What Innovation Provides the Investor

In our review of Professor Giovanni Dosi’s paper, “Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation“ we should ask what are the incentives for the financial marketplace to invest in the producers discovery of innovations and their development? Will these depend on incentives that interested and motivated investors perceive in terms of expected economic returns? Professor Dosi calls “appropriability those properties of technological knowledge and technical artifacts, of markets and the legal environment that permit innovations as rent yielding assets against competitors imitation.” Previously we have documented that producers have lead times and learning curves as process innovations. Are these incentives enough of a market inducement for profit motivated agents?

The competitive advantages of the producer are its land & asset base, and its earth science & engineering capabilities. To develop its capabilities it has been suggested here in the Financial Marketplace module that the financial community will have an incentive in funding the development of the producers capabilities. These competitive advantages, the capabilities, when applied to their land & asset base will generate the rent yielding assets the financial community is seeking. To hold the land & asset base is the alternative the investor has to consider. However, without the capabilities to develop the properties the assets are of little use. The investor must acquire the capabilities in some fashion and that will cost them. To develop them through a producer may be the most effective and lowest cost alternative available to them.

Another aspect of the understanding that we have learned about innovation is that innovation is the result of a quantifiable and replicable process. Taken from the perspective of an investor, the value this understanding provides is that the means of production, the scientific capability is within the scope of his / her undertaking. The risks still exist. However, the ability to develop the innovation from a known capability exists and is a possibility based on quantifiable and replicable process.

Money is not necessarily the determinant of innovative success. If it were there would be more innovation occurring in the large firms. Innovation can and does come from anywhere and does not necessarily require the vast financial resources that are believed to be necessary to make them real. From the financial marketplace perspective this would provide them with the evidence they don’t need to throw a lot of money around to make the producers innovative. A lot of the capabilities that are needed can and will be developed in innovative ways as a result of not having an unlimited capital budget. This might be the key point that draws the capital marketplace into the Financial Marketplace module and participates in the development of the capabilities and innovations of the producer.

What we have learned about innovation is well summarized by Professor Giovanni Dosi in the following quotation.

...businesses commit to innovation stemming from exogenous scientific factors and endogenously accumulated capabilities developed by their respective firms.” His general point is that “observed sectoral patterns of technical change are the result of the interplay between various sorts of market-inducements, on the one hand, and opportunity and appropriability combinations, on the other.” p. 1141

The manner in which the oil and gas investor earns a return on their investment will be on the basis of the producers earth science and engineering capabilities and innovativeness applied to their land and asset base. From the investors point of view, using the public interface of the People, Ideas & Objects Financial Marketplace module they can quickly determine whom has the highest trajectory change in terms of Revenue Per Employee. They will then be able to engage with that producer in terms of what their team is capable of in the earth science and engineering disciplines. And then commence collaborations with those producers that are of interest to the investor on the basis of what they have seen in the Financial Marketplace module. Then the producer and the investor can discuss how the financing of the “interplay between various sorts of market-inducements, on the one hand, and opportunity and appropriability combinations, on the other” can come about.

The efficient financing of innovation on an industry wide basis should be the result of the overall processes managed by the Financial Marketplace module. As described here the ability to focus on the producer with the highest level of innovation, as reflected in the trajectory change in Revenue Per Employee, will be quick. The pace of change in the science will need to be mirrored in the pace of change in the producers. And the pace of change in the producers will only be matched if the investment community is able to respond to the market changes at the same speed as the producers are able to. Therefore in order to accelerate the producers it is necessary to accelerate the pace and speed of the financial community in terms of their capabilities in understanding the producers business. This is the focus of the Financial Marketplace module.

In terms of what the capabilities of the producer are, and what they are able to achieve, I can see some producers unwilling to document and publish this material for reasons that they will leave themselves exposed to competitive exploitation. That’s always possible, however, as with any competitive advantage they can be actively developed and marketed or hidden and atrophied. The ability to market these competitive advantages to the investment community and in turn develop them further is the opportunity being discussed here. The paradox of Revenue Per Employee is the area where the difficulties really lay and where the producers and investors attentions should really be focused.

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.

Revenue Per Employee as a Key Financial Metric

We asked an important question of what role will the capital markets play in the future of the oil and gas industry? More specifically, we should ask what role will they play in funding innovation? Will they value the capabilities of the innovative producer and fund them as was suggested earlier? Will the demand for capital be diminished as a result of the high commodity prices allocating the financial resources towards an innovative producer? What role will banks fill in this costly science and engineering based environment? These are all difficult questions that have to be asked in funding the oil and gas producer.

Recently we discussed in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module the factor that was developed in People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Research report of Revenue Per Employee. The Financial Marketplace module will publish the producers Revenue Per Employee factor for the current and past periods, and include some of the future projections of where the producers factor is heading. This would provide the investors and bankers with an understanding of the innovative standing that the firm has and its future expectations over the next few periods.

Revenue Per Employee is therefore a reflection of value. When we discussed the factor in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module it was for internal consumption purposes. The purpose of using Revenue Per Employee in the Financial Marketplace module is to publish it and allow the investment community to compare your performance against your peers. As we discussed in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module there would be three types of variances that could be calculated on the comparisons between periods. There would be the volume, price and number of employees variance. Each would impute a different result in terms of what the comparison of the variable meant.

Does Revenue Per Employee reflect a more innovative footing. That is debatable. I think it clearly does, and I can’t think of a more effective means of answering how innovative a producer is. Professor Dosi states “In very general terms, technological innovation involves or is the solution to problems.” Dosi goes on to further define this as “In other words, an innovative solution to a certain problem involves “discovery” (of the problem) and “creation” since no general algorithm can be derived from the information about the problems. Solutions to technological problems involve the use of information derived from experience and formal knowledge. It is the specific and un-codified capabilities, or “tacit-ness” as Professor Dosi describes “on the part of the inventors who discover the creative solution.” The net result of this, in a laboratory setting would be great experiments. The net result of this in a commercial setting like an oil and gas firm would be increased revenue over the period without the additional burden of increased overhead. Therefore Revenue Per Employee will have its own interface in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace, and be published as well in the Financial Marketplace module.

One of the attributes of Revenue Per Employee is that a producers history becomes a significant part of the calculation. If a producer has a poor factor then the performance of those fields will continue to affect the performance in the calculation from that point forward. Laggards remain laggards. To change requires significant and radical changes to the way the firm operates. Those firms that have a high factor are those that are able to truly state that they are innovative. And they have the benefit of that history in which they will be able to live off those high factors for the short and medium term. This factor can be a significant selling point, or alternatively, highlight the real stinkers.

The variance in the marketplace of the factor of Revenue Per Employee is truly remarkable. To have a variance of fivefold is not uncommon. When a producer has five times as much revenue per employee as its competitor then it reflects that something is fundamentally different in terms of what theyre doing. As we stated in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module, although Revenue Per Employee itself is not necessarily an overall reflection of innovativeness, the trajectory of the factor over a period of time is definitely a reflection of innovativeness, or the lack of it.

We have discussed the promotion of the producers team of earth science and engineering capabilities on the Financial Marketplace module through the publication of their Revenue Per Employee factor. It is through that interface the producer communicates to the financial marketplace the capabilities that they have assembled and what they as a producer are able to accomplish. I see the long term development of the producer as an extension of this capabilities development. The application of the capability and its development to a geographic area where the risks are of a certain nature and are unknown and unknowable for the foreseeable future. This is the nature of the oil and gas business and to embark on such an adventure without the financial marketplace committed to your team would be unwise and certain to fail. What is needed is a means to communicate on top of the “Dynamic Capabilities Interface” of the Research & Capabilities module, and include what Professor Giovanni Dosi states here.

Internalization and routinization in the face of the uncertainty and complexity of the innovative process also point to the importance of particular organizational arrangements for the success or failure of individual innovative attempts. This is what was found by the SAPPHO Project (cf. Science Policy Research Unit 1972 and Rothwell et al. 1974), possibly the most extensive investigation of the sources of commercial success or failure of innovation: Institutional traits, both internal to the firm - such as the nature of the organizational arrangements between technical and commercial people, or the hierarchical authority within the innovating firm - and between a firm and its external environment - such as good communication channels with users, universities, and so on - turn out to be very important. Moreover, it has been argued (Pavitt 1986; Robert Wilson, Peter Ashton and Thomas Egan 1984) that, for given incentives and innovative opportunities, the various forms of internal corporate organization (U form versus M form centralized versus decentralized, etc.) affect innovation and commercial success positively or negatively, according to the particular nature of each technological paradigm and its stage of development. p. 1135

It sounds simple, and reasonable, to include “good communication channels” as a necessary part of any relationship between an innovative producer and its financial backers. To include these within the ERP systems is the key to making them effective. What originates as a result of these “good communication channels” is defined by Professor Dosi.

In general, each organizational arrangement of a firm embodies procedures for resource allocation to particular activities (in our case, innovative activities), and for the efficient use of these resources in the search for new products, new processes, and procedures for improvements in existing routines; however, the specific nature of these procedures differs across firms and sectors. For example, the typical degrees of commitment of resources vary by industry and so do the rates at which learning occurs. I now turn to the interpretation of these phenomena. p. 1135

Professor Dosi 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. It is the capabilities that make the determining difference.

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.

Selling the Team

We now focus on innovation and review Professor Giovanni Dosi’s 1988 paper “Sources, Procedures and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation.” It has been argued throughout the writings in the Preliminary Specification that commodity prices are allocating the financial resources to fuel the innovative oil and gas producer. If that is so, then what role will capital markets play in the future of the oil and gas industry?

Taking this thinking to its extreme then the most innovative firm would also be the most profitable. As their costs of capital would be lower than its competitors, and with their innovations being on a steeper trajectory, they would therefore be more effective causing them to be less costly than the competitions. The investment in science and technologies is with the implicit expectation of a return on these investments, but also, to provide the firm with additional structural competitive advantages by moving their products costs and / or capabilities beyond that of the competition. Professor Dosi notes:

Thus, I shall discuss the sources of innovation opportunities, the role of markets in allocating resources to the exploration of these opportunities and in determining the rates and directions of technological advances, the characteristics of the processes of innovative search, and the nature of the incentives driving private agents to commit themselves to innovation.

What you are capable of achieving as an innovative oil and gas producer is possibly the most valuable asset that you have in the very near future. This capability is what you are investing in and how you expect to earn a return on your land and asset base, and earth science and engineering capabilities. Although much of your capability may be funded by the day to day of your operation, it represents a critical part of your firm's cumulative investments. In answer to the question posed earlier as to what role will the capital markets play? It will be to make the investments in your capabilities. Your capabilities are what provide you with your highest return on investments.

We noted that the producer firms engineering and earth science team was being highlighted in an interface on the Financial Marketplace module. Isn't it time that the producer was able to financially leverage these capabilities in the capital markets? If innovation is the result of the team that is put together, then the ability to fund that team and earn a return on the basis of their performance should be considered in this new energy era.

To facilitate that possibility the interface in the Financial Marketplace module could have performance metrics that reflect the results of their efforts. These could be quantified over a certain period and verified by reserve reports prepared by independent engineers. The point of the exercise would be to increase the value of the producer firm based on the intangible value of its capabilities. In a world where ideas matter, the ability to quantify them and qualify them within a marketplace brings real value to the oil and gas producer and investor.

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.

Speed is Nothing Without Control

The first item of information that a marketplace should tell a producer is what is an acceptable rate of return for an investment in oil and gas. This is the criteria that all producers should use to evaluate their oil and gas investments. If the rate of return and capital allocation does not exceed the producers expected rate of return then the project should not proceed. There is no more important factor or information that a producer needs to know. The producers discipline and methodology in its capital allocation is how the successful producers succeed. This is how the Financial Marketplace module incorporates the calculations of return on investment and capital allocation in the Preliminary Specification.

First of all there are no more confidential, in my opinion, information then these calculations. Particularly the capital allocation can be a complex algorithm that is usually contained within multiple spreadsheets. Centralizing these calculations within the Financial Marketplace module would be opportune as it's managed by the Security & Access Control module and has general access to the historical accounting data. Data elements would therefore be live and provide real time performance. There is however much more to the decision making process than just the numbers. The management's discussion, based on the calculations is sometimes the important feature. Therefore having robust features for discussion throughout the calculations of return on investment and capital allocation will be necessary. This might best be represented as a blackboard feature of the module.

There is more to the process then just blue sky thinking and number crunching too. What I am suggesting here is that the process of capital allocation is an art as much as it is a science. The process needs to be rigorous and thorough enough to ensure that every rock has been overturned and inspected. That process can and should be automated to the highest level in the Preliminary Specifications Financial Marketplace module. It is up to the individual producer to either follow the process or to ignore it, as much as they do the capital allocation process today. These facilities will be built within the module.

Astute readers will note the obvious contradiction that is inherent in the Financial Marketplace module. Doesn’t the speed we discussed contradict the deliberate pace of the capital allocation process described here? No, that is to say it shouldn't, or they should be one in the same. Having the speed that was described earlier was desirable only if you had some measure of control. The control is attained through the capital allocation process that is described here. These two forces, speed and control, are in the hands of the management of the firm and are reflected in the performance of the assets. The marketplace will see this performance and respond appropriately and that will be reflected through the Preliminary Specifications Financial Marketplace module.

Another contradiction might be suggested that with banks funding Joint Operating Committees on a semi-autonomous nature, this will interrupt the capital allocation process and affect the return calculations of the firm. That is correct, however they will disrupt it in a good way. Banks funding the Joint Operating Committee as opposed to taking general claims against the individual producers would be more motivated and aligned to develop the individual property. Since the producers are using borrowed money to invest in that Joint Operating Committee they are leveraging the investment of the producer. An investment that had previously attained the acceptable rate of return of the producer. Therefore the actual return to the producer would be leveraged to the point that it would most certainly exceed the producers expected return.

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.

Speeding up the Process

In a capital intensive industry, financing is a critical issue for any producer. In an industry where innovation is providing significant value add, and with escalating capital and operating costs the relationships with your investors need to be of premier concern in your business. Speed will become a major criteria on how you will be evaluated in the marketplace. If you as a producer are unable to perform in terms of competing, or participating at the speed of the marketplace, you will be left behind, very quickly. Reputation has a permanence to it that is difficult to change. The speed in which you conduct your financing can give you a head start and provide you with the ability to participate at the speed of the marketplace, and maybe even set the pace for those to try and follow. The speed at which a producer is able to execute would be reflected in the Financial Marketplace module. Transparent marketplaces are a two way street. And it is here that the Financial Marketplace module will enable those producers with superior performance to attain a real speed advantage.

Our discussion of how one bank would finance all the producers within a Joint Operating Committee as opposed to today’s method of each producer having their own banker. Provides a focus for the bank that is unconstrained by any of the other properties of the producers, or concerns other than the property at hand. We also discussed, with the technology automation that is available today, that both the producers and the banks could automate most of the increased logistical banking requirements that this would cause. I also suggested that the disenchanted oil and gas investor might be better served by providing them with the ability to invest directly in the property, giving them the opportunity to circumvent the bureaucracy. A bureaucracy that has provided no upside on 400% energy price increases. And lastly that these changes, made through the Financial Marketplace module, provide a focus for the alignment of the financial interests to the Joint Operating Committee to achieve some of that speed, innovative capability, accountability and profitability.

Now let's explore that speed aspect. The Financial Marketplace module is one of three of People, Ideas & Objects marketplace modules. Which imputes a line of communications is open between the financial marketplace and the producer firm that is above and beyond that of the statutory compliance requirements. It is therefore going to have to be authored by the senior people of the firm who know what it is that they are authorized to state. Some of these current investors who have a direct investment interest with the producer would be able to source historical accounting data and information on their Joint Operating Committee from the producer from the Partnership Accounting module. Future plans and investments, the difficult situations to discuss, could be published and promoted in the Financial Marketplace and meet the regulations requirements for full disclosure. Thereby giving no investor or group any unfair advantage in terms of quality of information.

The point of the marketplace is the opportunity to establish significant and rich relationships with investors and bankers of all shapes and sizes. Make no mistake, the ability to attract capital will be on the basis of performance, for that there is no alternative. However, the speed and effort at which a producer is able to raise the funds necessary to develop their assets depends on the quality of those assets and the quality of the relationships they have with the investment community. The Financial Marketplace module helps to establish a stronger relationship with the investment community, raise the required capital, align the stakeholders interests and account for these investments. Therefore in a significant way increasing the speed at which you can approach the oil and gas business.

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.

Alignment and its Benefits

I want to briefly discuss the logistical implications of having relationships with many banks operating in an oil and gas firm. To suggest that this would make the financial aspects of a producer firm simpler would be contrary to the reality of a system that is providing these types of opportunities. Simply the legal and financial reporting and logistical requirements would be an order of magnitude more voluminous. It is fair to assume that the producer firm would need to maintain a banking relationship with most of the banks that had a presence in the oil and gas business. That relationship would include loans, accounts and all of the banks services. Managing for each of the loans financial requirement would become unbearable. Causing all kinds of administrative and management burdens that would otherwise not be incurred in today's systems.

All of these are done today, albeit on a smaller scale, in most companies. Adding a multiple of volume through automated systems such as what is being discussed in the Preliminary Specification makes the prior discussion a mute point. What is not realized is that the Joint Operating Committee is the key organizational construct of the innovative and profitable oil and gas producer. By enabling the financial constraints of the property to be just the financial constraints of the property and the only financial constraints of the property. The participants in the Joint Operating Committee are free to deal with those that are financially motivated in dealing with the issues of that Joint Operating Committee. There are no more discussions about “them,” who are never in attendance at meetings anyway. When it comes time to make a decision, a decision can be made.

Its not that the decisions are made in the Financial Marketplace module. What this module is doing is aligning the financial interests of the Joint Operating Committee so that the decision rights are in alignment with the operational decision making authority. The financial, legal and operational decision making authority resides in the Joint Operating Committee and the alignment of these interests makes the ability to decide the best course of action possible. Currently, the muddling of these frameworks by general assignments to banks by each producer, and some nameless and faceless investor, limit the flexibility of the decision making authority of the engineers and earth scientists who are responsible for the performance of the property. By focusing the ownership and operating resources on the assets of the Joint Operating Committee, the consensus can be achieved and decisions can be made.

Our discussion of the costs of administering high levels of banking due to using the Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the innovative producer is an important consideration in this discussion. We have two choices to deal with these potentially higher administrative costs. We can hire a lot of people, or alternatively we can highly engineer the software that the industry will use to deal with the potentially higher administrative burden. A highly engineered software solution, backed up with a software development capability such as is proposed by People, Ideas & Objects would earn, I think, the general consensus as to how to deal with the issue.

Understanding the marketplace metaphor and the discussion regarding bankers and investors, the module would include, but in no way would be limited to, the following.

Joint Operating Committee perspective.

• Banking deposit and payment processing.
• Account reconciliation and analysis.
• Short term asset reconciliation and management.
• Dynamic working capital determinations.
• Short term liabilities accounts and management.
• Long term liabilities accounts and management.

From the producer perspective.

• Banking deposit and payment processing.
• Account reconciliation and analysis.
• Short term asset reconciliation and management.
• Dynamic working capital determinations and allocations.
• Short term liabilities accounts and management.
• Long term liabilities accounts and management.
• Shareholder equity accounts and management.
• Consolidated JOC working capital.
• Uncommitted consolidated JOC working capital.

People, Ideas & Objects are 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 are doing this to achieve greater speed, innovative capabilities, accountability and most importantly profitability. Speed is achieved by reducing the financial constraints and the time required that financing has traditionally taken in oil and gas.

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.

A Certain Dissatisfaction

It is the Financial Marketplace module in which I really throw the cat amongst the pigeons when I talk about the redundancy of the bureaucracy. Yet when I reflect on the past five years, I see the investment marketplace holds the oil and gas producers bureaucracy in not much better esteem. There is a general dissatisfaction within the oil and gas investor community. How much of this dissatisfaction is to do with the overall financial crisis, and how much is to do with a general dissatisfaction with the oil and gas industry itself is unknown at this time.

The fact of the matter is that with the run up in the commodity prices there has been an even greater run up in the costs of production and operations. The bureaucracy have provided no upside from the price increases. A bureaucracy that has provided no upside on 400% commodity price increases will not provide any upside on any further price increases. And it is quite probable that significant financial losses will arise as a result of any price declines. So there is much to be concerned about when it comes to the current state of affairs in the manner in which the oil and gas industry is managed.

I’m glad that I am on record for being critical of the bureaucracy, and that I am the one that they have been kicking with such vigor. It’s one thing to be right, another for them to have been so wrong for so long. Nonetheless, the industry is going through a fundamental change. One in which the earth science and engineering resources needed to discover and produce the base commodities are under increasing demands. We therefore need to organize ourselves first and foremost for this new challenge. And in today’s marketplace that begins with the development of the software that defines the organization, that being People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification. The question that should be asked at this critical time is what is the bureaucracies plan for the future?

The Financial Marketplace module provides a window for the producer to deal with the bankers within the Joint Operating Committee. Whether a producer chooses to have each participant maintain their own bank representative. Or, each Joint Operating Committee has one banker for all the producers represented in the Joint Operating Committee is a choice provided by the Financial Marketplace module.

Our discussion now shows the critical role of the investor in the long term health of the oil and gas industry. I think in order to have them participate in the industry, again, will require they are provided with new tools and opportunities to invest in oil and gas. Earlier it was suggested that possibly the working interest share might be a securitized investment. I think on the basis of the past five years history, that it should be considered that the investment community might have some enhanced tools and interfaces to the producer through the Financial Marketplace module of the People, Ideas & Objects software application. After all it's a marketplace.

The interfaces and tools that I am thinking of are not of the statutory type that are required by various regulatory agencies. These are provided through the Compliance & Governance module of the People, Ideas & Objects application. The type of interfaces that I am thinking that may be used in the Financial Marketplace module would be more of the marketing style. Where the producer is out selling their investment to the “financial marketplace” in order to secure future capital investments. Ways to initiate dialog and for information and discussion to start the relationship between the investor and the 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.

Introduction to the Financial Marketplace

The financial crisis has had a tremendous effect on the capital intensive oil and gas industry. Capital structures and lower demand for the commodities have been the two issues that have caused significant management upheaval. Times appear to be improving and moving to a more normal basis of economic performance. However that will bring higher interest rates with the higher expectations of performance and no guarantee of higher commodity prices. Producers remain stuck in a business model that sees them produce at full capacity and have no capability to deal with any underlying changes in the business. The Preliminary Specification works to provide the producer and Joint Operating Committee with an innovative and profitable business model. The Financial Marketplace module provides the means in which the capital structures are managed.

The primary point that the Financial Marketplace module is making is that there are competing interests and motivations in the industry in attempting to get things done. With different strategies being deployed by different partners within a Joint Operating Committee, is it any wonder that the financing of a project can ever fall into place. What the Financial Marketplace module proposes is that instead of the property being funded by several different company bankers, each taking a working interest share claim against the firm. The Financial Marketplace module would see one bank, or one consortium of banks fund the property in its entirety on behalf of the partners represented in the property. Aligning of the bank financing to the innovative oil and gas producers and Joint Operating Committees legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural, communication, strategic, innovation, compliance and governance frameworks.

Today that may or may not be an objective or opportunity worth pursuing. However, I think that the freedom of having the attributes of the Financial Marketplace module still reside within the oil and gas market, and possibly even more as a result of the financial crisis of 2008. Why? The demand for capital will continue to be strong, and the supply will continue to be tight. What we seek to prove in this module, is that through its use we can provide the innovative and profitable oil and gas producer and the Joint Operating Committee with the ability to ensure that their capital structures are more efficient than what can be attained in any other system.

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.

$94 Billion With a B

I want to take a moment between our review of the Petroleum Lease and Financial Marketplace modules. To go through how the Preliminary Specification provides the oil and gas producer with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. The value of People, Ideas & Objects solution for 2012 alone was an incremental revenue stream of $94 billion. It is the solution to profitable operations of oil and gas, and particularly a solution to the unique characteristics of shale gas reservoirs. The value difference that is calculated here is a result of the ability of the producers to shut-in 15% of the marginal production, raising the prices to a point where gas begins to return a profit. A price which they claim is $6.70 / mmbtu. This is applied to the production profile of North America. This is done through the Preliminary Specifications use of the decentralized production model.

The issue with shutting in production is the associated costs of administration and accounting are fixed. The Preliminary Specifications use of the decentralized production model converts the producers fixed administrative and accounting costs to the variable administrative and accounting costs of the Joint Operating Committee. We do this by first of all making some changes to the profile of the prototypical oil and gas producer. That is the producer is configured with the c class executives, earth science and engineering resources, land and legal and some support staff. The remainder of the people are reorganized into service providers who are focused on the process and are using the entire industry as their client base. These service providers will be using specialization and the division of labor to enhance their services to their clients, the Joint Operating Committees.

When a property is unable to cover its marginal costs from the revenues from production. The associated losses can be more costly than having the property shut-in. These costs as a result of any losses have to be added to the reserves costs to be earned from the future and will require higher prices to make up for the losses that are being incurred. In today’s environment the producer has a fixed capability in terms of their administrative and accounting capabilities. And these must be maintained. The ability to cut these costs with their production profile doesn’t exist due to the unique specialized nature of the capabilities. What the Preliminary Specification will do will be to move the administrative and accounting capabilities from the producer firm and make them the administrative and accounting capabilities of the industry. Then the ability to charge for the services that are rendered by each service provider to each Joint Operating Committee can be made.

If the property is shut-in due to the marginal costs not being covered. The service providers will not have the work for that property cross their desks and their billings for that month will not include that property. Therefore no Joint Operating Committee that is shut-in will have any administrative or accounting costs charged during times of shut-in production. Leaving the property with no profit or loss situation. Saving those reserves for a time when the prices rise to a point where profitable operations can be achieved. And removing the marginal production from the marketplace so that the commodity prices can find the real market price.

With the high cost, prolific nature of the shale gas reserves this provides a business model in which to profitably produce those reserves. To continue to produce at capacity, and at a loss, is a fools game. However, one in which the bureaucracy seems content to play. Then again its not their money, and either way they still get paid.

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 the Petroleum Lease Marketplace

The Petroleum Lease Marketplace is the second of three “Marketplace” modules of the Preliminary Specification. As with the Resource and Financial Marketplace modules it too employs the “Marketplace Interface” as the ultimate collaborative interface. It is within the Petroleum Lease Marketplace that the majority of the producer firm and Joint Operating Committee data and information is developed, recorded and stored. Many of the other modules will be sourcing their primary data from the Petroleum Lease Marketplace.

The innovative oil and gas producer relies on their competitive advantages of their land and asset base, and their earth science and engineering capabilities. The Petroleum Lease Marketplace is the module that provides the producer and Joint Operating Committee with the tools to build their land and asset base. The Petroleum Lease Marketplace provides the producer with the competitive advantages to compete in the 21st century.

The division of labor and specialization plays a large role in this module as well. As in the Resource Marketplace module, service providers are relied upon to provide for the management of processes like lease rental payments and other areas of land administration. These aid in the conversion of the producer firms fixed overhead costs to the Joint Operating Committees variable overhead costs. This conversion is a critical part of People, Ideas & Objects ability to provide the oil and gas producer with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations.

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.

People, Ideas & Objects and Oracle Corporation

PPDM

The first thing we need to do is we need to pick up an important piece of technology that will work with all of the technologies in the Preliminary Specification. It's important to mention it here in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace as so many of the unique oil and gas attributes are stored within this module. The technology of course is the data model. And the data model that we are including in the Preliminary Specification is the industry standard PPDM (Professional Petroleum Data Management Association). This will provide a solid foundation for the innovative producer to base their ERP, engineering and geotechnical applications upon.

The PPDM Association defines and creates standards to help oil and gas companies manage exploration and production data. Included within the scope of their data model is the following data; general well header information, digital well log data, seismic location information, seismic data, land parcel information, reservoir field / pool information, faults and formations, geographical information, and surface grids. Although many of these data elements may seem outside of the ERP scope only seismic location information, seismic data, and faults and formations are outside. Particularly the land information, since we are in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module, will be of significant value within an industry wide collaborative application.

The data model is currently quite large in the last upgrade PPDM suggest that just the upgrade is an addition of 500 tables. I am not a member of the association and am therefore not able to download the model and can’t tell what level of normalization the data model conforms to. Looking in the wiki however I see a number of tables with similar first names that have different second names. It would appear to me that the first name should be the table and the second name should be an attribute within that table. Therefore instead of 10 or 15 tables they would only need one table. However data models being data models it is difficult to understand them without a comprehensive look into them.

Many of the innovative oil and gas producers will already be using applications that access the PPDM data model. These would be for earth science and engineering applications primarily, and as a result we are building on the producers current infrastructure of technologies. In addition we are adding to the scope of applications that the technical staff are able to access and use their data for. Having well header information for engineering information that also references the accounting information provides real value for the engineer. I would suggest it is also something that is necessary as we get into some of the more complex accounting that we do in the Material Balance Report of the Accounting Voucher.

Data models are sophisticated architectures that reside within the Oracle database and provide a structure for the data to be stored and retrieved. The database ensures that the rules and requirements of the data are enforced so that elements of the database remain in balance. Database technology provides this value through the Oracle database and the data models that are developed. We will use the PPDM data model. Oracle will have developed their own data models for their Oracle Fusion Middleware Applications. And we will be developing our own data models for the data that is unique to the needs of the People, Ideas & Objects application modules. All of these data models will be employed by the same RDBMS (Relational Database Management System) that being the Oracle database. The size of these databases will be enormous.

Service Providers

There are many things that require transaction support in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace of the Preliminary Specification. Transactions such as lease rentals, surface rentals and bonus payments all would fall within the modules domain. In this discussion I want to look at the Oracle Fusion Applications Financial Management module to determine what services are available to assist in the processing of these transactions.

We once again should look to the service providers in terms of the expanded division of labor and specialization that has been enabled through the Preliminary Specification. The focus of the innovative oil and gas producer and Joint Operating Committees are on their land and asset base, and their earth science and engineering capabilities. The Research & Capabilities and Knowledge & Learning modules focus on the development and deployment of capabilities and the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module is focused on the land and asset base of the producer. Therefore to focus on those assets would require that the administrative minutiae of land administration, production and exploration administration and the accounting associated with land and assets be outsourced to specialized service providers. Enabling the producer to focus exclusively on building and maintaining the competitive and strategic land and asset base of their firm. A task that is the key to building value for the producer, and a task that is unlimited in terms of the amount of time and energy they could expend in pursuit of that base.

Here we have a scenario where the producer has selected the People, Ideas & Objects application modules as their ERP system. Which includes the Oracle Financials and imputes that high levels of specialization and division of labor are incorporated. Meaning that these accounting applications are primarily used by individuals who reside outside the producer firm. There will be members of the producer firm who use them as well, however, the majority will reside within the service provider firms. Thankfully we are using a cloud computing model of delivery of the systems to enable the use of these systems to be used by these other organizations. Let's assume for a moment that there are service providers for lease payments who guarantee your surface and lease rentals will be paid on time, lawyers for maintenance of agreements and one for Crown / Federal lands, to name just a few. Each of these service providers are representing many producers with a large market share of the industry. Each have highly organized and efficient processes that require specialized software systems to meet their specific needs. People, Ideas & Objects, on behalf of the producers represented in our subscription model would need to provide access to the producers data and the development of these highly automated systems.

What processes would be adequate for one producer would be fairly simple and straightforward. In terms of a highly organized process, the ability of one producer firm to have the volume of activity to justify the systems to build the highly automated systems wouldn’t exist. In a scenario where the industry is being represented by highly specialized service providers the need for highly automated systems however is necessary. And these systems have to be an integral part of the producers system in terms of their Security & Access Control. For instance the lease rental service provider would be able to access only the tables relating to the lease rental data. Without this level of access the ability of the service provider to do their job would not exist.

In terms of the Oracle Fusion Applications we will need to adopt the full suite of Financial Management modules. These include the General Ledger, Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable, Asset Management, Payments & Collections and Cash & Expense Management. We had already adopted these in the Resource Marketplace module and therefore only have to access the specific services within those modules that we need. Such is the advantages of modularity.

If we look at the innovative oil and gas producer from the scenario of using the People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification. Within the Petroleum Lease Marketplace, we noted that the focus of the producer was on building their land and asset base and having accounting, land administration and other service providers taking care of the administrative and accounting aspects of their firm. This requires the access of the People, Ideas & Objects application to be specifically developed to meet the needs of these highly specialized service providers and for them to have very limited access to the producers data. We now want to talk about the billing process and how the service provider is able to earn their service fees from the producers that are their customers.

Part of the specialization and division of labor process requires that the customer and service provider are able to come to terms on price for the service. Since the service provider is able to process larger volumes of lease rentals with a fixed number of resources, they are able to pass these savings on to the customer. This in turn makes it economical for the producer to use the service provider as the cost is lower and the service is higher than they can achieve on their own.

One thing the service provider doesn’t want to be doing is to going through reams of data to prepare a thousand invoices each month. And the producer doesn’t want to reward the service provider if the lease rentals are not paid. So it is agreed that the billing for the service will be automated based on the successful payment of any and all lease rentals on behalf of the producer. When a lease rental payment is processed by the service provider the billing for that service will be sent through the People, Ideas & Objects systems, which both the producer and the service provider are using for these purposes, creating an account payable for the producer and an account receivable for the service provider.

In many oil and gas producers you might have needed a whole department to process the accounts payable service fees from the service provider for lease rental payments because of the volume of lease rentals. However, with highly automated systems, and the billing being dependent on just a successful lease rental payments being made, and verified that there are no duplicates, we can be assured that the costs to maintain such a system are minimal. The efficiencies are gained by the producers, the service provider and society itself as the people are involved in more productive use of their time, like the producer building their land and asset base.

This is also a step further than what we discussed recently in terms of what the service provider was using the People, Ideas & Objects applications for. We had discussed that they were being used on behalf of the producer and now we are discussing that they are being used for the service providers purpose. Oracle Fusion Applications and particularly Oracle Financial Management suite are designed to be used in a cloud computing configuration. Whether the service provider would also have their own accounting system is not relevant to this discussion, what is pertinent is that the billing process for the producer remains as efficient as possible and that imputes that these processes have the Oracle Financial Management suite available to the service providers.

A Scenario

It is within the Petroleum Lease Marketplace that we find some of the data elements and characteristics that form the unique culture of the oil and gas industry. Things like the AFE and the working interest distribution, and many others, are a result of the culture of the Joint Operating Committee and these are stored and originated within the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module. The unique nature of these attributes requires that they are not dealt with by generic accounting classifications for application modules. They require specific modules like the Petroleum Lease Marketplace to be built and for that we need to drop down from the Oracle Fusion Applications to the Oracle Fusion Middleware layer.

What we should do therefore is start with the beginning of the process, a sort of asset life cycle, starting with the acquisition of a petroleum lease, the development of partners and forming of an agreement, to the raising of an AFE to drill a well or some other operation to show how the People, Ideas & Objects application is different from other ERP systems.

Capital is king, the 2008 financial crisis is still felt throughout the markets. Many producers are readily available to make a deal to farmout large blocks of land in their shale positions. You negotiate a 32,000 acre 20 well deal to participate in a promising area where the farmor has shot extensive seismic. Participation is at 100% and the farmor has input as to the drilling locations. You will earn an undivided 50% working interest upon completion of the drilling of the 20 well program. You have limited shale capabilities to take on a 20 well program and have promoted another producer to join you who has extensive capabilities in the region. They will participate at 20% to earn a 12.5% interest and provide these capabilities by agreement.

Looking at this scenario from the point of view of the producers who just happen to all be using the People, Ideas & Objects application modules. The leases that are part of the deal that are with the farmor can now be, as a result of the agreement, listed in the companies that are party to the agreement, the farmees. By way of the agreement they would have registered an encumbrance against the leases and lets assume for these purposes that happens coincidental with the agreement. Under the agreement, the costs associated with the lease rentals falls to the farmees. Therefore these leases are copied from one system to the other in a data download. The service provider that we discussed who provides the lease administration services on behalf of the farmee then uploads the lease data to the farmees system and begins the process of managing those leases as part of their administration. As soon as those leases require payment of lease rentals they will be paid, and the billing for the annual services provided by the lease administration service provider will be billed. A similar process will happen for the other farmee in terms of their lease data download however, there will be no lease rental payments made and no lease administration service fees. Those will be billed, at 20% of the total, through the joint venture billing, from the other farmee, the you in this scenario.

Within the Oracle Fusion Middleware suite of tools there are a variety of frameworks that will be used to make this happen. The frameworks that we would use as a minimum for what is discussed above would include, Business Intelligence, Business Process Management, Collaboration, Content Management, Cloud Application Foundation, Data Integration, Oracle Fusion Middleware for Applications, Service Oriented Architecture, SOA Governance, and Transaction Processing.

So one can see even when we step out from the Oracle Fusion Applications we are still able to inherit substantial capabilities in terms of infrastructure from Oracle Fusion Middleware. And that is the promise of Java, building on previous efforts. Oracle has expended great effort in developing Oracle Fusion Middleware. If fact all of Oracle Fusion Applications are derivative from it.

We pick up with the discussion regarding the scenario where you were with a firm that was farming in on a 32,000 acre parcel of land and a 20 well commitment to drill. We now want to discuss the elements of the agreement that has been formed and how the People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specifications Petroleum Lease Marketplace module will use the Oracle Fusion Middleware layer to provide the services to the partners of this agreement.

What has been executed between the three parties to the agreement, the farmor, the farmee (you) and a partner with the capabilities in the shale formations is a traditional farmin agreement complete with accounting and operating procedures. All of the variables that are defined in the agreement and these procedures need to populate the various areas within the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module. A point of interest is that operating decisions require 60% approval for passage which leaves you with de facto control of the operations prior to the point of earning. Once earning has been achieved however, this will be a difficult threshold to cross as it will require almost full consensus amongst the partners on all operations.

The manner in which these operational decisions are made is through the collaborative elements of the “Planning & Deployment Interface” in the Knowledge & Learning module. When a decision is required from the Joint Operating Committee participants, using the Collaboration Framework of Oracle Fusion Middleware as the foundation we will be able to create the necessary collaborative environment to initiate, document, discuss and record the voting of these decisions.

One area that will be new will be the area where the capabilities of the partner who was brought on to provide the experience in the shale area has to be documented. These are listed in the “Capabilities & Commitments Interface” of the Petroleum Lease Marketplace. Before the agreement was signed you had the opportunity to review with their team and look at their Research & Capabilities “Dynamic Capabilities Interface” for the shale capabilities they had and were satisfied, that when those capabilities were available to you in the Knowledge & Learning module through the Joint Operating Committee; they would be more than adequate for the farmin. It was documented in the agreement that these were being made available and that the capabilities would be part of the consideration that is paid to the producer. Some of that consideration is paid in the form of a higher working interest through earning, and established day rates for their engineering and geological staff members. It will be incumbent on the producer who is providing the capabilities to note in their “Capabilities & Commitments Interface” that they are providing these resources to the farmin and what consideration they are earning in exchange for this. These will help both producers in balancing the costs and revenues of developing their capabilities and ensure that they are not over committing their resource base in the years to come.

The agreement itself is not a static document. It might have been that the “Marketplace Interface” was used extensively during the development of the agreement. Changes to the agreement could be done using that forum again. Expanding the scope of the lands or including some equipment to deal with the production from the lands. These are all elements of how the agreement could evolve during the life of the assets. The variables that are stored within the system would change, of course, and provide raw data to most of the modules that operate in the Preliminary Specification. As the agreements are the place of origin of most of the critical data that is used within the oil and gas industry. From working interest distribution scenarios, to methods of accounting, to land and procedural requirements this is where its at.

We now want to discuss the AFE process and how the Petroleum Lease Marketplace of the Preliminary Specification handles the elements of that document. We will also discuss the Oracle Fusion Middleware frameworks that would be used to implement the processes, functionality and features that are discussed.

As we indicated at the beginning of this scenario, capital is king. And you have the resources available to complete the 20 well program within the next drilling season which is consistent with your partners capabilities. It's time to get to work and that involves reviewing the “Dynamic Capabilities Interface” in the Knowledge & Learning module. Which also involves the “Planning & Deployment Interface” which has as part of that interface the AFE. The variables that are used to populate the AFE are derived from the agreement and include the working interest distribution, the participants, the location and the contacts for execution. Other variables such as the budget, also prepared within the “Planning & Deployment Interface,” and are derived from the Partnership Accounting module. Preparation of an AFE therefore is the least problematic in terms of creating the document. The ability to select from pull down menus and options that automatically populate the form are necessary to make the user interface as intuitive as possible. Items such as selecting the well id should automatically populate the partners and the working interest distribution variables.

Now that the form of the AFE is complete the need to have the internal routing of the document for approval is necessary. The various departments need to sign off on all expenditures internally before the AFE is sent for external approval. The document is sent through the process of routing that is managed by the Oracle Middleware Business Process Management framework. There it is sent to the CEO, CFO, COO, Land and Legal department for digital approval. Once all approvals are complete the document will be rerouted back for external distribution. In this case it is only necessary to gain the approval of the partner that we have brought on for their capabilities as they are paying 20% of the costs. However, we are also routing the document to the farmor as the AFE will be used by them to document the 20 well commitment we have under the earning provision of the agreement. As we indicated these producers were using the same People, Ideas & Objects systems that you are using. And as such, this routing is similar to the internal routing and approval process. However, upon approval, verification of the signed AFE’s are circulated to the partners to inform them that the AFE is now a valid cost center and will begin the process of, in this case, drilling the well.

Due to the fact that you and the partner that is bringing in the shale capabilities are both actively involved in drilling these 20 wells. Both of you will be incurring costs on behalf of the joint account. This is consistent with the pooling concept that the People, Ideas & Objects software was built around. That no one producer would fulfill the operator role and that all producers would be drawn into participate in some form or fashion in order to make up for any potential resource shortfalls. Therefore each of you will be participating and incurring costs in unequal proportions to your working interests. What the People, Ideas & Objects system will do each month is conduct an equalization on the participants interests and participation rates to make each other whole during the Joint Venture Billing process. This requires that both producers in this case, however it could involve as many producers as a Joint Operating Committee has, post their costs to the AFE for the month in which they have incurred these costs. Then during the month end process the equalization will be run based on their participation and the total costs incurred by both partners that month, and either compensate them or bill them for the difference to their actual working interest share. This is of course on an AFE by AFE basis.

Lets not forget that part of the pooling concept involves the billing of a producers engineering and geological resources to the joint account. The concept of overhead allowances is eliminated with the operator. The ability of a producer to maintain a technical resource base, when that resource is in such high demand, requires that that base have its own source of revenue. And that is the ability to charge these resources to the joint account for services rendered. Under the terms of the agreement with these partners it is by agreement that the shale capabilities are billed by that partner in such a manner. That however, does not preclude you from doing so as well.

Royalties

I thought that we would spend some time discussing the management of royalties in the Preliminary Specification. It is here in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace along with the Accounting Voucher and Partnership Accounting modules that the royalties are calculated, paid and processed. One of the key determinants of the Preliminary Specification will be the geographical scope of the application. That will determine which jurisdictions the People, Ideas & Objects application modules will calculate, pay and process royalties. If you participate in a remote area and you want all of your areas covered by the application then participation in the community is the manner in which you need to make this happen. If you have production or leases in Alaska then you should assert that Alaska be part of the scope. Don’t assume someone else will participate in the user community and do this for you.

When we talk about royalties we have a myriad different ways in which they are calculated and processed. Although over time many have adopted what could be called generally accepted royalty principles, there are still differences that need to be accounted for. On top of these differences are the systems that are used to calculate the royalties themselves. And let’s be honest Excel does a pretty good job. But that is not the way in which many of these royalty frameworks were designed to be handled. Excel is very labor intensive. From a Gas Cost Allowance (GCA) point of view, no one has implemented an ERP process anywhere within any of the systems in the industry. These royalties are the producers largest cost items. With high commodity prices significant value can be attained by ensuring that the minimum correct royalties are calculated and paid.

It is within the Petroleum Lease Marketplace that the Lease document is stored and therefore the royalty information is captured and stored. The jurisdiction, whether that is Crown, Federal, Freehold, Private or State will have its methods and procedures to calculate royalties on its lands. In most cases these are comprehensive and impose significant levels of Information Technologies be used. Some use the prices that were realized and some use their own pricing models. There are a variety of different ways a unit of production can attract a royalty. Nothing however that can not be handled by a software development capability like that proposed by People, Ideas & Objects. Lets also look at how that compliance is achieved.

Using the division of labor and specialization we will have within each royalty jurisdiction a royalty accounting service provider, or several providers, who specializes in the management of royalties for, in this example, the state of Texas. The only thing these people deal with is Texas production and Texas Railroad Commission for state royalties. They operate on behalf of the hundreds of producers that produce oil and gas in the state of Texas and pay Texas State royalties. Using specialized software developed specifically for the service provider by People, Ideas & Objects they are able to calculate the royalties and ensure that the producers pay their minimum correct royalty. The service provider is also able to keep up with the changes in the Texas royalty administration and ensure that these changes are reflected in the software at the appropriate time on behalf of their clients. Consider that there would be royalty specialist service providers located in each jurisdiction for each royalty that falls within the scope of the Preliminary and subsequent Specifications of the People, Ideas & Objects application modules.

We have certainly reduced the footprint size of the oil and gas producers square footage requirements for office space. Through the process of specialization and the division of labor we have handed off everything from an administrative basis to these service providers to increase the quality of the service, and reduce the overall costs. This is the only proven method of increasing the economic performance of the industry. The alternative is that we continue to build individual silos of fully capable oil and gas producers. A scenario in which only the managers will be happy, and more of an operational myth than reality.

The act of paying royalties is an individual producer's responsibility. I believe this holds true in the majority of jurisdictions. Therefore the royalties are calculated on the producer's share and not on the Joint Operating Committee’s production. Nonetheless the production is derived from the Joint Operating Committee and that involves the Material Balance Report. This discussion will deal with the production end of the royalty calculation and the tie in to the Accounting Voucher and Partnership Accounting modules Material Balance Report.

First let's revisit the manner in which production accounting is handled in the Preliminary Specification. It is through our favorite tools of specialization and the division of labor that we have looked to service providers to provide these production accounting services to the Joint Operating Committees. Being specialized in a geographical region the production accounting service provider is possibly located within the region to have a hands on interaction with the operation. Working for the many Joint Operating Committees that may be located in the region the service provider may as a result work indirectly on behalf of many producers production accounting.

Therefore looking at this situation from a reasonably large producers point of view. They may have upwards of a few hundred geographically based production accounting service providers and twenty to thirty royalty accounting service providers depending on the number of jurisdictions they operate in. The complexity in dealing with these many providers is not the issue as much as it is the size of the producer. It should be restated here that the basis of the billing of these services should be on some positive action based transaction. In the case of the production accounting service provider it would be on the basis of original production for the month. Then if there was no production for that month, then no charges would be incurred, etc. The same situation should hold for the royalty accounting service provider, however, you do not want it to depend on the calculation or payment of a royalty.

Within the Accounting Voucher and Partnership Accounting modules resides the Material Balance Report. It is a report to provide for the material balancing of any facility for oil and gas purposes. We have discussed in those modules how the volumetric information is reported and managed within the Preliminary Specification. To review the discussion to date please review the Material Balance Report in the Partnership Accounting and Accounting Voucher modules. Royalties is one of the areas that will be using the outputs of the information from the Material Balance Report. Production for each producer is allocated through the report as one of the outputs of the process. Therefore this is the input into the royalty calculations for the various jurisdictions that apply to that production. Taking note of any swaps or inventory this volume should be the final production volume for royalty purposes. However, the endless process of amendments begins and will no doubt carry on for at least 30 - 60 days before everything settles down. The royalty calculation being a nature of revenue less costs times royalty rate equals royalty, these production volume changes do not require any human interaction until such time as the point the royalties are due.

In terms of paying royalties on the appropriate volume of production, the Material Balance Report will be a key aspect of this control.

The prices that the royalties will be based on is what we will be discussing. It is critical that the producer pays the royalty on the net price at the wellhead for all of the commodities that are produced. How these prices are calculated in the People, Ideas & Objects application is the point of discussion.

The first point I should make is that some jurisdictions use their own pricing scenarios. Provinces in Canada calculate the average gas and NGL prices for each producer to pay royalties on. They also use standard costs for gas processing. These are excluded from this discussion as they are unique to the Canadian oil and gas producer and require substantial software development commitments from the Canadian producers that may preclude them from participating in the Preliminary Specification. Please review the July 28, 2011 blogpost “Budgets and Canadians.” (innovation-in-oil-and-gas.blogspot.ca—2011_07_01_archive.html)

In most other jurisdictions it is the net realized price that is used for calculating the royalty. We’ll use a gas contract to describe the scenario that we are using here. For simplicity we will assume there are no liquids. Going back to the Material Balance Report we see that the gas that is sold under the contract is all of the gas that is produced by company A in the region that is serviced by gas plant B. This gas is aggregated from over 50 wells and is collected over, in some instances, a substantial distance. None of the gathering or facilities is owned by the producer and they pay custom processing and gathering fees for these services. The gas contract is to an industrial consumer who is situated across the state and the point of sale is the delivery into their facility.

The need therefore is for this producer to pay for the transportation and processing of this gas to the point of sale, the consumers front door. The royalty price will be what the consumer pays less the costs of the processing and transportation to get it to them, netted back to the wellhead. Turning to the Material Balance Report each production stream must have a sales contract and transportation contract from the point of origin to the point of sale. This is a requirement of the system. Each of these contracts support the production stream within the Material Balance Report, without a contract the Material Balance Report will not balance, just like in the real world. Therefore all of the information that is needed to determine the royalty price is going to be available from the various Material Balance Reports, where they should be available.

Taking the production from a well by well perspective the prices that will be received at each wellhead might be slightly different since the distance that some of the wells gathering might be materially different and therefore would pay more in gathering. The royalties are going to take the calculations from the point of view of the wellhead and begin the royalty calculations on that basis. These prices are derived from the Material Balance Report based on the contracts that are necessary to make that document operate and balance. Changes in prices and volumes do occur and that will lead to an amendment process within the Material Balance Report. Recall that the Material Balance Report is part of the Accounting Voucher module in the People, Ideas & Objects application. Any changes in the material balance must also correspond to the changes within the Accounting Voucher, and an Accounting Voucher can be for a producer or a Joint Operating Committee. So a volumetric change will recalculate the total custom processing and revenue receipts and a change in custom processing fees will affect total custom processing and net pricing to all the producers in that system. Making a change in one of the systems has an effect in the other. To change the price the producer received in the month can’t be done in the general ledger, it can only be done through the gas sales, custom processing or gathering contracts.

We’ve used a simple example of how the costs were netted back to determine the price used for royalties. Today we are going to show how the Preliminary Specification handles Gas Cost Allowance (GCA) and the costs of operations. This example will apply when a producer has a financial interest in the gathering or processing facilities that are used to carry the gas they produce. The GCA allows for the costs of capital and operations of those facilities to be charged based on its annual throughput.

Operation of those assets whether they are a gas plant or a gathering system will have their own Joint Operating Committee. However, the first thing to determine is what is an eligible capital item for GCA purposes. Not all the capital is necessarily allowable to be charged as a deduction for GCA purposes. There needs to be within the accounts of a producer a way in which you can tag an AFE with the designation that these costs would be eligible for GCA. Either that or through the chart of accounts, globally select the accounts that are eligible. From there the costs of capital, both a return on investment and depreciation, can be calculated for the year.

The operating costs associated with those assets will have been aggregated under that Joint Operating Committees accounts as well. These costs are eligible to be deducted and are included in the total costs of the facility. Each facility has to be accounted for on its own. A gathering system will be calculated so that there is a cost factor for the gathering system alone. If there are separate functional units within a gas plant then each of the functional units should be accounted for as separate calculations for GCA purposes. Calculations for throughput need to be based on the gas or liquid equivalent value. If the functional unit in a gas plant is a deep cut facility then the output will be in liquids and a gathering system will be based on the gas volume. The results of these calculations provide you with an amount of GCA to deduct from the royalty price for any product that is processed or gathered through that facility in a month.

Automation of these calculations is the purpose in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module. The calculations of royalties for the current year are based on estimates of GCA using last year's factors. However, that does not mean they are not a labor intensive activity. All of the factors that go into a calculation are already stored within the People, Ideas & Objects applications. The Material Balance Report being the key to providing the production volumes and throughput at each functional unit. What is needed is the “Gas Cost Allowance Worksheet Interface” that aggregates these variables for the Revenue and Royalty Accountant for them to prepare their calculations for actual GCA, equalizations and estimates.

The “Gas Cost Allowance Worksheet Interface” provides the accountant with the ability to look at each functional unit as a separate facility. The interface will pull in the the producers variables of the AFE’s and cost centres that are pertinent to that facility and the throughput information from the Material Balance Report. These AFE and cost centres information are live. Then the accountant can organize the information in the manner that the calculation is automatically populated with the current information from the system. The accuracy and timeliness of this information, and the format of the data would be such that the production of GCA values for each month of the year would be possible. The outcome of the “Gas Cost Allowance Worksheet Interface” would be the value that is used to deduct for royalty purposes.

Now each producer's working interests in the various gathering and processing facilities are possibly different then their working interests in the producing property. Therefore these calculations are not done on a Joint Operating Committee basis but at the level of each producer. This will continue to be one of the areas where time is spent by the royalty accounting service providers. Having people who specialize in the administration of royalties will help to ensure that the producer pays the minimum correct royalties.

So far we have used the Oracle Fusion Applications Financial Management suite in unique ways within the Petroleum Lease Marketplace. It provides for the accounting and billing services to the producers, Joint Operating Committees and service providers that are involved in the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module. The Oracle Database is fully employed as well as there are many attributes, or data elements, that are stored within the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module. From the unique strategy of the Joint Operating Committee, the Lease, the agreements with all of their variables, the royalty information and data about the service providers. What is needed now is an understanding of how the unique attributes of a royalty infrastructure for an oil and gas system will be put together.

In Oracle Fusion Middleware there is Oracle’s Business Process Management Suite (BPM) which is a collection of tools and previously defined processes that developers use to configure for specific processes. The royalty process is an ideal candidate for the use of these tools. Based on the Oracle Database, Java and XML Oracle BPM is a front end, or high level graphical user interface that users can relate to in terms of the process that is mapped. Using data models provided from PPDM and the Oracle Fusion Application Suites, augmented by the People, Ideas & Objects data model, data storage and integrity will be the highest that can be achieved.

Key to the Oracle Fusion BPM tools is the dependence on the user. People, Ideas & Objects being user based developments need to have tools that can interface directly with the user community. Having them learn Java, XML and SQL just won’t work. Reviewing a process from the business logic point of view, ensuring it is consistent with their needs and seeing a step by step basis of that logic assures them of the accuracy and the possibilities of what more they could have. All of this would sound like the end product would be bloated and slow. That’s not the case as the technologies used are the same as if the process was being hand crafted. The result is that Oracle Fusion BPM’s output is fully scalable and appropriate for a cloud computing distribution model, and the manner in which People, Ideas & Objects intends to use these processes.

Calculating royalties for multiple jurisdictions, each with their own nuance of how those royalties are calculated are well within the scope of what the People, Ideas & Objects application development objective are. This becomes a simple if-else-then statement to calculate the royalty on the basis of the specific jurisdiction. One of the important determinations in this is what jurisdictions are we developing for. This question is answered in our scope, and is one of the reasons producers should subscribe to this software development. To make sure we are covering all of your royalty jurisdictions. Maintaining the up-to-date requirements of each of the royalty regimes will be an ongoing part of our responsibilities. However, I would reiterate our value proposition is that we would be doing this on behalf of all of the producers in the industry. The one time cost allocated over our entire subscribing producers will make these changes incidental to the innovative oil and gas producer. Specialization and the division of labor works in terms of your software development team as well as your service providers.

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.

Management's Role in this Transition

The key deliverable that would be the outcome of the development of the Petroleum Lease Marketplace of the Preliminary Specification. Would be the removal of management control by the current bureaucracy and replace it with the “vanishing hand” of the marketplace. The representation of the marketplace would of course be through the “Marketplace Interface” that we have been discussing here. In this quotation, taken from Professor Richard Langlois’ book “The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism” he reflects on this point.

In highly developed economies, moreover, a wide variety of capabilities is already available for purchase on ordinary markets, in the form of either contract inputs or finished products. When markets are thick and market-supporting institutions plentiful, even systemic change may proceed in large measure through market coordination. At the same time, it may also come to pass that the existing network of capabilities that must be creatively destroyed (at least in part) by entrepreneurial change is not in the hands of decentralized input suppliers but is in fact concentrated in existing large firms. The unavoidable flip-side of seeing firms as possessed of capabilities, and therefore as accretions of habits and routines, is that such firms are quite as susceptible to institutional inertia as is a system of decentralized economic capabilities. Economic change has in many circumstances come from small innovative firms relying on their own capabilities and those available in the market rather than from existing firms with ill-adapted internal capabilities. Chapter 5 will reconstruct the New Economy of the late 20th and early 21st centuries along exactly these lines, once again adding nuance and historical texture. If the antebellum period reflected the Invisible Hand of market coordination, and if the late 19th and early 20th centuries saw the rise of the Visible Hand of managerial coordination, then the New Economy is the era of the Vanishing Hand. p . 14

One could certainly accuse me of being anti-management. They and I have had an interesting battle since the discovery of using the Joint Operating Committee was the key to administrative efficiency in the innovative and profitable oil and gas producer. Our other key discovery, that software defines and supports the organization, and therefore to change the organization requires that we change the software first. Management have distorted this knowledge by realizing, if they never changed the software, their domain would never be challenged. Using this knowledge to seal their future. But we know many things from our review of Langlois, Coase and Chandler; specifically.

• Management have no stake in the firm. 

• If a crisis were to strike a firm, the management would resume elsewhere. 

• It is the investor and debt holders who will shoulder the costs.

• Management currently hold the reigns, and are mindful that their options may lay elsewhere. 

• Ownership, in the same fashion as the Merchants need to start over. 

• Starting over begins with supporting People, Ideas & Objects and the Community of Independent Service Providers.

• Chandler noted that management have failed before. 

• During the great depression. 

• A time when government had to increase its involvement in the economy.

• Management may not see the more global picture, and therefore, may fail again.

The knowledge that management have in not changing the software is an extension of their monopoly on the tacit knowledge of how to get things done. They know that the tacit knowledge can be held by bureaucracies or markets. And have ensured that no tacit knowledge capable markets gain a foothold to challenge their franchise. Making the entire People, Ideas & Objects idea an exercise in futility, or a call to action for the ownership class of the oil and gas industry.

Much knowledge - including, importantly, much knowledge about production - is tacit and can be acquired only through a time-consuming process of learning by doing. Moreover, knowledge about production is often essentially distributed knowledge: that is to say, knowledge that is only mobilized in the context of carrying out a multi-person productive task, that is not possessed by any single agent, and that normally requires some sort of qualitative coordination - for example, through direction and command - for its efficient use. p. 359

The assertion by the bureaucracy that the oil and gas service industry vendors and suppliers are greedy and lazy is as much self serving and designed to ensure that the markets don’t develop and compete with management. What is needed is the market supporting efforts of an innovative oil and gas industry that depends on a dynamic and effective “Marketplace Interface” in the Petroleum Lease, Resource and Financial Marketplace.

I think that what we have learned about capabilities is valuable and applies to the “Marketplace Interface” that we have detailed here. That “knowledge, skills and experience” are the basic ingredients of capabilities and these fit well within the Petroleum Lease Marketplace module. If we at People, Ideas & Objects could be so bold as to assert that we include “ideas” with knowledge, skills and experience then we are starting to really build on these concepts.

The other aspect of what we have discussed is the role the oil and gas industry has in making the market supporting infrastructure. This includes standards and, as we have discussed, software like People, Ideas & Objects to support the markets and the marketplace. The choice between the marketplace and the management as to who will control the industry in the future has already been made. The Internet demands the decentralized methods of the market will rule the day. Just don’t tell the current management as they fight to hang on to their last few moments of control.

When a modular product is imbedded in a decentralized production network, benefits also appear on the supply side (Langlois and Robertson 1992). For one thing, a modular system opens the technology up to a much wider set of capabilities. Rather than being limited to the internal capabilities of even the most capable Chandlerian corporation, a modular system can benefit from the external capabilities of the entire economy. External capabilities are an important aspect of the “extent of the market,” which encompasses not only the number of possible traders but also the cumulative skill, experience, and technology available to participants in the market. Moreover, because it can generate economies of substitution (Garud and Kumaraswamy 1995) or external economies of scope (Langlois and Robertson 1995), a modular system is not limited by the weakest link in the chain of corporate capabilities but can avail itself of the best modules the wider market has to offer. Moreover, an open modular system can spur innovation, since, in allowing many more entry points for new ideas, it can create what Nelson and Winter (1977) call rapid trial-and-error learning. From the perspective of the present argument, however, the crucial supply side benefit of a modular production network is that it provides an additional mechanism of buffering. p. 70

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.