Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Customer connections project report

395 views

Published on

A master project in Systems Oriented Design at the Oslo School of Architecture and Design in 2013. Partner is ABB.
Students: Amra Osmanovik and Hilde Dybdahl Johannesen

Published in: Design
  • Be the first to comment

Customer connections project report

  1. 1. c u s t o m e r c o n n e c t i o n
  2. 2. AMra Osmanovik Hilde Dybdahl Johannessen Interaction design service design With one year of studies in interaction design at the Oslo School of Architec- ture and Design, Amra has developed her competence for working with in- teraction within tangible products and screenbased design. For this project she wanted to challenge herself with working on complex systems and learn new methods for using system oriented design in a different industry. With a master focusing on the cross-sec- tion of Service and Systems-Orient- ed Design, Hilde aims to get a better understanding of complex systems, especially as they relate to organiza- tional challenges. And since she is from Stavanger it was mandatory to choose the project related to oil and gas.
  3. 3. A Systems Oriented Design Project for the ABB c u s t o m e r c o n n e c t i o n
  4. 4. CONTENTS Initial phase Stavanger Research Synthesis Integrated Operations Giga map Insights Interview with Entrepreneur Subsurface support centre Interview with IT Statoil Pain-points Oil and gas production Hierarchy on platform Interviews Insights Concept development Problem definition Tool content Content quality Information structure 10 14 16 34 36 39 42 20 23 24 26 54 56 60 62 64
  5. 5. Reflection Concept Systems thinking & design Source critique Sources Wireframe of tool Finding no 1 Finding no 2 Value proposition Basic functionality User Implementation Concept assessment SWOT 91 96 97 68 71 73 77 79 80 82 84 86
  6. 6. 8 Initial phase
  7. 7. 9 Throughout the entire Systems Oriented Design Course Fall 2013 we have been working upon a single project that was chosen to enhance our skills in dealing with designing for complexity. The project was to be conducted in collaboration with an external partner, and we chose to collaborate with ABB (the oil and gas division), more specifically with their User Centred Design group situated at Helsfyr. ABB is a huge international company, it has close to 150, 000 employees and approx 2200 of them are situated in Norway. Their core expertise lies within power and automation systems, which they provide to a variety of different industries. During this project we worked with a part of ABB that delivers solutions to the offshore oil and gas industry on the Norwegian Continental shelf. We chose ABB as a collaborative partner as it seemed an ideal opportunity to work with extremely complex systems, and to apply a design approach to a field dominated by engineers. Of the initial project proposals from ABB/UCD we decided to pursue one that allowed us to investigate the system surrounding operations within the oil and gas industry. However multiple iterations throughout the project led us in a rather different direction. This report aims to describe the process that made us (seemingly) deviate from the initial task of giga mapping Integrated Operations. The systems, equipment and tools used to operate an oil and gas facility are becoming increasingly complex. The demand for energy efficiency and production optimisation has introduced tools that greatly increase the interdependencies between different components. New technology, such as wireless devices, provides access to information which was previously hidden to the users. At the same time, organizational changes has introduced a different form of complexity as people are located far from the actual facility and need to collaborate across locations, technical disciplines and companies. The task is to create a GIGA-map of the electrical, instrument, control and telecommunication installation at an oil and gas facility, including the different users and their relations. The process and the result is expected to be used to challenge engineers in how such complex installations are designed, and through this foster new thinking and innovation. Project Proposal
  8. 8. 10 Integrated Operations a new approach in the oil and gas industry Integrated Operations* (IO) is a term used to describe a new work method within the field of oil and gas. It consists of multidisciplinary col- laboration and global access to real time data in order to optimize the production, operations and management of an oil field. The purpose is to create “seamless cooperation between different parts of the organization” (IO center definition), including collaboration between offshore and onshore personnel and between the company and its suppliers/sub-suppliers. In essence it aims to give the right information to the right people at the right time to improve decision making. Integrated Operations was enabled by new technologies during the late 90’s, such as bandwidth access in the North Sea and real time video conferencing. These technolo- gies enable communication and data sharing independent of geographical location. This means that an offshore operator can get direct advise from expert personnel onshore (support centres) immediately should a complication arise. Thus improving the decisions made by the offshore operator to ensure a safe and stable production that reaches its target rate of produced barrels pr./day/year. The economic potential of implementing Integrated Operations is estimated to be over 250 billion nok (in Net Present Value) on the Norwegian Continental Shelf alone. Between 2002 to 2009 Shell gained 5 billion US dollars by utilizing IO/smart field methods (Business value from intelligent fields). Due to maturing oil fields on the Norwegian Continental shelf it is increasingly important to optimize operations. As a reservoir is depleted the price pr. barrel will increase, and methods must be used to ensure profitabili- ty. Automating processes and moving more personnel onshore are key trends within this sector, and are heavily dependent on the im- plementation and use of Integrated Operations. This movement is creating even more interde- pendencies in an already complex industry, by adding additional actors and disciplines to the equation. Therefore we started the project by zooming out from the initial project proposal in order to get a better overview of the oil and gas ecosystem. *Also known as Smart Field, E-field, intelligent Field and Field of the future.
  9. 9. 11 Collaboration between onshore and offshore.
  10. 10. Giga map no 2.1 These maps were created to give us a better understanding of the oil and gas system. Which actors operated within it, where ABB fit in and what were the essential challenges in the industry. Insights: Huge variety of different methods to produce oil and gas. Few universal standards. Recovery of oil is difficult and normally only 40% of the petroleum is extracted from the reservoir.
  11. 11. 14 white space This is basically everything that was written on the map.
  12. 12. 15 This map was meant to facilitate a discussion/workshop at ABB regarding the people and processes involved in oil and gas production. The intention was to place the people and processes on the map in order to gain an understanding of how the system worked. However at the end of the meeting the map was nearly blank. When asking questions such as “how is the oil extracted?” and “what must be done to produce it?” we received very little and quite vague information. This has been a recurring phenomena throughout the entire project. When inquiring about information we believe to be basic we have been met with “this is not my area of expertise” and consequently hit a dead-end information wise. AREAS OIL & GAS PRODUCTION WHERE ABB OFFERS SOLUTIONS HYDROCARBON RECOVERY EXPLORATION TRANSPORTATION MONITORING SEPARATION DATA ANALYSIS GAS COMPRESSION & DE-HYDRATION MAINTENANCE TOUCHPOINT PROCESS USERS ACTOR TYPICAL PROCESS BRIEF DELIVERY COMMUNICATION FLOWLINES giga map no 3.0 White space Insights: The production process is not as straight forward as we had anticipated. Nor is it common knowledge within the oil and gas sector. There is a general lack of overview of the oil and gas system. Engineers create systems without knowing who the end-user actually is. The blank map doesn’t necessarily illustrate lack of knowledge among the participants, but rather an unwillingness to go beyond the boundaries of their expertise. Expertise seems to raise the “knowledge threshold”.
  13. 13. 16 Insights The oil and gas industry is incredibly complex, in the sense that it consists of a multitude of interconnected actors, processes and influential variables. Due to increasingly advanced technology the processes and systems within are becoming ever more sophisticated and dependent upon expertise knowledge. And as Gharajedaghi stated, “As systems become more sophisticated the reality of interdependency becomes more and more pronounced.” This necessitates a thorough understanding of the causality within the system in order to improve it. primary phase Over 400 000 data points are collected each day at a single rig. Therefore it is difficult to know which data is valuable and how to make it actionable. The systems surrounding the oil and gas production are complex and have created the need for specialization within all the different areas, causing a fractal system with silos & divisions. This makes it hard for any individual to obtain an overview. Example: During interviews it has been very hard to get the interview objects to talk about areas outside of their specific discipline. As illustrated on the map on the previous page. It also became apparent that no one quite knows who the end user is - the system engineers at ABB develop systems based on spec- ifications delivered by EPCs (Engineer- ing, Procurement & Construction firm) that have gotten their own specifications from yet another contractor. Lack of overview/expertise A cost controller within a major subsea supplier stated that their was no real connection between herself and the construction crew (of a subsea project). However the basis for all budgeting/ revenue withdrawal within cost control is determined by progress reports and progress data sent from sub-contractors and their construction crew. Not only will their progress affect the cost control unit, but also the format and accuracy with which they measure progress will have an impact on cost control. non-obvious Interdependencies complex & demanding industry data amount
  14. 14. 17 ? No one seems to know who the end users of the products/systems actually are.
  15. 15. 18 research
  16. 16. 19 Based on the insights accumulated in the previous project phase we decided to zoom in and gain a more detailed understanding of key processes and users within oil and gas production. This would then function as the basis for interviews and continued investigation during our field trip to Stavanger.
  17. 17. 20 We created a giga map showcasing the process fundamentals (no 4.1), but have decided to highlight the basic process within this report to give the reader a brief introduction. The oil and gas is extracted through several different steps as illustrated to the right (this showcases the sequence of a FPSO). These steps are affected by external as well as internal forces and will vary throughout the fields life-cycle. As a reservoir matures fundamental charac- teristics will change and therefore require different methods to continue producing oil. It typically goes through three stages. The first stage is free flowing, meaning that the well fluids will naturally flow up to the surface due to reservoir pressure. The second phase requires Increased Oil Recovery techniques such as water re-injection in order to continue production. The third stage (if the operator doesn’t just retire the reservoir) will need Enhanced Oil Recovery techniques (includes chemicals injections to free petroleum from the reservoir pores) in order to continue producing petroleum at a profitable rate. reservoir A reservoir is an area of porous rock filled with petroleum that has a solid cap rock on top that traps the oil and gas. The gas will be at the top of the reservoir while water will be at the bottom and oil will be in- between. Petroleum = mixture of gas and liquid hydrocarbons Well fluids = the mixture of petroleum, water and solids that are pumped up from the reservoir. FPSO = Floating Production Storage Offloading reservoir Pressure Pressure of the fluids confined in the reservoir rock. gas, oil, water, ratio Ratio of oil, water and gas within the well fluids. permeability Porosity that enable liquid to pass through the reservoir formation. Petroleum distribution The location of hydrocarbons within the reservoir. specific gravity Ratio of the density of the petroleum in comparison to water. The mixture of liquids/solids (viscos- ity, impurities etc.) through well. well fluids Mixture of non-liquid elements that are dispersed in the well fluids. Solids Oil & gas production zoom on processes
  18. 18. 21 through pipes The well fluids are transport- ed through pipelines and risers up to the platform. This process can be aided by gas lift to reduce specific gravity of well fluids. The flow may be obstructed by clogging in the pipelines typically caused by wax or hydrates. Blowouts Uncontrollable bursts of high pres- sure oil/gas from well. sand erosion Wear on pipelines caused by sand being transported through pipeline. slugging Uneven distribution of gas & liquids in pipelines causing “plugs”. hydrates Formation of crystalline water based structures resembling ice. clogging Wax accumulation in pipelines that minimizes pipe diameter. multiphase flowline Pipeline with a combination of oil and gas. ssv Subsea Safety Valve that protects platform against blow outs. choke valves Valve that regulates/encourages oil fluid velocity (pipeline flow). separation After being brought up to the rig the well fluids must be separated into pure water, gas and oil. The water is then used onboard or returned to the sea. Gas must be completely dried to avoid hydrates during transport. Produced water conditioning Methods of rinsing water after sepa- ration to comply with regulations. gas dehydration Removes remaining liquids to avoid hydrate formation during transport. flaring The burning of excess gas due to over-pressurization in system. Oscillations Variations in the stock and flow of various well fluids. coalescence Injecting gas near wellhead to re- duce specific gravity of well fluids. de-mulsifiers Separates oil/water by mechanical or electrostatic processes. gravity separation Separates oil, water, gas, solids. Oil/ gas rises to the top, water sinks. subsea well The oil and gas is extracted through a well mounted on a template on the surface of the seabed. The wellhead enables operators to control the flow by altering the valve openings. There are usually multiple wells strategically placed on a reservoir to aid recovery. gas-injection Injecting gas in reservoir to increase the pressure. gas-lift Injecting gas near wellhead to re- duce specific gravity of well fluids. ESP Electrical submersible pump that pumps well fluids up from well. Meor Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery, chemicals wash oil from rock pores. water-reinjection Water is injected back into well to increase pressure and alter flow. hydrofracturing Mixture of water and sand is inject- ed at high pressure into well bore to increase permeability. gas, oil, water, ratio Ratio of oil, water and gas within the well fluids.
  19. 19. 22 Blueprint Blueprint of Statfjord rig to facilitate a discussion/workshop with an offshore worker. The map helped identify different areas of responsibility based on the geographical wherabouts of the user in question.
  20. 20. 23 Operator and maintenance manager Catering/hotel manager Head of platform HMS coordinator Marine- and logistics manager Deck and stockDeck and crane Process Mechanic Maintenance manager Electrician and instrument technician Operational support Process Automation Electrician Hierarchy On platform
  21. 21. 24 Interviews HEad of IO During this interview we were given a more thorough introduction to integrated Operations and how ABB contributes to its development. ABB delivers a variety of products and services within the field of IO from onshore consulting to control and safety systems. Their focus is primarily from the wellhead to export (IO stops with the hydrocarbons). This is because they wish to focus on their core competencies. Also, going beyond this area is the domain of other divisions/actors that operate with totally different datasets and different business models (such as reservoir management). The ultimate vision of the digital oil field (IO) is to bring decision loops from production and reservoir together. This is the area with the biggest potential of value, but it is further away from ABB operations. Previously there have been attempts to make these parts collaborate, but their business models were completely different so that didn’t work out. The complexity within IO is largely due to multiple the multiple users involved. Originally IO gave people the ability to work across location and disciplines because the data was the same, the quality was high enough and the data was time synced. The next phase of IO is about involving the suppliers even more. Another interesting topic was that of aligning supply (production) and demand (trading). Shell is doing that to a certain degree with swing production at Ormen lange. That is why they have a weather forecast in their control room. Gas can’t be stored, and they sell gas to England where the gas prices are highly affected by the weather. However a lot of exploration and production companies do not have the whole value chain (so they can’t be tactical about downstream operations). And since stock value is unpredictable the general principle is that a barrel today is more valuable today than tomorrow (you could have a crack in the market). at ABB Method: Interview with transcript
  22. 22. 25 This interview was a more product focused introduction to what ABB offers in the context of integrated operations as well as comments on our process map (giga map no 4.2). Interdependencies within the production process were thoroughly highlighted. Oscillations in the separation system could have dire affects for the entire process, in addition to flaring and production loss it could potentially result in shut-downs that are estimated to cost approx 5-25 million nok an hour. Another key piece of information from this interview was the segregation between onshore and offshore and between production and reservoir management. They care about their own areas of responsibilities and don’t actually give much thought to the divisions operating around them. This segregation is enhanced by the knowledge divide of onshore and offshore personnel (analytic vs. tacit). And the creation of tribal cultures on the different platforms that result in differing terminology being used depending on the platform they are working on. This is problematic when offshore personnel must collaborate with a multitude of different platforms. Engineer Condition monitoring In this interview we had the opportunity to gain knowledge from a highly experienced expert within the field of asset management (equipment maintenance). There has been a revolution within this field due to IO, where predictive analytics can be used to determine the “health” of the equipment (known as condition monitoring), thereby increasing its lifetime as well as reducing the chance of unexpected shut-downs. The promise of increased uptime is incredibly important within the oil and gas industry and the suppliers who can provide this have a significant competitive edge. However there is a drawback to some of the IO methods, especially the ones trying to combine data from different sources. During the interview we were told that nuances in data could be lost when making it compatible with other types of data. Some data would only be gathered once a second while data from rotary equipment might be as dense as 5000 images per second. By combining these data sets valuable information might be ignored, thus reducing the foundation for decision making. Another key insight from this interview was the divide between asset management and production management. engineer IO Method: Interview using pre-made giga map (4.2) Method: Interview using blank map (no 5.0)
  23. 23. 26 Insights Secondary phase Operations is concerned about the maintenance and (obviously) operations of the rig. They try to prevent equipment from failing and have the responsibility for executing the tasks at hand. Their goals and incentives are focused upon reducing costs and increasing efficiency. Reservoir management aims to optimize the recovery/lifetime of the reservoir. They operate in a very analytical manner, using data from multiple reservoirs to simulate the effects of different oil recovery techniques. Production tries to increase the flow of petroleum and reduce flow variations in order to optimize production capacity. These different disciplines are interde- pendent, what production does will affect operations and reservoir management, yet there is a general lack of collabora- tion between the “disciplines”. Operations management Production management reservoir management different objectives
  24. 24. 27 If production management succeeds in increasing production, the workload for operations is consequently increased.
  25. 25. 28 Typically tacit knowledge (top) vs. analytical knowledge (bottom).
  26. 26. 29 In addition to being divided into different areas of responsibility and expertise the oil and gas industry is characterized by a “knowledge divide” between the onshore and offshore personnel. Offshore personnel. Typically have a tacit/experience based knowledge. It is practical, related to the specific oil field and is concerned about what happens. Onshore personnel. Are more analytical/ research based. Their knowledge is general and can be applied to different oil fields, it is more abstract and preoc- cuppied with the why. Tacit vs analytical knowledge Lack of industry overview makes it difficult to predict who will use a system, and even more difficult to assess who might actually have value of the system. Example: Performance monitoring is a system that enables users to evaluate how a well is performing, this might be complimentary to condition monitoring systems yet ABB is unsure of who would gain most value from this type of system. user Another interesting finding from the interviews is that there seems to be little collaboration between production (supply) and trading/sales (demand) in the offshore sector. Despite a volatile price market production rarely adjusts to suit the actual market demand. Example: Gas is very difficult to store hence it must be sold/distributed imme- diately. This can result in excess supply, Unlike onshore installations that can be shut down at a whim, offshore rigs must continuously produce in order to avoid problems (hydrates etc.) that occur during downtime. Consequently production and operations are eager to produce at a high level, despite market saturation (which makes it difficult for sales to achieve the desired price pr barrel/anticipated profit). Offshore production has to operate on a real time basis, this means decisions must be taken immediately. Onshore production management & well devel- opment have much longer decision cycles (ranging from days to years). The difference in decision cycles can be a foundation for conflict between offshore and onshore parties. Decisions regarding work agendas are made onshore, but executed and prioritized offshore. This may cause friction between onshore and offshore personnel as the reasons for why a task must be done is not always obvious (or reasonable). It is crucial for the onshore operators and support team to have an adequate situational awareness to make the best decisions possible. decision making supply and demand
  27. 27. 30 The decision to focus efforts from the wellhead and up is based upon ABBs existing operations rather than their customers needs.
  28. 28. 31 Attempts have been made to combine reservoir data with production data to optimize total oil recovery, however they have been unsuccessful largely due to different business models. This begs the question whether the business models are flawed when they prevent, arguably, some of the ventures with the highest economic potential. The scope of IO at ABB spans from the wellhead to export. The main reason is that this is closer to ABBs core compe- tencies and operations. This might be a good strategy for ABB, but is it what their customers actually need when the biggest value of IO is believed to lie within the integration of reservoir and production management? New technologies have enabled data quality that was previously impossible, allowing experts to read ever finer nuances within the data. However the question is whether it would be better to reduce the data quality in order to compare it with other data sets? Due to the vast amount of interdependen- cies within the system the data might be more valuable put in context than being separately analysed by different expert groups. differing business models Integrated operations at ABB Data quality
  29. 29. 32 stavanger
  30. 30. 33 The previous phase gave us a better overview of specific processes and ABB’s perspective on Integrated Operations. To gain a broader understanding of IO we went to Stavanger to get a different perspective on the matter. This was acquired through interviews and observations with ABB’s potential customers and partners. This trip resulted in several project pivots, causal loop diagrams, identification of major pain-points within the system, concept generation based on these and a giga map that defined the direction for the rest of our project.
  31. 31. 34 Consultant, founder & ceo Our first meeting in Stavanger was with Egil Josefson a highly experienced actor within the field of oil and gas. He has worked within a number of different companies and sectors in the industry, among them Haliburton and he was also the founder and CEO of PTC and SIEM wis. As such his perspective on the industry was considerably broader than what we had met previously during the project. Throughout the interview it became apparant that despite the industry being technology heavy many of the recurring issues and problems came down to basic human factors. Despite being an expert himself (petro chemicals and data) he believed that it was the extreme expertise within the field that often caused trouble. With expertise comes disciplinary pride, and although this is not a problem in itself it seems to narrow the experts focus, making them believe that their discipline is by far the most important. This not only impairs multidisciplinary collaboration, but makes the experts less attuned to vital interdependencies within the system. Expertise also leads to disciplinary integration, where people are more interested in optimizing expertise within their discipline than optimizing cross disciplinary results. An example of this is the expert who didn’t believe in data integration as it would reduce the quality of the Egil josefson domain data. Furthermore expertise creates a resistance to change. People don’t want to loose face so they will avoid areas they are uncertain about. This also results in an inability to ask if they don’t actually understand each- other, this being particularly problematic in multidisciplinary projects. Another recurring problem within the industry is sub-optimization. The different divisions are benchmarked according to their own performance, not to the performance of the whole. In that sense a division might succeed despite the company going bankrupt. This is one of the root causes to the lack of goal alignment within the system. Another important cause is that companies consist of individuals. They have their own goals and own motivations for what they do. They’re just people. They want to go home at four o’clock and they want to get the raise, despite sacrificing long term company goals to do so. And finally, this industry is characterized by a lack of empathy for the customers (operator) needs. They (suppliers) focus on what will benefit them the most rather than their customers. Method: Interview with transcript
  32. 32. 35 “It’s all about the human factors.”
  33. 33. 36 subsurface support centre We were also so fortunate that we were able to get a tour around Statoils Subsea Support Centre based in Forus. This centre focuses primarily on drilling and has a multidisciplinary team of experts that advise operators on platforms and direct support centres about issues regarding drilling. They have access to all the data from the different fields that Statoil operates and are therefore able to create best practice guidelines that they collect within an internal search engine/ site dubbed ‘Casebook”. The centre has no real decision authority, but operators must have good reason if they choose to ignore the advise provided by the support Statoil centre. Creating sufficient situational awareness is a key priority. Another pressing matter is the visualization of data. Data is not visually intuitive, and it must be interpreted. This is difficult in a multidisciplinary team as the data is only understandable for experts within the given domain. Also since terminology differs they try to facilitate collaboration by using images and visualizations. Despite this centre pioneering the area of multidisciplinary collaboration within IO, they are segregated from the other subsea support centres such as reservoir management.
  34. 34. 37 Image of the support centre at Statoil. Surprisingly tranquil, with a very pleasant staff.
  35. 35. 38 “We lack a common terminology and data integration. It sounds so simple, but we’ve been working on it since the 80’s.”
  36. 36. 39 VP IT statoil Geir Owe Wærsland During our trip to Statoil we were so fortunate that we were able to have a meeting with Geir Owe Wærsland, the head of IT at Statoil. IT is a fundamental part of Integrated Operations and this interview gave us a far better understanding of the practical issues regarding IO. First we received an introduction to the main advantages of IO. Besides reducing costs and increasing production it can also significantly improve safety and environmental aspects of oil and gas operations. Apparently a lack of common terminology and data standards within oil and gas is the biggest challenge facing IO. The data doesn’t speak together and therefore it is hard to compare data sets from different systems, consequently reducing the integration within Integrated Operations. This is not a new phenomenon, data integration and the creation of a common terminology have been priorities within the sector since the 80’s. Many attempts have been made, but most failed due to the costs. There is also the issue of suppliers gaining advantages by creating separate systems as this creates a lock-in incentive for the oil company. Another key issue is data security. If the data is standardized and made more accessible via broadband connections, it is also far more vulnerable for security breaches. This is dangerous for two reasons. Information can be hacked by competitors and actors who wish to acquire the knowledge Statoil has regarding operations, production and strategy. Additionally it poses a threat since terrorists might attack oil rigs simply by inserting viruses to the system. We were also given a nice introduction to the automation processes that are occurring throughout the entire system. Logistics have been significantly automated compared to other parts of the sector, perhaps because they are more closely monitored and benchmarked. The Norwegian offshore platforms have a very large amount of autonomy compared to other parts of the industry. One of the most interesting topics was that of misaligned goals in the oil and gas industry. Drilling companies are rewarded contracts based on the cost/speed of drilling and in the US this results in slightly ad-hoc drilling without the use of real time data etc. However well placement and configuration is essential for the production capabilities of the field, therefore it might not be in the best interest of the oil company to base incentives on costs alone, as this may incentivise poorer well configuration? Method: Interview using pre-made giga map (no 6.2)
  37. 37. 40 Reflections after stavanger Thoughts/ideas?
  38. 38. 41 giga map no 7.1 A causal loop diagram synthesising the knowledge acquired during the interviews in Stavanger. Afterwards it functioned as the basis for identifying painpoints and generating ideas.
  39. 39. 42 Pain-points identified from the causal loop diagram Yet again we got confirmation that the extreme expertise necessary within this sector has created a fractal system that bereaves users of a holistic overview. Expertise/lack of overview Expertise not only narrows the experts focus, it also creates disciplinary pride. This creates an aversion to losing face and reluctance to try the unknown (which often resides in the peripheries between different disciplines). Disciplinary pride in this sense contributes to maintain- ing the status-quo, reducing the ability to innovate especially in the context of competence destroying innovations or changes that require “unlearning”. Expertise/disciplinary pride
  40. 40. 43 Basin pr ioritasion Licensin g Exploration Appraisal dril ling Feed study Construction Recovery production Processing pr oduction Maintenance Expo rt Refining Trading Business development Well dec ommissioning Peter Rasmus en Statsfjord B Mech anic eng inee r Lorem ipsum dolor si t amet, consectetur adipisicing el it, sed do e iusm od tempor incidid unt ut l abore et dolor e magna aliqua. Ut e nim ad minim veniam, q uis nostrud exercitation ullamco la boris nisi u t aliquip ex ea co mmodo consequat. Du is aute ir ure dolor in r eprehender it in voluptate velit esse cillu m dolor e eu f ugiat nu lla pariatur. Excepteur si nt occaecat cupidatat non pr oident, sunt in culpa qu i officia deserunt molli t ani m id e st la borum. Lorem ipsum dolor si t amet, consectetur adipisicing el it, sed do e iusm od tempor incidid unt ut l abore et dolor e magna aliqua. Ut e nim ad minim veniam, q uis nostrud exercitation ullamco la boris nisi u t aliquip ex ea co mmodo consequat. Du is aute ir ure dolor in r eprehender it in voluptate velit esse cillu m dolor e eu f ugiat nu lla pariatur. Excepteur si nt occaecat cupidatat non pr oident, sunt in culpa qu i officia deserunt molli t ani m id e st la borum. EXPLORATION Concept of a competence database that gives the company an internal platform that displays the different types of expertise within the company. Goal is to make people in company more aware of other types of expertise and the value in them. Possible concept to deal with expertise
  41. 41. 44 This industry is wrought with contradict- ing incentives or incentives that drive sub-optimization. One example is the lock-in effect suppliers gain by providing non-standardized systems. Drilling is rewarded based upon the speed in which they complete the drilling, despite the well-placement strongly affecting hydrocarbon recovery. This may result in short term cost reduction, yet long term loss of profit. contradicting incentives Another example of contradicting goals. Ideally data/knowledge would be freely given to suppliers and sub-suppliers so they can best aid the operator, yet there is an underlying fear that (some) suppliers will gain too much knowledge and gain access to operations/licenses (especially true for the larger actors such as Schlumberger and Haliburton). Hence information security is a key issue in the development of IO. Collaboration vs info security The operators are companies consisting of a network of individuals with their own goals and purposes. As humans we care about getting home by four, want to keep our positions despite them possibly being redundant and want to look good/ get promoted. This is sometimes in direct conflict with company goals - especially in regards to long term vs short term goals (you might be in your job position for three years, while the project you are developing will take another 18). Personal vs company goals Painpoints conflicting interests
  42. 42. 45 CUSTOMER GOA L Coll aboration across discipline s will help y ou gain a better understanding on tasks that includ es different expertice. In the end y ou have achieved both personal and co mpany goal. You start out with a task where you have to make the fist s tep. Operator Business develope r Operator Flow e xpert 1 2 3 This concept “gamifies” the collaboration process in an effort to align incentives in a fun/unorthodox manner. Possible concept to align interests
  43. 43. 46 Wellhead EXPLORATION Basin pr ioritasion | L icensing | Explor ation | Appr aisal drilling | Feed study | Cons truction | R ecovery production | Processing production | Maintenance Wellhead A library that consists of images and visualizations of the elements within the oil and gas process. To be used in multidisciplinary collaboration make concepts/data more understandable via images. Possible concept to improve data understanding
  44. 44. 47 Lack of data integration Differing systems, lack of a widespread common ontology and complex actor relations have contributed to the frag- mentation of data types. They don’t speak together and are therefore difficult to compare. There is an ongoing attempt to create a common ontology headed by Posc Caesar, however it has not been widely adopted. It is technically feasible to do, but requires buy-in from a multitude of different actors. The cost of integrating was cited to be one of the major obstruc- tions to Integrated Operations, despite potential economic reward being cited as one of the main drivers for Integrated Operations. Data interpretation Data must be interpreted. It requires someone with the skills to understand the significance of the given data. Un- fortunately data is rarely visually intuitive and it is not universal or standardized. This makes multidisciplinary collabora- tion a lot more difficult, as the data they discuss will be understandable only for the corresponding discipline. Painpoints data
  45. 45. 48 Uptime is the amount of time a rig is actually producing oil (or gas), and is therefore the basis for the operators revenue estimation. Uptime may be reduced by planned shut-downs (well work-overs and maintenance) as well as unplanned shut-downs caused by plant and equipment malfunctions. The unplanned shut-downs are very costly, not only do they lose the potential profit of the given time frame, they also lose the Net Present Value of that oil and gas*. Additionally unplanned shut-downs can create future complications in production such as hydrates, clogging etc. Hence uptime is a key priority among operators. *When an oil company loses an hour of production, they don’t regain it until the end of the wells lifetime (might be 30 years ahead of time)- due to NPV the oil is therefore rendered worthless in regards to present calculations. uptime Pain-points Economic structures It can take up to 20 years for a reservoir discovery to be developed into a fully functional oil field. When taking into account the Net Present Value, need for positive cash flow and investor time horizons (typically being between 3-8 years), Oil companies are obviously eager to reduce the amount of time elapsed between these two phases. Exploration to production
  46. 46. 49 Due to Net Present Value and a volatile price market operators in general wish to produce as much as possible today.
  47. 47. 50 production/recovery purpose: To retrieve as much petroleum (oil & gas) from the reservoir rock as possible in a safe and stable manner (constant flow). How: The petroleum is situated within porous rock/sand deposits and trapped by caps of impermeable rock. The specific gravity of the oil and gas combined with hydrostatic pressure causes the petroleum to flow up through the well. If the pressure is insufficient methods are used to increase the oil recovery process. The most common are water re-injection, gas injection, gas lift and the use of electrical submersible pumps. Flow and pressure can be controlled by a set of valves (christmas tree) located at the wellhead. purpose: To separate the oil and gas from the water and other solids (sand, wax etc.). These must be separated and stabilized/converted into formats that enable safe storage/transport. How: The separation process consists of crude oil refining, gas separation, compression and drying as well as produced water cleansing. This is done through several gravity separators that utilize the different specific density of the petroleum/water/solids in order to separate them. Chemicals and coalescers are often used to improve the separation and reduce the amout of time necessary. purpose: To transport oil and gas to refineries/consumers in a safe and efficient manner. How: Export will depend on the type of platform and surrounding transport infrastructure. Oil can be transported via subsea pipelines or by large transport vessels that typically arrive once a week. Gas is trickier to store so it is normally transported via pipelines to pre-defined gas markets, but it can be liquified and frozen for safe transport by ship. production/processing storage/export production ManageMent asset ManageMent teMperature gas/oil/water ratio reservoir perMeability liquid content (in gas) water currents Mostly automated systems goal: increase equipment lifetime & reduce unforseen shutdowns. logistics ManageMent goal: coordinate transport of supplies to platform & export of petroleum off platform. vessel suppliers goal: transport supplies and petrole will try to avoid operating at max capacity to avoid damage and tear on the equipment. goal: to increase oil recovery & maintain a steady flow from the well. will try to increase well pressure/flowand operate gas and oil trains at max. unevendistributionofgowcanoverworkcertainparts ofthesystemwhileleavingotherpartsredundant canaffectthepetroleummovementinthereservoir,therebyincreasingrecovery. can affectby:alterin g valve settin gs,in creasin g w aterin je ctio n/gasin je ctio n. slugging can alter the gow ratio. can affectby:increasing/decreasing waterinjectio n/gasinjectio n. contacts/obtains can be dependent on vessels to export oil/gas if no pipelines are available. cause shipment delays (both supplies and oil export) equipMent sensors ce shutdowns canaffectthepetroleummovementinthereservoir,therebydecreasingrecovery. results in poor w ater/oil separatio n, can result in productio n shutdow n. in creases need form ain tenance,lim its productio n capacity and causes fla rin g. t of solids, needs optimal wells to maximize production of oil and gas can com pensate by using water/gas re-injection or gas lift clatHrate Hydrates can damage equipment can clog pipelines canproactivelyinformaboutsupply/serviceneeds. can create can affect increases need for maintenance, reduces risk of leaks & lim its production capacity. increasedperm eability: increaseso&grecovery low tem p can create field support centres goal: to manage the offshore opera- tions and reach set production goals control rooMs (offsHore) goal: to ensure stability/safety of the production process integralpart(offshore) integral part (onshore) support &supervisoryfunction support function expert support centres goal: to provide expertise and data analysis to the field support centres integral part (onshore) increased perm eability: increases sand production - increases need for maintenance wishes to increase production now wishes to maintain consistently high production rate enablesconditionm onitoring
  48. 48. 51 production/recovery purpose: To retrieve as much petroleum (oil & gas) from the reservoir rock as possible in a safe and stable manner (constant flow). How: The petroleum is situated within porous rock/sand deposits and trapped by caps of impermeable rock. The specific gravity of the oil and gas combined with hydrostatic pressure causes the petroleum to flow up through the well. If the pressure is insufficient methods are used to increase the oil recovery process. The most common are water re-injection, gas injection, gas lift and the use of electrical submersible pumps. Flow and pressure can be controlled by a set of valves (christmas tree) located at the wellhead. purpose: To separate the oil and gas from the water and other solids (sand, wax etc.). These must be separated and stabilized/converted into formats that enable safe storage/transport. How: The separation process consists of crude oil refining, gas separation, compression and drying as well as produced water cleansing. This is done through several gravity separators that utilize the different specific density of the petroleum/water/solids in order to separate them. Chemicals and coalescers are often used to improve the separation and reduce the amout of time necessary. purpose: To transport oil and gas to refineries/consumers in a safe and efficient manner. How: Export will depend on the type of platform and surrounding transport infrastructure. Oil can be transported via subsea pipelines or by large transport vessels that typically arrive once a week. Gas is trickier to store so it is normally transported via pipelines to pre-defined gas markets, but it can be liquified and frozen for safe transport by ship. purpose: To separate different oil qualities (APIs) from eachother in order to create consumption ready products (gasoline, jet fuel, asphalt, propane etc.). How: The hydrocarbons have different boiling points and can therefor be separated via distillation. If desirable further processing of the hydrocarbons can be done to meet product demands such as octane requirements. This is done by chemical processes such as catalytic reforming, various types of “cracking” (heavy molecules are broken down into lighter ones) or by blending different types of gasoils. the oil & gas eco-system purpose: To drill wells that enable the recovery of hydrocarbons. How: The well is created by using a rotating drill string with a bit attached. As the drilling progresses steel casing is applied within the well to provide structural integrity to the well and separate potentially dangerous high pressure zones from each other. Drilling fluids are actively used during the drilling process and have a multitude of different functions that include cooling the bit, overcoming pressure of fluids inside the well rock and transporting rock cuttings up to the surface. The drilling time will vary depending on geological characteristics and depth (ultra deep wells can take months to complete). purpose: Evaluate the costs, potential gains and possible risks in order to determine whether the field is economically viable for production/ re-development. How: After the initial discovery of petroleum more wells (appraisal wells) are drilled in order to determine the size of the reservoir and the amount of recoverable hydrocarbons. The estimated value of the reservoir is then compared with drilling and operating costs. $ purpose: To obtain licences for oil & gas exploration and development. How: Practices for licences vary depending on the country. Licences on the Norwegian continental shelf are awarded in Ordinary Licencing Rounds every other year and Awards in Pre-defined areas (APAs). These are granted based upon individual or multiple company applications, where the companies are evaluated by the companies technical expertise, understanding of geology, financial strength and previous experience. purpose: To locate oil and gas reservoirs. How: The first step when locating the reservoirs is to identify hydrocarbon bearing rock formations. When promising geological formations have been found the area is examined with seismic reflection that utilizesound waves to determine geological composition underground. After an area has been deemed sufficiently promising a test well is drilled in order to verify the existing of hydrocarbons. production/processing storage/export crude oil refiningwell drillingreservoir appraisalexplorationlicencing purpose: To sell the hydrocarbon products. How: This is done through trading and is dependent on market demand and long term supply contracts. gas & oil trading drilling contractors production ManageMent asset ManageMent well ManageMent governMent/ oil Ministry the goal of the oil company (aBB’s end-user) is to extract as much of the hydrocarbons as possible to the greatest amount of profit.* How: This requires all the actors involved in upstream, midstream and downstream operations to collaborate and to anticipate how their actions will affect interdependent actors and processes. oil coMpany/licence Holder *safety and environmental concerns are of course part of their goals, but these will have a considerable impact on the companies profits and are therefor considered to be implicit elements of the stated goal. the entire system consists of individuals with their own motivations and understandings of how the affect the system. their goals may not be aligned with those of the company, often due to inherent company structures and incen- tives. How: This requires all the actors involved in up- stream, midstream and downstream operations to collaborate and to anticipate how their actions will affect interdependent actors and processes. eMployee/ individual refineries traders investors brand/coMpany perception a small overview of processes, actors, influential factors and their relations. environMental concerns reservoir ManageMent geological cHaracteristics Hydrostatic pressure teMperature gas/oil/water ratio density (api) reservoir perMeability liquid content (in gas) weatHer political tensions water currents Mostly automat ed systems goal: increase equipment lifetime & reduce unforseen shutdowns. logistics ManageMent goal: coordinate transport of supplies to platform & export of petroleum off platform. vessel suppliers goal: transport supplies and petroleum will try to avoid opera ting at max capac ity to avoid dama ge and tear on the equip ment. goal: to increase oil recovery & maintain a steady flow from the well. global econoMy stock Market Market deMand estiMated oil prices will try to increase well pressure/flowand operate gas and oil trains at max. goal: to reduce the cost of drilling the well. goal: transform crude oil into commercial products. uneven distributio nofgow canoverwork certain parts ofthesystem while leaving other parts redundan t can affect the petrole um movem ent inthe reserv oir, thereb yincrea sing recove ry. can affe ct by: alte ring valv e set ting s, inc rea sing wat er inje ctio n/g as inje ctio n. slugging can alter the gow ratio. reservoir age can affe ct by: incr eas ing/ dec reas ing wat er inje ctio n/g as inje ctio n. con tact s/ob tains can be dependent on vessels to export oil/gas if no pipelines are available. deli ver crud e oil to refin ery “acc omo date ” deli vere d oil waves can cau se dela ys whe ndrill ing can cause shipment delays (both supplies and oil export) equipMent sensors can force shutd owns can affect the petrole um movem ent inthe reserv oir, thereb ydecrea sing recove ry. res ults in poo r wat er/o il sep ara tion , can res ult in pro duc tion shu tdo wn . inc rea ses nee d for ma inte nan ce, lim its pro duc tion cap aci ty and cau ses flar ing . reduc es low press ure reduc es natur alflow less petr oleu m increased amount of solids, will try to minim ize time and resou rces spent on drillin g wells. needs optimal wells to maximiz e product ion of oil and gas gives incentives/hire based on cost can com pen sate by usin g wat er/g as re-in ject ion or gas lift clatHrate Hydrates can dama ge equip ment can clog pipeline s can proact ively inform about supply /servic eneeds . can crea te can affe ct increa ses need for maint enanc e, reduc es risk of leaks & limits produ ction capac ity. incre ased perm eabi lity: incre ases o&g reco very low tem p can cre ate goal: to plan & execute efficient drilling & completion of wells field support centres goal: to manage the offshore opera- tions and reach set production goals wis hes to inc rea se TO TAL oil/ gas rec ove ry wish es to decr ease drilli ng time /cos t control rooMs (offsHore) goal: to ensure stability/safety of the production process integ ral part (offsh ore) integ ral part (onsh ore) support &superviso ryfunction support function expert support centres goal: to provide expertise and data analysis to the field support centres integral part (onshor e) incre ased perm eabil ity: incre ases sand prod uctio n - incre ases need for main tena nce goal: optimize total oil & gas extraction in regards to roi wishes to increase production now goal: sell oil and gas to the highest profit possible goal: get the largest roi within a given time frame wishes to mainta in consist ently high produc tion rate wis hes to alte rpro duc tion to sui tma rke tdem and badweather= increaseddemand goodweather= decreaseddemand differe nt densit ies can accom odate differe nt produ ct dema nds too mu ch ava ilab le pet role um will dec reas e mar ket dem and too little petro leum may result in trade rs overs elling - forcin g the oil comp any to buy petro leum from comp etitor s affect eachoth er affe ct eac hoth er affects the marke t deman d affec ts op era tes wit h res erv oir life tim e (20 -30 yea rs) as a tim e fram e ofte n ope rate s with a sho rter time fram e (3-5 year s) focused on quarterly reports affec tswillin gnes stoinves t ena bles con ditio nmon itori ng ? affec ts decis ions rega rding licen se distr ibutio n per me able roc k red uce s dril ling cos ts per me able roc k red uce s wel l inte grit y deter mine s explo ration sites affe cts will ingn ess to inve st determines whether it is economically viable to drill a new well/enhance oil recovery of mature field som eexp lora tion me tho ds are haz ard ous to the env iron me nt and incr eas econ cer ns affec ts affec ts licen ce awar ds encourages environmentally considerate strategies increased oil prices might reduce economic incentive s to reduce environm ental risks det erm ines whe the r it is eco nom ical ly viab le to dev elop /re- dev elop a field can alter actors influential factors processes negative effects positive effects positive effects actor/process relations conflicting interests giga map no 9.0 Map showing relations between actors, processes and influential factors of the larger system that the customer operates within. Includes company vs career goals to the far right (view appendix for pdf version).
  49. 49. 52 synthesis
  50. 50. 53 Stavanger reinforced our perception of silo formations within the oil and gas industry. It also gave us a better understanding of how this affects ABBs (potential) customers. The next step was to synthesize the insights accumulated during the project and create a problem definition that would act as a foundation for the concept development. The concepts were intended to function as systemic interventions that could impact the whole system rather than specific parts of it.
  51. 51. 54 During the first phase of concept development* we started working with multiple pain-points derived from the research phase. This included expertise and goal alignment in addition to lack of overview. Initially we wished to create an in- teractive giga map that could give ABB a better overview of the system, thereby allowing them to anticipate their users actual needs. In the first concepts we tried to include everything in the map. Actors, users, goals, processes, phases, disciplines, misalignments, incentive structures, types of data, information flow, decision cycles and the systems that ABB provided. Despite trying to layer the information it became far too information dense. When we started drawing relations the map just resembled spaghetti. In addition it was very difficult to get quality information regarding all the different areas. In our first attempts to create the interactive map we tried to create a visually intuitive map with platforms, geographical locations etc. The Statfjord blueprint (no 3.1) had worked well during the research phase, and we had seen many good examples of “naturalistic” giga maps. However this approach did not work for this type of map. Visualizations of specific components of a process seem to work well when the map aims to describe a specific process. This map intended to show general processes and rather abstract concepts, therfore concrete visuals were insufficient. Concept development First phase The next versions of the map focused on the goal/purpose of Integrated Operations within the industry. We wanted to make a roadmap for IO that clearly showed where they were today and where they wanted to be. One of the main problems with this map was the lack of knowledge regarding strategic decisions and that it was incredibly difficult to get a proper overview of the competitors/actors, technolo- gies, strategies or actual user needs. One very frustrating week went by until we realized that we needed a more specific problem definition if we were to create a focused concept. After making this realiza- tion the project pivoted slightly as we had to re-assess our initial pain-points and redefine the problem that we wished to address. *Throughout the project we have continuously developed concepts, but this was the first part of the project where we could fully focus on it.
  52. 52. 55 Images of “spaghetti map”
  53. 53. 56 Problem definition main pain-points Interdependencies The oil and gas industry is wrought with both obvious and non-obvious interde- pendencies. Performance of the system can therefore not be improved by targeting the separate parts. This will only reduce the slack within the system (Ackoff). Lack of holistic view Due to the inherent complexity of the system and the need for specialization no one has an overview of the entire system. Thus forcing decisions to be based on parts instead of the whole. Expertise The complexity necessitates expertise, yet this expertise comes at the cost of a reduced overview and understanding of the larger picture. It can also enhance silos due to disciplinary pride etc. Misaligned goals The lack of overview and disciplinary seg- regation have contributed to misaligned goals. Performance evaluation is based on KPI’s within a single part of the system. Thus creating incentives to sub-optimize. Human factors Through a variety of different ways cognitive biases and human factors contribute to the misalignment of goals. Ranging from personal goals that conflict with corporate aspirations to human biases such as inertia and WYSIATI*. Lack of data integration The lack of data integration and a standard terminology are results of the fractal system created by different expert disciplines and competing suppliers who can profit from creating lock-in systems. Time scale The time horizons that the oil and gas industry operate with are not compatible with the time horizons of the individuals who operate within this system. This contributes to goal misalignment between company and employee. *What You See Is All There Is. A mental bias that makes people ignore areas where they have limited knowledge when making decisions.
  54. 54. 57 Most of the main pain-points are intertwined and reinforce each-other. The lack of data integration is partially a result of expertise, yet it also reinforces the divides between the different disciplines thus enhancing the negative aspects of expertise. Consequently it was difficult to narrow these down as they all play a part in the larger system, but we decided to target the pain-point that most represented the underlying mental model*. Eventually we chose to focus on the lack of holistic view as our target pain-point. This because many of the other pain-points are a direct result of this singular focus within the system. Our belief is that this pain-point is not merely a result of the complexity within the oil and gas sector. It also seems that suppliers within the system avoid the bigger picture that their customers operate within. The in- terdependencies are obvious. Production management and Reservoir management are both keenly aware that they affect each-other. However it seems that suppliers focus on excelling within their specific fields, instead of on the larger system. This sounds rather good, but results in ABB operating from wellhead and up because that is where their core competence lies. The customers goal isn’t optimization from wellhead to offloader. They are interested in the bottom-line. Put cynically, their goal is to: “..utilize the company resources in the best possible way, in order to make as much money as possible in a sustainable manner” (VP Investor Relations Statoil). This requires optimizing the whole system, not just certain parts of it. Thus the supplier strategy is not conducive with the customers actual needs. Therefore our goal with this project became to give ABB a tool that visualizes the larger system that the customer operates within. The purpose of the tool is to challenge the existing business models by making the interdepend- ent nature of the offerings more tangible. The next page shows an overview of the larger system we wish to incorporate within the tool. *Mental models are the underlying assumptions that dictate the behaviour and structures of the system (according to Colleen Ponto).
  55. 55. 58 trading Here the refined petroleum products are traded/sold, this (and the refinement stage) are often not a direct part of the pro- ducing companies value chain. refinement Crude oil is refined via a distilla- tion process in order to separate the different APIs (weights) from each-other in order to create consumable products. Licensingprospect identification After the petroleum has been separated it must be stored and transported, either via pipeline or by an offloader ship (if it is an FPSO). concept development Basin prioritization transportation Identifying which basins around the world one would like to be in. Factors such as geology, in- frastructure and politics must be taken into consideration. Acquisition and interpretation of seismic data in order to identify interesting prospects situated in the basin. Obtaining licenses for explo- ration and development. The licenses are given based on a bidding process as well as an evaluation of the company. Consists of reserve estimation and concept development. Es- tablishes reserves for initial re- covery and assesses technical and economical viability. feed study The FEED study (Front End Engi- neering Design) focuses on the technical specs of the concept and may also be used to roughly assess the costs of the project. construction phase In this phase the operator must lock the final concept, build fa- cilities (including well drilling). Additionally they must establish the production organization that will manage and run production.
  56. 56. 59 pre-drilling work Purpose of this phase is to iden- tify drillable prospects through proprietary seismic data acqui- sition and interpretation in order to avoid “empty” drilling. business development Continuous business develop- ment during the entire field life span. Goal is to maximize re- covery from field, including res- ervoir monitoring and technolo- gy for enhanced recovery. At the end of the fields lifespan the well must be decommis- sioned and the environmental footprint must be reduced as much as possible. Production part 1 The stage where petroleum and other well fluids are extracted from the reservoir and transport- ed via pipelines to the rig. The pressure and flow in pipelines must constantly be monitored to avoid blow-outs. Production part 2 Mainly consists of the separa- tion process where oil, gas, wa- ter and solids are separated and purified in order to safely store, transport, re-inject or recycle. maintenance Ongoing throughout the entire lifetime of the oil rig. Primarily concerned with avoiding shut- downs and blow-outs. Started to utilize pro-active maintenance such as Condition Monitoring. drilling Petroleum can only be verified by the means of drilling. The wells drilled to discover petro- leum are called wild-cat wells as they are unstable, due to un- known pressure etc. appraisal drilling After petroleum has been dis- covered, the size of the reser- voir must be estimated by the means of appraisal drilling (mul- tiple wells drilled in the area to determine size of the field). abb main operations Additional customer operations well decommissioning
  57. 57. 60 The tool will showcase processes within the system. Here processes are defined as cyclical human activity that must be accomplished to reach the goals of the oil and gas company. We chose processes as the defining element of the map as they are directly related to the goals/needs of the company (ABBs customer). Also processes are more relatable for users in the field as it concerns their work activities. Examples of activities can range from manual (and active) choke regulation to licence appli- cation processes. Furthermore processes can (to a certain degree) be separated into different stages of the oil and gas life cycle (depicted on previous page). For example application bidding and impact assessment can be placed within the “licensing phase”. activities/processes Tool content what should the tool show? - The tool must give an overview of the bigger picture to the customer. - It must showcase interdependencies and should describe the causality within the system. - It must be interactive. - It must be visual in the sense that it illus- trates areas with problems or potential. - It should be flexible in the sense that it can be used by different disciplines and in different contexts. - It must facilitate exploration of the system, questions don’t have to be pre-defined the user can “browse” it. Demand specifications
  58. 58. 61 The tool will also include influential factors within the system. This because we wanted to include aspects that might influence the process and that would have to be taken into account when the different users complete their activities to achieve their goals. Examples include pressure within the pipeline, reservoir depth, license applica- tion procedures and corporate policies. These range from tangible to intangible aspects and are in some manner influ- ential to the objectives of the company. Some of the factors can be easily altered (active choke regulation settings, just alter the defined parameters) to un- changeable factors such as climate (the Barents Sea will be cold so they will just have to deal with it). factors Ultimately the purpose of this interac- tive tool is to make ABB more compet- itive by allowing them to anticipate/ understand their customers needs. This necessitates an understanding of what the customer wishes to achieve, both the sum of all the different processes and the sub-goals set to achieve these. Ideally the tool should have a section that shows the goals and needs of the customers (must be interchangeable to accommodate different customers). goals It seemed natural to split the oil and gas life cycle and the different phases into a sequential time line. This is not completely unproblematic, many phases run simultaneously, (mainte- nance and production) and some are ongoing throughout the entire life cycle (business development). However some sequences do exist, seismic research will happen before drilling and a FEED study will be conducted prior to con- struction. Hence the most visible/influ- ential parameter will be the time line. time line
  59. 59. 62 Content quality data collection for tool After having defined what type of infor- mation we wished to display in the tool we had to acquire it. We wished to create a prototype of the tool that could plausibly demonstrate some of its potential. The main stages had already been identified along with some of the basic processes that resided within them. However we needed more specific descriptions of the activities, influential factors and relations within each area. Fortunately we were able to have two interviews with senior engineers at ABB to discuss the area of flow optimization and flow assurance. Despite some trouble regarding the initial communication (the term process is considered a mechanical, electrical and chemical series of reactions/actions among engineers) we were able to retrieve 13 key processes within the given area and approximately 30 influ- ential factors as well as a description of what these affected and why. Additional desktop research was done to fill in some of the information gaps, and additional factors were added based on this and previous research. The processes were maintained as they were and further investigated in order to get a better understanding before the in- formation was to be sorted. Interview/workshops Method: The processes and factors were collected in different cards that were coded to establish relations between processes and factors. It was quite difficult to code them while conducting the interview and also quite difficult to get the specific information we wished during the interview. We were met with the now familiar: “this is not my field of expertise...”.
  60. 60. 63 Image of mini map and templates used in the data collection process.
  61. 61. 64 information structure structuring the data To ensure that the connections, patterns and relations displayed in the prototype were as consistent and free from bias as possible we created matrix’s where we (crudely) defined whether the factor/ processes directly affected each-other. Gas, oil water ratio is directly affected by the reservoir maturity, reservoir maturity is directly affected by the production rate, hence the gas, oil, water ratio is indirectly (second degree) affected by the production rate. This was done with factor/factor, factor/ process, process/factor & process/ process in both 1st and 2nd degree versions (view the matrix section in the appendix for the actual charts). After the matrix’s had been created we identified two points of interest. Facility design, as it had many and a quite in- teresting mix of connections, and the separation process, a process with a few 1st degree connections, but a substantial amount of 2nd degree connections. First we connected facility design with all the processes and factors that affected, and were affected by it (shown on the right page). We did the same with the separation process before connecting them both together in order to identify if anything interesting emerged when the connections were visualized. Matrix and connections This was done to quickly and manually prototype connections and patterns that might occur in the tool. The results are limited by our understanding of relations when creating the matrix and the quite subjective notion of where the different processes and factors would fit in the interactive map. However we believe this method sufficiently simulates how the tool might work with an automated comparison process. Method critique
  62. 62. 65 The factor Facility design with first and second degree connections.
  63. 63. 66 concept
  64. 64. 67 After having clearly defined the objective of the map, collected and structured the necessary data we began testing and evidencing the concept. Results were not guaranteed since we were uncertain how the connections in the map would relate to each-other. In this part of the project we also got feedback from ABB regarding potential use of the concept.
  65. 65. 68 Wireframe of tool Here is a basic overview of the tools interface. It is intentionally stripped down and most of the surface is dedicated to the placement of processes and factors. This is the first iteration of the concept, following versions would likely include more features, especially regarding access to additional information. On the next pages the tool is shown “in action” displaying results developed during the manual data prototyping phase. Basic features The vertical parameter indicates how controllable a factor or process is from the customers perspective. controllablenon-controllable
  66. 66. 69 Top bar that displays additional information such as the customers main and sub goals. The columns represent the different phases of the customers system and will contain the processes and relating factors. “Time line” that indicates duration and sequence of each phase. Description of phase
  67. 67. 70 Relations that affect facility design Relations that are affected by facility design
  68. 68. 71 This image displays the factor facility design activated within the interactive tool. In essence facility design is the design and construction of the platform which is set during the pre-FEED and FEED studies. Therefor it is roughly located in the FEED study phase of the tool. Some trends immediately appear when we differ- entiate things that affect facility design (the orange lines) and things that are affected by facility design (the black lines). It is largely affected by processes and factors that are not directly controllable by the oil company. Some of the factors are not control- lable at all, such as reservoir depth and climate. It is also mostly affected by processes and factors upstream, despite having a significant impact on many of the processes and factors located downstream (in the production phases). This visualization clearly indicates that ABBs flow optimization and flow assurance efforts are consid- erably affected by facility design. This is a perhaps an obvious observation that mirrors statements made by systems engineers at ABB. However this actually visualizes it. You can point at it. You can have discussions around it. The abstract notion of causality is made more concrete. Additionally this appeared “organically”, the configuration of con- nections is dictated by the framework of the tool, not by an individual. Finding no 1 Facility design cause & effect
  69. 69. 72 Knowledge gap The separation process is affected by many factors and processes within maintenance. Yet it is completely empty. Why? Relations that affect and are affected by facility design
  70. 70. 73 In this image the separation process has been activated. The direction of the relations has not been highlighted as that isn’t the most interest- ing part of the visualization. The divide between the separation process and phases further “downstream” (to the right) are quite baffling. At first we couldn’t understand why there were no connections between maintenance and the separation process. Because in reality these processes are very related, if a compressor fails, or if the solids are not removed the separation process will come to a halt. After some pondering we realized that the disconnect between the two phases was due to the source of our informa- tion. We had obtained most of the information during expert interviews with senior engineers specializing in the field of flow optimization and flow assurance. They had extreme knowledge regarding these processes, debating the severity of hydrate formation and possible effects of increased salinity to optimize production. However they failed to mention processes within mainte- nance that are arguably just as important in order to maintain a stable flow. Whether this was due to lack of knowledge or arbitrary neglect we can’t be sure. Nevertheless it does indicate that there is a knowledge gap between these two divisions. In a sense this image can be interpreted as a disci- plinary silo visualized. Finding no 2 The Separation process divide *We will not rule out that the knowledge gap is our own as a result of us creating the framework, either way it shows a shortcoming in the understanding of relations between sepa- ration and maintenance.
  71. 71. 74 The tool used in a business development meeting to aid decision making and discussions.
  72. 72. 75
  73. 73. 76
  74. 74. 77 Value proposition As depicted on the previous page the tool can be used for business development, by visualizing potentially interesting (or problematic) areas for ABB. It can be used to investigate relations in the system or to build up arguments as to why ABB should focus on a specific area or strengthen their competence regarding a certain field. The actual visualization can be exported and used in internal or client meetings to clearly show why ABB should be part of the process at the given area. The true value of this tool is the ability to make the abstract connections (and disconnections) in the system TANGIBLE. Additionally it forces the user (suppliers such as ABB) to view their offerings in context of the larger customer system. Thus making them more aware of their customers needs. and basic functionality
  75. 75. 78 Information panel with a description of the chosen element(s). Excerpt of the larger system allowing user to navigate within a part of the map. Includes a zoom function and node description. All major phases within the system are displayed to allow quick navigation from one par of the system to another. Main navigation bar with access to editing features, main categories & meta map. Links to relevant comments, data, statistics/ diagrams and resource people within the selected field. wireframe of interface
  76. 76. 79 BASIC FUNCTIONALITY The very wide format makes the tool a bit difficult to manoeuvre, however this format is necessary in order to view the whole system at once. To accommodate this format, we propose a dual navigation system where the larger image is controlled by a regular desktop/laptop computer. This will not only function as a more user-friendly interface, it will also allow the user to get additional information regarding the processes, factors and their relations. NAVIGATION AND USE View processes in stages View related factors to a specific process Ability to comment/edit Ability to view connections Ability to compare multiple processes or factors Ability to search for specific processes Basic Functions include:
  77. 77. 80 User Originally the tool was intended for ABB system engineers, however after a meeting with ABB we decided it would have the greatest impact on the system by targeting mid-level management and up. The greatest value of the tool lies in its ability to challenge/facilitate strategic decision making. System engineers normally get a quite detailed demand specification prior to system development, therefore the tool had to enter the development process at an earlier stage. The tool can also be used to facilitate collaboration between different disciplines/ fields or different organizations as it quite clearly shows the existing perceptions regarding relations. Asset management (the division responsible for maintenance) would probably have a different opinion of which processes affect the separation process than the one shown on page 72. Finally management can use it to gain a better understanding of how their divisions contribute to the whole, thus being able to explain why tedious and seemingly useless tasks must be done (and hopefully increasing motivation by doing so). Management and up
  78. 78. 81 Perhaps a potential user of the interactive tool?
  79. 79. 82 Implementation macro level The implementation of the tool will be resource consuming. A group within the organization must have responsi- bility for the implementation process and knowledge collection of the tool. They will have to identify experts among the different disciplines and motivate them to contribute with their knowledge. champion implementation groupexpert expert expert
  80. 80. 83 Description Processes PRODUCTION micro level To ease the process of adding information simple forms should be designed. These will not only make it easier for the chosen domain experts to apply their knowledge, it can also standardize the information and thereby make it easier to incorporate with the existing data in the interactive tool.
  81. 81. 84 This concept is quite different from the initial task given by ABB. It is far more abstract and difficult to implement than the giga map they requested. A giga map of a specific platform, showcasing the components and users would have been useful for ABB. But in our pursuit of such a giga map we were constantly met by disciplinary silos and knowledge gaps. Not only did this make information collection extremely difficult, it also suggested that there were underlying systemic issues that impeded the full realization of Integrated Operations. Seeing this as an interesting task we decided to investigate this further and ended up with a conclusion that there is an industry-wide lack of customer focus. That by ignoring the whole and only focusing on specific parts of the system, suppliers are in reality providing their customers with solutions prone to sub-op- timization. The final concept may not directly challenge ABBs engineers in how complex installations are designed. However it can most certainly challenge management on their business models and through this foster new thinking and innovation. On the next page a quote from Clay Spinuzzi sums up the essence of the problem our concept seeks to address remarkably well. concept assessment data collection for tool
  82. 82. 85 “Complex organizations develop complex problems, problems that might involve values, inter- pretations, culture clashes, roles, rules, confusing tools and even unspoken habits. These problems are often undefined or under-de- fined. Although everyone seems to have an opinion about how to fix them, no one seems to be able to get the big picture.” - Clay Spinuzzi, Topsight Onshore - offshore sap Experts Offerings from well head & up stay within their specific discipline terminology short term/measurable results
  83. 83. 86 swot of the final concept The tool clearly displays the larger system that ABBs customer operate within. It forces them to have a more cus- tomer-centric perspective, something we believe might give them a competi- tive advantage in a market characterized by a lack of customer empathy. Besides functioning as an external business development tool it can also be used to investigate and collect internal competence. Thus enabling them to better assess internal strengths and weaknesses as well as significant disci- plinary silos or knowledge gaps. And finally the strength lies in its ability to make the systems interdependencies more tangible and accessible by visual- izing them. Strengths The implementation of the tool is resource heavy and will require signif- icant buy-in in order to be successfully integrated in ABBs operations. Furthermore it is based on subjective data that will vary depending on the person asked, thus there must be a way to quality check the information gathered. This tool is only as good as the data inside of it, meaning that in the early phases of implementation the findings within the tool will be probably be ABB centric (that is after all what they have most knowledge about). And the findings will have very little empirical authority. Weaknesses
  84. 84. 87 Since the oil and gas industry is not pre-dominantly a customer oriented market a competitive edge could be gained by actually focusing on the customers needs. This tool might be especially useful since the system in which they operate is becoming ever more complex. The company with a better understanding of the inherent in- terdependencies will be better equipped to deal with this increasing complexity and the increasing demand for optimiza- tion that the Norwegian offshore industry is faced with. Since ABB is not a supplier for the entire exploration and production field they pose no significant threat to operators. Yet this tool gives them the ability to gain an adequate understanding of the entire value chain. Opportunities One of the major threats is the possibility that the tool won’t gain enough traction within the company. The lack of buy-in from users might be fuelled due to the “obvious” nature of the insights the tool generates. Another threat is information security both during the collection of information as well as when the system is operating. There will be a lot of data in the tool and therefore it could potentially cause infor- mation leaks (especially when it is used as a collaborative tool among vendors). The lack of data integration and different terminologies might make it difficult to collect a sufficient amount of data to make results within the tool credible. Threats
  85. 85. 88 reflection
  86. 86. 89 This section of the report is a short reflection regarding methods and processes used during this project. Enjoy.
  87. 87. 90 Colleen Ponto holding a workshop at the Systems Oriented Design Symposium.
  88. 88. 91 During this project we attempted to apply a systemic approach to our design process. Perhaps we were fortunate that our task involved an incredibly complex field. The interdependencies within the oil and gas industry were evident and thus we were inclined to tackle the problems systemically from an early stage of the project. Ackoff and his thoughts regarding how one can’t improve a system by targeting the parts greatly influenced our project. The Systems Oriented Design Symposium not only gave us interesting input regarding a systemic approach in design, the workshops held during the symposium gave us tools that aided this approach. Especially the Iceberg Model introduction given during Peter Coughlan and Colleen Ponto’s workshop was useful. We could draw direct parallels between our research and insights in IO with the notion of surface problems (data that doesn’t speak together), patterns (lack of data integration), structures (differing business models/corporate policy to not go beyond well head) and the mental model (the assumption that optimizing a single part of the system is a sufficient offering. systems thinking & design A way to design for complexity Also the works of Gharajedaghi concerning systems thinking in organizations was Inspiring. His observation of companies only being able to fix the “slack within the system” when targeting specific parts of the it seemed very akin to the way ABB operates today. According to one of their engineers, they mostly provide services to companies when the field is maturing. This means they can only fix the slack in the existing system, facility design, well configuration and so forth have already been set. The systemic methods used during this project were mostly different types of mapping, ranging from blueprints and visually descriptive maps to causal loop diagrams (these can be viewed in the appendix). On the next pages the use of the giga maps will be highlighted and reflected upon. “If we have a system of improvement that is directed at the parts, taken separately, you can be absolutely sure that the performance of the whole will not be improved.” - Ackoff
  89. 89. 92 Giga map as collaborative tool The giga map functions quite well as a collaborative tool that facilitates Discussions. It worked especially well during our interviews with platform personnel when the maps were visually descriptive. An example of this is the Statfjord Blueprint map (no 3.1) that aided the discussion regarding hierarchy and roles on a platform by displaying a platform layout. The negative aspects of using the map in such a manner is that it requires domain knowledge within the specific field for participants to be comfortable with filling them in. The nearly empty map (no 3.0) clearly illustrates this. However the white areas on that map can be valuable as they might illustrate knowledge gaps.
  90. 90. 93 giga map for very rapid learning process Throughout this project we have had to learn a lot within a very limited time frame. The giga maps were excellent tools for aiding this very rapid learning process. By visualizing the information and adding links, comments and iterations on the giga maps we were able to have a dynamic learning process where things just seemed to “stick” quite easily. A drawback with this method is that it became difficult to retrace some of our knowledge sources when summarizing the project.
  91. 91. 94 Giga map To create rich learning spaces The greatest limitation of the giga map is their size. At the end of the project we simply weren’t able to fit all of the giga maps in the classroom. This reduced the effect of the rich learning space we had tried to create around us, findings and concepts from earlier phases of the project were hidden from view. Eventually we had to collect all of the maps and hang them on the schools longest wall to assess the process of our project.
  92. 92. 95 giga map To communicate concepts/ideas Giga maps are designed to visualize complexity. As such, they are not immediately intuitive and normally the require some domain knowledge to be understood. Therefore they are not the most user-friendly ways of displaying information. Normally representative visualizations aid the understanding of the map, however in this industry we were faced with the challenge of images being taken too literally. When using an image/icon of a boat to convey transport we were informed that this could not possibly be an offloader as it was too short. production/recovery purpose: To retrieve as much petroleum (oil & gas) from the reservoir rock as possible in a safe and stable manner (constant flow). How: The petroleum is situated within porous rock/sand deposits and trapped by caps of impermeable rock. The specific gravity of the oil and gas combined with hydrostatic pressure causes the petroleum to flow up through the well. If the pressure is insufficient methods are used to increase the oil recovery process. The most common are water re-injection, gas injection, gas lift and the use of electrical submersible pumps. Flow and pressure can be controlled by a set of valves (christmas tree) located at the wellhead. purpose: To separate the oil and gas from the water and other solids (sand, wax etc.). These must be separated and stabilized/converted into formats that enable safe storage/transport. How: The separation process consists of crude oil refining, gas separation, compression and drying as well as produced water cleansing. This is done through several gravity separators that utilize the different specific density of the petroleum/water/solids in order to separate them. Chemicals and coalescers are often used to improve the separation and reduce the amout of time necessary. purpose: To transport oil and gas to refineries/consumers in a safe and efficient manner. How: Export will depend on the type of platform and surrounding transport infrastructure. Oil can be transported via subsea pipelines or by large transport vessels that typically arrive once a week. Gas is trickier to store so it is normally transported via pipelines to pre-defined gas markets, but it can be liquified and frozen for safe transport by ship. purpose: To separate different oil qualities (APIs) from eachother in order to create consumption ready products (gasoline, jet fuel, asphalt, propane etc.). How: The hydrocarbons have different boiling points and can therefor be separated via distillation. If desirable further processing of the hydrocarbons can be done to meet product demands such as octane requirements. This is done by chemical processes such as catalytic reforming, various types of “cracking” (heavy molecules are broken down into lighter ones) or by blending different types of gasoils. purpose: To drill wells that enable the recovery of hydrocarbons. How: The well is created by using a rotating drill string with a bit attached. As the drilling progresses steel casing is applied within the well to provide structural integrity to the well and separate potentially dangerous high pressure zones from each other. Drilling fluids are actively used during the drilling process and have a multitude of different functions that include cooling the bit, overcoming pressure of fluids inside the well rock and transporting rock cuttings up to the surface. The drilling time will vary depending on geological characteristics and depth (ultra deep wells can take months to complete). purpose: Evaluate the costs, potential gains and possible risks in order to determine whether the field is economically viable for production/ re-development. How: After the initial discovery of petroleum more wells (appraisal wells) are drilled in order to determine the size of the reservoir and the amount of recoverable hydrocarbons. The estimated value of the reservoir is then compared with drilling and operating costs. $ production/processing storage/export crude oil refiningwell drillingreservoir appraisal drilling contractors production ManageMent asset ManageMent well ManageMent refineries reservoir ManageMent geological cHaracteristics Hydrostatic pressure teMperature gas/oil/water ratio density (api) reservoir perMeability liquid content (in gas) weatHer water currents Mostly automated systems goal: increase equipment lifetime & reduce unforseen shutdowns. logistics ManageMent goal: coordinate transport of supplies to platform & export of petroleum off platform. vessel suppliers goal: transport supplies and petroleum will try to avo id operating at ma x cap acity to avo id dama ge and tear on the equipme nt. goal: to increase oil recovery & maintain a steady flow from the well. Market deMand will try to increase well pressure/flowand operate gas and oil trains at max. goal: to reduce the cost of drilling the well. goal: transform crude oil into commercial products. unevendistributionofgow canoverwork certainparts ofthesystemwhile leavingotherparts redundant canaffe ctthe petrole um movem ent inthe reservoir, therebyincreasingrecove ry. can aff ec tby :alte rin g va lve se ttin gs, in cr ea sing w at er in je ct io n/ gas in je ct io n. slugging can alter the gow ratio. reservoir age can aff ec tby :incr ea sing /d ec re as ing wat er inject io n/ ga sinject io n. co ntac ts/obtain s can be dependent on vessels to export oil/gas if no pipelines are available. de liv er cr ud e oil to refin er y “acc om od ate” de liv ered oil waves can ca us ede lays whe ndr illi ng can cause shipment delays (both supplies and oil export) equipMent sensors ca n force shutd ow ns canaffe ctthe petrole um movem ent inthe reservoir, therebydec reasingrecove ry. re su lts in poo r w at er /o il se par at io n, ca n re su lt in pro duc tio n sh ut dow n. in cr ea se s nee d fo rm ai nte nan ce ,lim its pro duct io n ca pac ity an d ca use s fla ring. red uce s lowpre ssu rered uces natur alflow le ss pe tro leum increased amount of solids, will try to minim ize tim e and res ource s spent on drilling we lls. needs optimal wells to max imize production of oil and gas gives incentives/hire based on cost can co m pe ns ate by us ing water/g as re-in jection or ga s lift clatHrate Hydrates ca n dama ge equip me nt can clog pipe lines canpro activelyinfo rmabo utsup ply/servic enee ds. ca n crea te can aff ec t inc rea ses need for ma intenance, red uces risk of leaks & lim its pro duction capacity. increa se dpe rm ea bility : increa se so& greco ve ry lo w te m p ca n cr ea te goal: to plan & execute efficient drilling & completion of wells field support centres goal: to manage the offshore opera- tions and reach set production goals w ishe s to in cr ea se TO TA L oil/ gas re co ve ry wish es to de crea se drilling tim e/co st control rooMs (offsHore) goal: to ensure stability/safety of the production process int eg ral pa rt(off shore) integral part (on shore ) support &supervisoryfunction support function expert support centres goal: to provide expertise and data analysis to the field support centres integral part (onshore ) inc reased pe rm eability: inc reases sand prod uc tio n - inc reases ne ed for main tena nc e goal: optimize total oil & gas extraction in regards to roi wishes to increase production now wishes to maintain con sistently high produc tion rate badweather= increaseddemand goodweather= decreaseddemand diff ere nt densities can acc om odate diff ere nt pro duct dema nds to o m uc h av ailabl e pe troleu m will de cr ea se m ar ke t de m an d too little petro leu m ma y res ult in traders overs elling - forcin g the oil comp any to buy petro leu m from comp etitor s o per at es w ith re se rv oir lif e tim e (2 0 -30 ye ar s) as a tim e fram e quarterly reports aff ectswillin gn esstoinv est en ab lesco nd ition m on ito rin g ? pe rm ea bl e ro ck re du ce s dr illin g co st s pe rm ea bl e ro ck re du ce s well in te gr ity determines explo ration site s ve lo p a fie ld can alter
  93. 93. 96 During this project we had a very rapid learning process that involved gathering and understanding information from many different resources. The resources ranged from experts within the field to engineer handbooks and online glossary sites. The vast amount of knowledge we had to acquire to gain an overview of the larger system forced us to be efficient in our information gathering, conse- quently much of our desktop research involved us jumping from page to page in order to get the gist of a specific phase or process. This made it quite difficult to retrace all the sources used during the project. Hence there is a basic list in the sources section that does not include all the pdfs and websites we have used. Another aspect I wish to emphasize is the data structuring after the meetings with ABBs senior engineers. The post-structuring within the matrix map was done by us. It is therefore based on our knowledge and understanding of the concepts. The framework is subjective in the sense that it is based on our under- standing of the connections within the system (whether it is a 1st or 2nd degree connection). However the framework makes the connec- tions consistent, and it makes them follow a set of rules regarding placement rather than being intentionally placed by us. source critique regarding data, interviews & desktop research
  94. 94. 97 ABB (engineers + UCD group) Statoil Subsea Support Centre Egil Josefson Geir-Owe Wærsland Morten S. Johannessen Offshore workers People & companies Oil and gas production handbook - Håvard Devold Additional material given by ABB Systems thinking - Gharajedaghi Connected Company - David Gray Literature ABB.no Statoil.no Slb.com NPD.no Sintef.no Iocenter.no Norskoljeoggass.no Jobboffshore.no EPCengineer.com Posccaesar.org Rigzone.com Wikipedia Systemsorienteddesign.net Etechinternational.org Nom.nb.no web Giga maps in appendix sources A rough overview
  95. 95. Thank you Adrain Paulsen Berit Haugseng og Statoil Subsea Support Centre Birger Sevaldson Bjørn Bringedal David Romero Erik Elvik Egil Josefson Erik Roald Geir-Owe Wærsland Helene Dybdahl Johannessen Katinka Bryn Bene Katrine Hilmen Kristoffer Husøy Linda Blaasvær Manuela Aguirre Mirzet Softic Morten Sven Johannessen Oliver Halvorsrød Tone-Grete Graven Tor-Jakob Vik

×