals, teams and groups are located. All will have the current understanding available to them, and more importantly the history of how these decisions, standards and specifications were determined. A rich, searchable environment that defines the key attributes of the innovative oil and gas systems necessary to support the innovative oil and gas producer. 

And it won't stop there. The code that is developed based on the Users specifications is accessible by the Developers and Users of the systems. This is done for a number of reasons, firstly to ensure that the systems are doing what is expected of them. The days of attaining assurance of the software vendors code accuracy and consistency. Assurance being attained by the size of the software developers balance sheet and cash balance I expect is over. These assurances don't provide any value in comparison to the variety and volume of eyeballs that can and will access the code the applications are derived from. Reading the code that makes up the application is reviewing the facts. Facts that Oracle and SAP don't provide for, I wonder why that is?

Technorati Tags: People's Development Asynchronous Collaboration Open-Source

McKinsey, Averting the Next Energy Crisis.

Let me make it clear. The reason that I have pursued this issue over the past five years is due to the extensive nature of the threat. Our energy supply and demand balance is in serious jeopardy of becoming the biggest issue man has ever faced. When I look around I see a handfull of people at People, Ideas & Objects and McKinsey working on this problem. We have received no support and have consistently been kicked to the curb as a lunatic Cassandra, Chicken Little, Boy who cried Wolf or what have you. Now our lone voice is joined by a chorus of people calling for action.

First up is McKinsey, (Click on the title of this entry to be taken to the report.) At 150 pages this article deals with tthe demand side of the equation. This should be mandatory reading for the many reasons captured in this quotation.

It would be all too easy to respond with complacency to a short-term easing back of energy-demand growth. Once the global economy begins to recover, energy demand will bounce back too, imposing costs on consumers and businesses and on the climate in the form of CO2 emissions. There is even potential for oil market demand to grow more quickly than supply, risking another oil market shock. In these circumstances, losing the momentum on action to rein back energy demand could turn out to be a high-risk strategy -- particularly given early evidence that policy to boost the economy's energy productivity is already having an impact. p. 18

Fair comment from a demand point of view. For an understanding of the supply side concerns, the pre-eminent authority on that topic is Matthew Simmons of Simmons Consulting. He has a 49 page slide presentation that reflects the appropriate concern. On slide 45 he calls for the need to go to an "immediate war footing" with the following actions. 

• Step one: Enact genuine "data reform" on all key producing oil and gas fields. 
• Step two: Begin blue prints for rebuilding our energy infrastructure. (Where I think the Draft Specification fits in.)
• Step three: Get oil and gas prices high and create a floor. 
• Step four: Adopt global Plan B to reduce our oil and gas use ASAP. 

Here we have the number one consulting group in McKinsey, and arguably the number one oil and gas consulting group in Simmons both warning in the most dire terms regarding the situation that we find ourselves in. 

Who else is warning us about the concern for the energy industry? Bloomberg reports that oil executives tell the Obama administration "to get real on energy independence". Rigzone quotes the CEO of Chesapeake that we are;

Current low natural gas prices are setting the stage for a dramatic price rebound that should begin this fall or winter, Chesapeake Energy Corp.'s chief executive officer told analysts Tuesday. 

I hold the CEO of Chesapeake in high esteem. Recall he is the individual who,in three days last September, lost his $2 billion fortune in a cascading series of margin calls. An individual driven by more then just the financial rewards of the business. 

The prices of oil and gas have only recently collapsed, however, we see the long term damage this has done. Many projects are cancelled and will return slowly. Here Reuters reports that Shell has shelved their Beaufort exploration program. As I have mentioned before, I'm a Shell brat, and I recall when my dad was seconded to an industry joint venture to build a pipeline to bring this gas to market. This was during the mid seventies, and we're replaying this history again. 

Where is this all leading? To a very dire situation with tragic consequences for society. Those are my words and the motivation that has fueled this desire to reorganize the industry around the Joint Operating Committee. As the chicken little who has been squawking about this issue for over five years, I am pleased to see the quality and quantity of similar calls to act on this critical issue. I'll leave you with one more voice that should be considered. This one is from The Rand Corporation. Yes, that Corporation. Which is described as the "original non-profit think tank helping to improve policy and decision making through objective research and analysis." On Monday they released a report regarding the scope of the energy issue. Here's what they have to say. (From Reuters).

HOUSTON (Reuters) - The greatest threat to the United States from crude oil imports is a long-term disruption of world supply and the higher costs associated with that loss of imports, according to a RAND Corp study issued Monday.

"The fact that the United States imports nearly three-fifths of its oil does not pose a national security threat," said Keith Crane, the study's lead author and senior economist at RAND, a nonprofit research organization.

"There is an integrated world oil market, and embargoes do not work. But a large, extended drop in the global supply of oil would trigger a sharp rise in oil prices and significantly affect the United States, no matter how much or how little oil the United States imports," Crane said in a statement.

If we believe that the same ideas and approach that brought us to this point is the solution to this problem, then I leave you with that task. If however, you agree that this is an issue that can be solved by first re-organizing our approach to the business of energy, then please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Call-to-Action Energy Leadership McKinsey Simmons

Exclusively oil and gas.

I've been spending some time thinking about the competition and their offerings. Specifically SAP and Oracle who are the predominate software systems used in oil and gas. There is also a large number of boutique software developers that have provided small numbers of producers with niche offerings. I don't normally spend time evaluating the competition, however, these are my thoughts regarding the impact our current economy is having on the software development business.

Capital expenditures are being reeled in at most if not all the oil and gas producers. This therefore applies to the software development groups that provide products and services to the oil and gas industry. Many are small vendors and will be unable to sustain any decline in revenues operations for long without continued support from the producers. That support is / will be waning as the lay-offs and losses continue to pile up in the industry. 

Generally unlike the large international software companies, the small software vendors are unable to rely on other industries, not that other industries are any better off in this economy. Suggesting that whether a vendor chose to focus exclusively on oil and gas or not, the effect in this current market is the same irrespective. 

SAP and Oracle have pursued the one solution fits all industries. This strategy leaves many in the oil and gas industry wishing they would build some functionality for energy. I doubt they will be able to address the unique needs of the industry as it exists today. Oracle is having difficulty in offering the many solutions they have purchased to customers. Oracle is not offering an integrated solution. Its integrating previous acquisitions. 

So much of these current economic difficulties are as a result of the "old" ways to sustain and provide for societies needs. Currently a bear market rally has everyone believing the good old days will soon be back. Nothing could further from the truth. This next downswing will be quick and decisive in communicating the scope of the economic damage that has occurred. It will also be dramatic enough for people to permanently change their expectations of the future. One in which they will begin to look for the things that will sustain them in the future. New projects and businesses like People, Ideas & Objects . 

Spending any more time on the competition is a futile exercise. I prefer to highlight the advantages the producers will attain by joining the community here. 

• A dedicated software developer working exclusively with oil and gas.
  
• Focused on the Joint Operating Committee to facilitate speed and innovativeness.
  
• Unconstrained by the traditional software paradox of code and customers.
  
• Providing a competitive value proposition and business model .
  
• Offering a compelling vision of how the industry could operate more efficiently. 

Technorati Tags: People's Capabilities Development Economics Strategy Value-Proposition

Auditor comments on royalties.

An article appeared in last weeks Calgary Herald that shows that all is not well with Alberta Royalties. The Auditor General will be reviewing the systems that collect oil and gas royalties.

Alberta's auditor general is examining the province's new royalty structure to ensure it's delivering desired results, after the old regime didn't collect a fair share of revenue and failed for six consecutive years to reach the bottom end of government's targets.

Fred Dunn told the legislature's public accounts committee Wednesday his office is hoping to report in October the results of a systems audit on the new royalty framework that will identify whether the structures are in place to en-able Albertans to collect the royalties they're due.

I can tell you that the report in October 2009 will reveal one gaping whole that the Alberta Government should close to ensure royalty compliance is achieved. It is this gaping whole that leaves an industry to scream blue bloody murder when changes are introduced. A situation where the opaqueness of the industry only frustrates dealings with the government.

I have first hand experience with this situation. In 1992 I started Genesys Software Corp to address the governments Royalty Simplification initiative. A new and comprehensive system that would ease the royalty calculations and simplify the administration for both government and industry. The problem with this system is the same as the Auditor General will be talking about in October. And that problem is the industries refusal to spend any money on developing in-house systems to meet the royalty obligation.

This situation is also the reason that I am turning to the various governments to fund the development costs associated with meeting their royalty compliance frameworks. I as a software developer was expected in 1992 to raise sufficient capital to implement the regulations on behalf of government for industries compliance. In retrospect I do some very dumb things. I can look back on this in hindsight and say that industry expected someone to build it and they will come. What I have learned is this scenario meets the industry needs for royalty compliance. Knowing that no one will be able to meet the industry expectations; companies can rest assured they will never have to implement any system of royalty compliance.

I may have periods where my intelligence is questionable, however, I do not tend to make the same mistakes more then once. My current thinking is that in the virtualized Joint Operating Committee, the royalty holder(s) will have a seat at the table. This transparency will show the extent of the efforts producers take to explore and produce oil and gas, and provide a better means of discussion between royalty holder and producer. Discussions that are based on the facts involved in each JOC. Discussions that involve the innovative oil and gas producer and the royalty holder who wishes to better understand the business they are in, and the specific nature of the JOC.

Technorati Tags: People's Governance Government Innovation

Some time off.

I will be taking some time off for the next two weeks. I'll resume posting on May 12, 2009.

Operational Control with Accountability

In an April 16, 2009 podcast on Bloomburg, Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz said;

... I think the depth of the problems remind us of how badly the system functioned before 2007. I mean I think this is the real lesson here, the lesson is not that we've had a little trauma today, the lesson is the system didn't work before the trauma, and it was the failures that were working before the trauma that have lead to the trauma. 

A certain eloquence is the liberty of economists who win the Nobel Prize. We have been in a very backward economy from at least the mid 1990's, in my opinion. If you can imagine trying to raise funds to eliminate the bureaucracy when employees homes were hitting the stratosphere along with there stock options. Some guy suggesting failure of the oil and gas firms. And the need to build systems to support a more innovative and scientific focus; received the old heave-ho. 

But times are changing, people are not so much sold on their home, stock options, retirement and other pipe dreams. The security that was attained by having shortages of eligible workers in the industry, provided a false and diversionary motivation. They now see the writing on the wall and it is here at People, Ideas & Objects where they see a more realistic future by participating in the Community of Independent Service Providers. This is at least an alternative future they are now willing to consider. 

The number of issues that were clearly evident to Joseph Stiglitz will be captured in many of his future papers. One of the issues that I was seeking to resolve is the separation of accountability and operational control. Once you remove the accountability for decisions, you lose the ability to learn from the success and failure of those decisions. Learning is the key to innovation. Where are the decisions made in the energy sector?

If we recall, it is the Joint Operating Committee (JOC) which holds the authority for the operational decisions. For the past number of years I have marvelled at the skill and audacity of the CFO's of the producer firms standing up and stating that the firm would grow production by 10%. This always struck me as comical as the individual generally has no authority to make that promise come true. How is a CFO going to increase production by 10% in the current fiscal period? If they were legitimately able to attain what they boasted, why have they stopped the bravado? We certainly could stand to have a number of CFO's stand up today and state, unequivocally, that production would increase. Please join me here. 

Technorati Tags: People's CISP Failure Accountability

What's expected.

It's important that I revisit the status of the project now and then for a quick update. Particularly for those that may have joined recently. As of today the Draft Specification has been reviewed by over 500 people. I consider this quite remarkable considering the topic of discussion, oil and gas systems is rather obscure. We are now just past 9 months from the point in time that I published the specification and the ideas inherent within are being broadcast across a very large community.

The scope of the People, Ideas & Objects application is truly global. Through LinkedIn I have been able to discover many like minded people that may be recruited to define the Preliminary Specification. This recruitment will continue for the remainder of 2009 with the objective of securing the 100 people necessary to make the Preliminary Specification as diverse and well documented as possible. 

Therefore effective January 1, 2010 we will be in full development of the application. I now want to detail some aspects of the budget and reiterate my involvement in the definition of the software from this point forward. I have no intention or capacity to further details the scope, functionality or anything to do with the application. This project is well beyond the ability of one person to comprehend each and every aspect of the oil and gas industry. This is a collaborative project for the simple reason that it must be. It is far better for me to step aside in terms of what can and will be done by the application and its modules. The application will be left to the community to determine the ways and means that their input is necessary and required. 

The key role that I can provide is the generation and distribution of the resources necessary to keep the development moving forward. That is a task that will be more then enough for any one individual, and one that can determine the success or failure of the entire project. The budget for this project is declining as the costs in the industry become more affordable through the lack of demand. How long this will last is probably short lived. Primarily as I think the lack of either equity or debt to fuel the producers efforts will be replaced through the reallocation of the market prices to fund these desperately needed energy resources. Therefore I am hesitant to suggest that the project will require less resources than what is originally estimated. That being in the area of $1 billion U.S.

In order to define this project I have detailed four stages of the specification. I completed the Draft Specification last July 2008. The Preliminary is set to start at the end of the 2009, with the Detailed and Final Specification to be determined by the community of users that is forming. The total costs associated with these phases of the specifications will be set at 10% of the total budget. Therefore $100 million will need to be raised to support these activities. 

This application is unique in that using the Joint Operating Committee (JOC) necessitates the global scope of functionality of the application. Hence the large nature of the project. Something of this scope is only possible during a time when organizational and business models are being revised through economic changes. Of the $100 million allocated to determine the specification, $30 million will be allocated to the Preliminary phase.

I expect to have at least 100 people involved in defining the Preliminary Specification. Participants should expect to incur approximately 500 hours on average. That is a total of 50,000 man hours that I am now setting the compensation for at $125 / hour or $1,000 / day. This work can be undertaken as soon as we have the financial resources established. 

I know these numbers are frighteningly large. The justification for these costs is based on reviewing the Draft Specification and the unique nature of using the Joint Operating Committee. Review of the business model of People, Ideas & Objects will show how this development is truly the most cost effective and appropriate means to continue. 

Our two defined groups of financial support are the governments involved in collecting royalties and the producers themselves. As this is an industry wide approach, we see these large costs allocated over the involvement of the government and industry. Making this a cost efffective solution. What I think is also paramount to consider. Is that this is the first and only user based development. It is the oil and gas users that know how to do there jobs that make up the community in the Preliminary Specification. 

The only deliverables that I have set for the Preliminary Specification is the determination of the geographical scope and functionality of the application. Other then these, the entire process of development is being handed over to the community through the Preliminary Specification. Please join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Specification Development Users Collaboration

No regulation here!

Yale University Professor Robert Shiller raises an interesting point in this video. Shiller is famous for the Case - Shiller housing index. And by the way, this is another McKinsey document, # 52 in a long list of top quality articles and commentary. The video and article are here, registration required, click on the title for the url.


The forces pushing to increase regulation today are potentially creating further difficulties down the road. The ability and desire to catch the Bernard Madoff and Conrad Blacks while their in the middle of planning their dirty deeds is a compelling justification. No one likes to see illegal acts being exercised on innocent victims. But are these crooks symptomatic of the entire marketplace? Or are they high profile and in the news because the Ponzi scheme could not be sold without cash.

Obama wants to completely redesign the marketplace. Good luck with that. I figure he is about 3 months away from being a mere shadow of a president. He doesn't have a clue about what it is that he is talking about, doesn't have ideas or foundation of which to build a new system on. Or the political capital to undertake such a task.

Professor Shiller notes many good points in the video presentation. Essentially laying a strong foundation that regulation is the anti-innovation. We don't need more rules to keep the criminals in-check. We need People, Ideas & Objects to make the energy industry keep the global economy fueled well into this century.

Professor Shiller makes the following comments supporting the work that is being done here at People, Ideas & Objects.

I think the government has to take an attitude that it is the sponsor of innovation, both of scientific innovation and of financial innovation. The government learned that years ago, just after World War II, when they created the National Science Foundation—and the government aggressively supports scientific innovation. We have to have the same attitude toward financial innovation.

This project seeks to support and provide the earth sciences and engineering disciplines. I stated in my thesis that the industry needs to move away from the banking basis of predictable returns to a basis of innovation and science. That will not happen on its own, we need to be build the systems to support the organizations first. No software no organization.

I don’t want to see us killing off innovation, and this is what may get lost—and I hope it doesn’t get lost—in the current crisis. Ultimately, let’s not forget that we’ve learned lessons that a capitalist economy is an economy that promotes entrepreneurship, and entrepreneurship is not the province for government bureaucrats.

Therefore we have to keep this project moving forward with an eye to ensuring that unnecessary regulation begins to influence the decisions that are made.

I don’t want to say that I don’t think there will be a turnaround soon, but I think that many of us are too much expecting that it might come tomorrow or the day after. And this volatility is evidence of that. So I think it is quite possible that the stock market and the housing market, five years from now, will be close to where they are now.

Professor Shiller's timing seems accurate to me. Five years is also a good time for the community to have this software operational. Providing the innovation that the oil and gas industry needs for the next 25 years. I wonder what SAP and Oracle have in store for the industry?

We need to act, now. Join me and this community in building this software for the golden age of oil and gas.

Technorati Tags: People's McKinsey CISP Innovation

Follow on to yesterday's post.

Google's new tool, the Google Insights for Search was highlighted yesterday. I was thinking all through the day what a tool like that would be like in the oil and gas industry. I felt as a result, I didn't attach enough emphasis on the implications of having the data available for the type of analysis that is available with the tools I described in the Draft Specification .

First lets go back to the situation at hand today. Data is scattered throughout the organization in a number of informal and unknown spreadsheets, databases and file cabinets. Their are production departments, accounting departments and exploration departments that use very similar data and store this data in their own file cabinets and electronically. As we know departments only speak to each other at the higher levels of the organizations. Hence the lack of communication and shared data remains an unfulfilled promise.

A lot of this data is not structured or captured in a centralized database. The advantage of using a database is that it allows different users to perceive the data in different ways. Much of this problem has been addressed by the various POSC and PPDM data models. However, not many of the software vendors or companies have been able to implement the data models in the optimal way. Consider also that polymorphic behavior which is a cornerstone of the Java Programming Language. Allows users to perceive different methods or ways of processing the data. You begin to see the flexibility and opportunity that is missing with these poor data implementations.

When we talk about the Security & Access Control Module in the People, Ideas & Objects we begin to see the importance of getting all of this data organized and accessible by the right people.

Imagine what it would be like if People were able to access the same data in the same format for the entire Joint Operating Committee. And this would apply to the entire industry. Where the employees and contractors that are authorized access to the data are all trained in the generic industry data models. Everyone would know where the data they need is, and would be able to access it from their clients in an authorized fashion and analyse it effectively for new information.

Lastly, the Technical Vision of People, ideas & Objects. Essentially laying out for the means to have an explosion of data in every corner of the producer's domain. This is not as a result of the application being built, this data will become real on its own. The tools to make it so are now readily available and a matter of time before its generally available. If the data is not organized today, when and how will it be organized in the future with exponentially more data, risk and complexity.

Technorati Tags: People's Data PPDM Specification Security

Google Insights for Search

Google recently released a new service called Google Insights for Search. (Click on the title of this blog post to be taken to the announcement on the Google Research blog). Once you go to the site (http://www.google.com/insights/search/#) it will subsequently show up as an application in your Google Account. There is a related .pdf written by Hal Varian and Hyunyong Choi that details how to use this new and interesting tool.

In the Draft Specification we have two modules that are somewhat related to this product. Both the Analytics & Statistics Module and the Performance Evaluation Module are user defined tools that allow detailed analysis of the data in People, Ideas & Objects. The data is the key attribute to these modules. With the People, Ideas & Objects Technical Vision expecting the data volumes to explode through IPv6, Java and Wireless access to the data in a known format. Data analysis tools like Analytics & Statistics and Performance Evaluation Modules will be the key to obtaining value from it. That is essentially what Google has done with the Google Trends data, published it through a known API and interface.

The purpose in allowing users to access formatted data is the key to the value in using the tools and understanding the data. How many firms have data scattered across many departments and on individuals machine? How much of this data is available through known and trusted access mechanisms? What tools are available for people to interpret and analyze the data. We have the opportunity to embed the R application into the Modules and other opportunities.

I highly recommend downloading the R application, the .pdf from Google on how to use Google Insight for Search and Google Trends data. Experimentation with this opportunity will provide you with the beginning of understanding the opportunities we will make available to our users. And please, join me here .

Technorati Tags: People's Google Data Algorithms Learning

Energy declines

Calgary's Herald newspaper has an article in Thursday's issue that supports the many initiatives inherent in this software development project. My actions have been to convince the industry that the need is great for the delivery of an ERP styled application such as People, Ideas & Objects. This began in February 2003 with a proposal that dealt with the two significant constraints of any software developer, code and customers. In September 2003 I then proposed a comprehensive research proposal. This proposal would test my hypothesis of an ERP system that identifies and supports the Joint Operating Committee; would provide the producers with a more innovative footing.

All well and good but it was at this time the producers turned against any idea of using the JOC. Or so I thought. Throughout the months of 2003 my proposals were steadily moving up the chain of command of the large intermediate producers. Reaching most of the CEO's in these firms was a reflection of the effort and the scope of the idea. Or so I thought. The one comment that in retrospect resonates with me is the comment that "we don't hire small research firm's." When none of the producers were interested in spending any money on this idea, I decided to conduct the research my self at my own cost.

In March 2004 I was informed that my thesis was complete and passed. I then set out to rewrite the document in commercial form. This was completed in May 2004 as the "Preliminary Research Report." Upon publishing this I was approached by some one in the industry who gave me two documents from Cambridge Energy Research Associates. These research documents were obviously on the same track as I was on in establishing the JOC as the key organizational construct. Their problem was it was well behind my completed work. I therefore won the right to the copyrights of these ideas. This also brought to mind the comments about "not using small research firms". I concluded this was a deliberate attempt to steal what was now mine. Understand the proposal I made in September 2003 was to conduct the research. The intellectual property was to be for the industry as they would be the ones that financed it. And since I financed it, the IP was mine.

Nonetheless it was around this point that I knew I was now an outsider to this industry. Any attempt to find work became useless and frustrated. Resigning myself to this fact I sought employment in other businesses and industries. And began writing this blog. After over 600 entries and 700,000 words I have been able to take the initial concept of using the JOC and detailed the research and results of the Draft Specification. An overall vision of what the oil and gas industry would look like and operate as by using the JOC.

I mention this bit of history as the basic need for People, Ideas & Objects was evident in the difficulties of finding and producing oil and gas. Finding energy was becoming substantially more difficult. Instead of developing these ideas and applications the industry chose to remove me and my ideas from the marketplace. Instead of doing anything constructive the industry has done nothing about their business but line their pockets with inappropriate levels of compensation.

That is a strong indictment of the brain trust of the Canadian oil and gas industry and particularly its management. And today we see the evidence that they are challenged by the difficulties in finding and producing oil and gas. From the Calgary Herald article.

Natural gas makes up two-thirds of all activity in the oilpatch and production has fallen almost 15 per cent over the past two years, taking the biggest contributor to the government’s revenue stream down with it. From a peak of about 14 billion cubic feet a day in 2001, Alberta’s gas production has steadily slid to a little more than 12 billion cubic feet at present. That figure is widely expected to fall as much as a billion cubic feet a day in 2009 as a result of spending cutbacks by big producers such as EnCana Corp. and Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., which are the two biggest drillers in the province.

It is important to remember that it was during this past two years that record activity in the field was taking place. More money was spent then in any prior period, and a 15% decline is the result? If doing all that activity lead to a significant decline in production what will doing nothing bring?

Herring was poring over numbers that showed only seven per cent of available rigs were drilling in Alberta.

Now granted some of that activity is attributable to road bans. But nonetheless budget cuts have been deep and systemic through out the producers involved in Alberta. In order to resolve this the solution that is suggested is;

The only way to increase production is to punch more wells to offset declines, said Don Herring, president of the Canadian Association of Oilwell Drilling Contractors.

The only way? Doing more of the same thing, expecting different results reflects a mental disability, not a solution.

Its time for the independent actions of people who are concerned about the effects of these irresponsible, selfish and criminal people. The CEO's of the major Canadian independent firms who were party to the discussion of using the JOC should be held accountable for their actions. The opportunity to do otherwise has passed, the damage is done and they are responsible. The road these producers are heading is towards their ultimate decline. Based on their performance in the province of Alberta, they will be out of business fairly soon. Please join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Call-to-Action Energy Management Failure

That's a five minute misconduct.

Using a hockey analogy to reflect the opposing team is indulging in inappropriate or unfair play. It's also an analogy that will be intimately understood by Sun Microsystems Chairman Scott McNeally. I'm speaking of the actions of IBM in this proposed acquisition of Sun.

Lets go back to the Microsofts offer to purchase Yahoo. I thought Microsoft never wanted to purchase Yahoo, but they certainly were not happy with having to deal with both Google and Yahoo in the critical and valuable search business. Microsoft's acquisition of Yahoo has similar anti-trust issues to what IBM would be presented with in purchasing Sun. In fact it is the management of Sun that are contending that IBM stick to the acquisition in a potentially difficult anti-trust review. This may be a key point that helps Sun in the very near future and adds fuel to my hypothesis of IBM's dirty tricks. 

If Microsoft could have eliminated Yahoo from the marketplace without spending any money, would that not be a worthwhile action to take? For IBM to walk away from Sun after reducing the offer and peaking at what Sun has under the covers, IBM quickly learned more then they otherwise would have in normal operations. Key contracts, technologies, strategies and tactics of Sun were possibly made available as a result of the offer. Walking away after this peek, after they have the goods, after they make a revised less valuable offer shows that Sun may have some big nasty skeletons in its closet. It also does not speak well of Sun's management in deferring the opportunity to fulfill their shareholders potential on a short term basis. Which introduces a conflict and concern that otherwise is unnecessary and is certainly destructive. This is why IBM needs to be assessed this penalty.

Sun is having a difficult time. They have technologies that few fully understand or appreciate. In a world where value is attributed to those with coherent sound bites, Sun looses a lot of people beyond Java. Sun also has a number of technologies that are unique and far more valuable then the sum of their parts. And that is what IBM is after. Like Microsoft wanting Yahoo's market share for search, IBM wants desperately needs Sun's technologies. 

After the introduction of the personal computer, IBM blew it, big blue time. Under Lou Gerstner, austere management and a lot of luck the firm was able to recover. But what is it that they own now? Services in the form of corporate services to companies. Few if any actual technologies, certainly not a coherent story that can be told. I ask what are the benefits of services to companies? If I buy some IBM services, how do I know that you have provided that excellent quality of services that you claim? And if they are of such high regard, why am I being asked to sign another contract? Selling services without any products is not a long term viable strategy to making money, in my opinion. 

So IBM has now put Sun into play. What ever damage that is done to Sun is of net benefit to IBM. I'm not a fan of this tactic, and I find it oddly coincidental that it's only played out by those with anti-trust difficulties. We'll see how this one plays out, but IBM should be penalized not only five minutes, but a game misconduct and a 10 game suspension. 

Technorati Tags: People's Sun Strategy