The purpose of this PID was to present a feasible strategy for the commercialization of decommissioning by entering into the consortium and to provide a basis for assessing the overall success of the project.

1. The Robert Gordon University
Faculty of Management
Aberdeen Business School
PROJECT FUNDAMENTALS, 2013
Lenka Tomsova
1105518
MSc Project Management
Project Initiation Document
Consortium
Word count: 3957

2. 1
ROSEMOUNT GROUP
PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT (PID)
ROSEMOUNT GROUP: CONSORTIUM

3. 2
Contents
PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT (PID) .................................................................................................. 1
ROSEMOUNT GROUP: CONSORTIUM ................................................................................................. 1
Project Definition .................................................................................................................................... 4
Background & rationale....................................................................................................................... 4
Project scope........................................................................................................................................... 8
Consortium project ............................................................................................................................. 8
SWOT analysis of Rosemount Group’s strategic option.................................................................. 8
Project scope......................................................................................................................................... 10
Financial budget of the consortium project...................................................................................... 11
Critical success criteria ...................................................................................................................... 15
Critical success factors....................................................................................................................... 15
Assumptions of the consortium project............................................................................................ 16
Constraints of the consortium project.............................................................................................. 16
Consideration .................................................................................................................................... 17
Project management plan................................................................................................................. 17
Stakeholder analysis.......................................................................................................................... 26
Risk assessment................................................................................................................................ 31
Risk management plan.................................................................................................................. 31
Recommendations ................................................................................................................................ 36
References............................................................................................................................................. 37
Bibliography........................................................................................................................................... 37

4. 3
Table of figures
1) UKCS map 4
2) Competencies required for decommissioning 6
3) Rosemount Group – organizational matrix structure (STRONG) 7
4) Direct cost breakdown structure of the consortium project 13
5) Indirect cost breakdown structure of the consortium project 14
6) WBS – Consortium 18
7) Schedule of the project 20
8) Network schedule of the consortium project 21
9) Gannt chart – milestones of the consortium project 21
10) Decision gates 22
11) Key phases of the consortium project life cycle 24
12) Stakeholder network – Rosemount Group 26
13) Consortium project team 27
14) Stakeholder grid 28
15) Communication lines 29
16) Risk management process 31
17) PIG of the risks 34
List of tables
1) UK offshore sites maintained by Rosemount Group 4
2) UKCS decommissioning opportunities 5
3) Rosemount Group – business objectives 6
4) Objectives of the consortium project 10
5) Deliverables of the consortium project 10
6) Financial budget for consortium project 11
7) Approximated incomes and expenses of Rosemount Group in 2014 11
8) Payback period time calculation 12
9) Consortium project – Outline view 19
10) Milestones of the project 22
11) Communication plan for the consortium project 30
12) PESTLE analysis of the consortium project 32
13) Risk log 33
14) Risk matrix with responses 35

5. 4
Project Definition
Background & rationale
Rosemount Group is focused supplier of engineering, services within project management
and high value consultancy to the world’s energy sector. Company offers wide range of services
which expand from environmental design to engineering further on to project decommissioning at
the end of the asset life cycle.
Rosemount Group was founded in 1970s and since then it operates in 25 countries all over
the world, mainly operating in the UK.
Primary goal of the organisation is the maintenance of number of large offshore sites across
the UK (see table 1 and fig. 1).
Table 1: UK offshore sites maintained by Rosemount Group
Central North Sea Southern North Sea Northern North Sea
Auk Oilfield Hewett Beryl Oilfield
Clyde Oilfield Dotty Emerald Oilfield
Fulmar Oilfield Viking Columbia Oilfield
Miller Oilfield Vulcan Eider Oilfield
Fig. 1: UKCS map

6. 5
However, our aim is to grow the business and increase market presence via opportunities in
UKCS decommissioning. To see the opportunities in the UKCS decommissioning market for
Rosemount Group see table 2.
Table 2: UKCS decommissioning opportunities
Forecast:
475 installations will eventually have to be decommissioned (90%)
Expenditure on decommissioning (2013-2040) = £3.5 billion
Why decommissioning?
There is a shortage of decommissioning facilities and skills in the UK which gives our
company great possibility of gaining valuable experience from number of planned
decommissioning projects (in the next 5-7 years) as projected by Oil and Gas UK, 2013.
Scottish Enterprise, 2013 also discovered significant gap in the capability in the supply
chain.
EEEgr News, 2010 identified the importance for local suppliers to understand their roles
within decommissioning sector. Rigzone, 2013 defined eleven competencies which are required for
successful decommissioning process (fig. 2). We believe that our company is competent in project
management, engineering and planning, permitting and regulating compliance as well as platform
preparation which suggest that our company is not taking advantage of other competencies stated
by Rigzone, 2013. Therefore our vision is to be the preferred partner for EPC activities in the UKCS
and beyond.
EEEgr News, 2010 also stated that it is essentials for suppliers to collaborate so that everyone
gets involved, market intelligence can be shared and it is easier for everybody to gain information
needed which was also defined by DNS, 2011.
Therefore it was decided that Rosemount Group will improve its strategic position in the
decommissioning market by entering into the consortium with companies that possess other
capabilities needed for successful process of decommissioning.
Oil and Gas UK, 2013

7. 6
Fig. 2: Competencies required for decommissioning
Table 3: Rosemount Group – Business Objectives
BUSINESS OBJECTIVES
OB-1 Capture market share of 15% within 24 months.
OB-2 Improve decommissioning capability by entering into the consortium by 28th
February 2013.
Given Rosemount Group’s strategy and objectives, the purpose of this PID is to present a
feasible strategy for the commercialization of decommissioning by entering into the consortium and
to provide a basis for assessing the overall success of the project.
Rosemount Group – Organisational structures (see Fig.3)
Strong matrix organisational structure gives Rosemount Group good basis for project
implementation since project managers are in charge of the project, its resources and control and
functional managers provide support to them as well as technical expertise. (Kerzner, 2009). In
favour of Kerzner, 2009; Gray and Larson, 2007 also identified that project manager and his team
requires more autonomy if there are high levels of specific factors according to the project needs
such as size of the project, its importance or need for integration of other departments.

8. 7
Fig. 3: Rosemount Group – Organizational matrix (STRONG)
Chief Executive
Procurement
manager
Senior category
officer
Category officer
Contracts and
procurement
officer
Buyer / support
role
Risk manager
Process/facitility
engineer
Technical
personnel
Supervisors
Production
operators
Maintenance
staff
Safety personnel
Contractor/supplier
personnel
Finance
manager
Financial
controller
Divisional
accountant
Divisional
finance officer
Finance officer
Project
accountant
Project
accountant
Quality assurance
manager
QA team
member
QA team
member
HR
manager
HR officer
HR officer
Planning
manager
Planning officer
Planning officer
Governance
and
accountability
manager
Corporate
governance
officer
CSR officer
Business ethics
officer
Performance and
control officer
Manager of
PM
Project
manager
Project
manager
Project
manager

9. 8
Project scope
Consortium project
Our plan is to create an association of five companies with the objective of participating in
the UKCS decommissioning market in order to better fulfil our purposes while remaining as separate
organisations.
We would like to create a lead partner consortium where Rosemount Group will be
nominated as the lead organisation and other companies would work through our company as
separate entities with specifically allocated areas of work based on specialism and capacity defined in
fig.2.
SWOT analysis of Rosemount Group’s strategic option
STRENGTS
Due to established reputation of companies entering the consortium may be perceived as
less risky.
Consortium is easy to form because no formal procedure has to be followed along with no
capital required.
Within consortium already existing management and accountable body systems may be
used.
It is easy to terminate.
Consortium is not directly subject to taxation, only the individual members are.
Members may be undisclosed parties which increases the confidentiality.
It is generally less costly to run consortium than for example joint venture.
Possibility of gaining PM capabilities as well as relevant skills, experience and expertise from
experts in other fields of decommissioning.
Gives Rosemount Group the opportunity to gain experience and competencies that we might
not otherwise have => learning process.
Improves outcomes for beneficiaries thanks to the greater overall capacity.
Risk and liability is likely to be spread across member organisations.
Rosemount Group can gain economies of scale as well as competitive advantage.
Thanks to close cooperation, our supply chain network can increase.

10. 9
WEAKNESSES
Lack of autonomy.
Profits are shared.
Difficulty in establishment of clear identity and brand for the consortium as well as difficulty
to restrict or limit the liability of members.
Time to develop may be considerably increased due to difficulties with liabilities of each
party.
Required high degree of trust and integration.
It may be difficult to gain external relationships and funding especially because of the
unwillingness of third parties to enter into contract with non legal entity.
Lack of permanent structure.
Cost of management may be increased.
As a lead member Rosemount Group will more likely carry out all the risks and liabilities.
Different values and culture from other members which may cause friction.
OPPORTUNITIES
Seamless integrated supply chain.
Long term collaborative supply chain.
Benefits from other alliances members may be part of.
Increased market domination.
Building up relationships with others for future business.
THREATS
Unwillingness of other parties.
Different ways of administration and operations by other members.
Power struggles.
Breakage of supply chain due to power struggles.
Slow integration.
Resistance from employees.
Reluctance of others to share expertise, secrets and patents.
Loss of staff to others companies.
Limiting laws, policies and legal boundaries.

11. 10
Project scope
Consortium project scope encompasses of consortium initiation where potential partners are
identified and proposed to enter the association, formation of consortium working group and
development plan, preparation of the due diligence exercise and its conduction as well as actual
signing of the Memorandum of Understanding to form the consortium.
Table 4: Objectives of the consortium project
OBJECTIVES OF THE CONSORTIUM PROJECT
1. To improve market share by 15% within 24 months by developing the consortium.
2. To improve decommissioning capability by entering into the consortium within 1 year from implementation.
3. To identify 4 potential partners to enter the consortium with within 1 month from definition.
4. To identify the risks associated with the delivery of the consortium within 7 days from definition.
5. To identify resources needed for development of the consortium within 7 days from definition.
6. To develop strategy for management of the shareholders within 7 days from definition.
7. To implement safe environmental process to be used while decommissioning within one year from
implementation.
Table 5: Deliverables of the consortium project
However consortium project will not define and deliver specific processes within the
consortium such as for example contract management of the consortium or consortium tendering
process, for that reason other meetings with preferred partners will be held. Other meetings will also
be held for the implementation of the safe environmental process which will be used as the
precedence for other companies while decommissioning to promote environmental best practice in
the sector.
DELIVERABLES OF THE CONSORTIUM PROJECT
1. Memorandum of Understanding – improved competitive advantage in decommissioning sector.
2. Memorandum of Understanding – improved competitive advantage in decommissioning sector.
3. Memorandum of Understanding.
4. Risk management plan.
5. Resource management plan.
6. Stakeholder management plan and communication plan.

12. 11
Financial budget of the consortium project
Direct budgeted cost for this project was established as £24000. To be able to visualise
projected direct costs, cost breakdown structure is used (see fig.4), followed by indirect cost
breakdown structure in fig.5 which equals to £11950. Therefore Rosemount Group financial analyst
appointed for the projection of the financial budget needed for Consortium project suggested that
£35950 should be obtained as an investment for the successful implementation of the project.
Introduced projected budget can be used as one of the monitoring and controlling tools as
defined by Burke, 1999.
Table 6: Financial budget for the consortium project
Financial budget for the consortium project
Direct costs £24000
Indirect costs £11950
Total costs £35950
To be able to define the length of time which is required to recover the cost of the
investment of £35950, payback period calculation was used. Formula for this calculation is defined as
cost of the project / annual cash flows.
To be able to calculate the annual cash flow, incomes and expenses of the year must be
defined. The incomes and expenses for upcoming year 2014 when the project will be initiated were
approximated to the numbers described in the table 8 below based on the historical data of the
company as well as using prediction on UK decommissioning expenditure suggested by Oil and Gas
UK, 2013.
Table 7: Approximated incomes and expenses of Rosemount Group in 2014
INCOMES 2013 EXPENSES 2013
£507 300 £295 800

13. 12
Therefore following calculation can be made:
Table 8: Payback period time calculation
Cost of project / annual cash flow Payback period time
35950 / (507300-295800) = 0,17
Result of the calculation tells us that investment in the consortium project will be returned in
0,17 of the year which can be easily recalculated to approximately 2 months. However, as defined by
Burke, 1999 this method does ignore time value of money as well as any benefits that might occur
after they payback period. It also does not measure profitability therefore it is recommended to use
other methods such as NPV, discounted cash flow or internal rate of return as other methods of
capital budgeting for consortium project.
Based on the length of the time which is required for repaying the investment we believe
that we are able to finance the project from the Rosemount Group’s profit with no loans or other
sources of money required.

14. 13
Fig.4: Direct cost breakdown structure of the consortium project
Consortium
CBS
Consortium
working
group
Consortium
initiation
Due
dilligence
Consortium
Identificatio
n of the
partners
Firstmeeting
Report
£3000
£700
£300
Form
consortium
working
group
Consortium
development
plan
Report
£1000
£3000
£300
Report £5000
Conduct due
dilligence
exercise
Memorandu
m of
Understandi
ng
£ 8000
£2000

15. 14
Fig.5: Indirect cost breakdown structure of the consortium project
Consortium
CBS
Consortium
working
group
Consortium
initiation
Due
dilligence
Consortium
Identificatio
n of the
partners
Firstmeeting
Report
£1500
£500
£200
Form
consortium
working
group
Consortium
development
plan
Report
£750
£1950
£200
Report £2350
Conduct due
dilligence
exercise
Memorandu
m of
Understandi
ng
£3000
£1500

16. 15
Critical success criteria
Success of the project will be measured based on following criteria defined by stakeholders
of the consortium project:
1) Total project cost does not exceed the initial budget of £35950.
2) The actual project duration is within the committed duration of 37 days.
3) Market share has increased by 15% by 11th
February 2016.
4) Decommissioning capability and knowledge has increased due to successful completion of
decommissioning project increased by 10% within first year from the development of the
consortium.
5) Four consortium partners were identified within first month of the initiation of the
consortium project.
6) Identification and application of environmental processes for successful decommissioning
by 11th
February 2015 from lessons learned of previously completed decommissioning projects.
Critical success factors
There are also critical success factors that need to be considered before implementation of
the project. Those factors are:
1) Completion of the consortium project on time and within budget and scope.
2) Robust due diligence exercise will be implemented to identify critical partners.
3) Each party in the consortium have to be committed to the shared goal of becoming
experts in decommissioning of oil rigs.
4) Project team will be committed and motivated throughout the life cycle of the project.
5) Effective use of stakeholder management, risk management, change management,
communication channels, stakeholder reviewing as well as environmental reviewing will be utilized
throughout the project to increase the probability of successful outcome as suggested by APM, 2006.

17. 16
Assumptions of the consortium project
As a company we assume that by using effective negotiation and communication with other
parties we are able to implement the consortium project within 36 days.
We also believe that by using the right contract management we will be able to limit the
liability threat associated with the consortium as well as the threat of not gaining the trust of third
parties in terms of funding and entering the contracts. As a company we are aware of the liability
threat associated with the consortium project, however, we assume that using Memorandum of
Understanding as the final agreement for forming the consortium will give Rosemount Group useful
tool for limiting its liability because Memorandum of Understanding can be made legally binding.
We assume that Rosemount Group has enough funds available to be able to fund the
strategic option with no other financial help such as for example loans.
As a successful growing company with potential we assume that companies as well as their
employees would not mind to work for us as for the leading organisation within the consortium.
In terms of financial return we believe that payback period time of the investment will be less
than 3 months especially because of Rosemount Group still working on projects during the
implementation of the consortium.
Project schedule is based on working weeks only because of the assumption that there will
be nobody willing to work during the weekends.
In terms of budgeting we believe that the estimation of the incomes and expenses for 2014
as well as cost of the project is well defined based on the historical data as well as WBS bottom-up
estimating methodology.
Constraints of the consortium project
As defined by Oil and Gas UK, 2013 there is lack of decommissioning knowledge in the sector
therefore it may be difficult for the consortium to become the best and gain new capabilities as well
as knowledge.
There is also lack of collaboration in the decommissioning sector which is defined by EEEgr
NEWS, 2010 as being essential for being successful; therefore it can be assumed that there is lack of
knowledge in terms of forming the consortium for decommissioning projects as well.

18. 17
Developing consortium requires high degree of trust and integration from each party
involved therefore it may be difficult to establish the association.
Rosemount Group may lose its position in the market if entering into the consortium with
inappropriate partners for decommissioning process, therefore due diligence process is crucial for
successful implementation of the project.
Different value and culture from other companies entering the consortium can cause friction
and negatively impact Rosemount Group, therefore negotiation of the win-win solution for
everybody is required.
Implementation of consortium might affect long term business relationships with our
preferred partners therefore effective supply chain management is crucial.
Consideration
UKCS and decommissioning forecasts as described in Oil and Gas UK, 2013 and Scottish
Enterprise, 2013 were considered for carrying out strategic option for improvement of our
decommissioning capability as well as for consortium project defined as one of the preferred options.
Various stakeholders had to be considered within and out-with the project for successful
identification of the project scope, objectives and deliverables.
Project management plan
Following project management plan was used for documentation of the planning process as
well as for management of the project. Project management plan was implemented to sequence the
tasks which need to be achieved in order to accomplish project objectives.
Fig. 6 shows WBS of the consortium project which was used as a part of the scope
management to define the work required to produce consortium project deliverables described in
table 5; followed by table 9 describing project in outline view, fig. 7 showing the schedule of the
consortium project in terms of tasks involved for successful completion and fig.8 highlighting the
network schedule of the consortium project. Another Gannt chart (see fig. 9) is used to highlight
milestones and decision gates of the project (see fig. 10).

19. 18
Consortium
Consortium
initiation
Consortium
working
group
Due
dilligence
Identification
Contact
potential
partners
Propose the
idea
Invite
potential
partners to
meet
Firstmeeting
Prepare
board report
Elect chairs
Share
information
Explore
options
Agree next
steps
Form
consortium
working
group
Meeting
with
representati
ves
Draftof
terms of
references of
Membership
agreement
Agreement
Appointmen
t of chair,
vicechair
and
secretary
Consortium
development
plan
Agreement
of
responsibiliti
es and
timescale
Preparation
of 2nd board
report
Preparation
of 3rd board
report
Outline of
due
dilligence
need
List of
recommende
d questions
Approval of
the
questions by
theboard
Intorduction
of the
membership
application
Consortium
Conduct due
dilligence
exercise
Preparation
of the 4th
board report
Findings
Recommend
ation
whether to
proceed or
not
Memorandu
m of
Understandi
ng
Preparation
Signature
Fig.6: WBS - Consortium

20. 19
Table 9: Consortium project – Outline view
Outline view of the Consortium project
1. Consortium initiation
1.1 Identification
1.1.1 Contact potential partners
1.1.2 Proposal of the idea
1.1.3 Invitation for meeting
1.2 First meeting
1.2.1 Election of the chairs
1.2.2 Sharing of the information
1.2.3 Exploring of the options
1.2.4 Agreement of the future steps
1.3 Preparation of the board report
2. Consortium working group
2.1 Form the working group
2.1.1 Meeting with representatives
2.1.2 Draft of terms of reference of Membership Agreement
2.1.3 Appointment of the chair, vice-chair and secretary
2.1.4 Agreement
2.2 Consortium development plan
2.3 Agreement of the development plan
2.4 Preparation of the second board report
3. Due diligence
3.1 Preparation of the third board report
3.1.1 Outline of the need for due diligence
3.1.2 List of recommended questions
3.1.3 Approval of the questions by the board
3.1.4 Introduction of the membership application
4. Consortium
4.1 Conduct due diligence exercise
4.1.1 Preparation of the fourth board report
4.1.1.1 Findings
4.1.1.2 Recommendation whether to proceed or not
4.2 Memorandum of Understanding
4.2.1 Preparation
4.2.2 Signature
Outline view of the Consortium project was included as a part of the document to ensure
that every project shareholder is able to understand the project work breakdown structure as long as
WBS graphs are no suggested as easy graphs to read by Kerzner, 2009.
It is projected that Consortium project will start on 6th
January 2014. Scheduled work is more
described in fig.7 (see below). Project finish date was established for 11th
February 2014.

21. 20
Fig.7: Schedule of the project

22. 21
Fig.8: Network schedule of the consortium project
Fig.9: Gannt Chart – Milestones of the consortium project

23. 22
Fig. 9 describes milestones or in other words an event that receives special attention. In the
consortium project there are 6 project milestones that are used to mark completion of specific work
packages and phases; for more detailed information see table 10 below.
Table 10: Milestones of the project
Milestone Phase / Work packages
1. End of the identification phase of the project – 8.1.
2. Formation of the working group done – 9.1.
3. End of the pre-consortium working group phase – 20.1.
4. End of the due diligence phase – 29.1.
5. Due diligence exercise conducted – 30.1.
6. Consortium formed – 11.2.
Fig. 10: Decision gates

24. 23
Picture above (fig. 10) highlights four decision gates taking place in the consortium project.
Gate 1 takes place after the end of the initiation phase. Following questions have to be asked:
1) Is the gate 1 finalized?
2) Are all the potential partners identified?
Decision gate 2 takes place after the end of formation of working group. After reviewing this
phase in terms of successful implementation of working group, it is important to approve the project
to move towards the other phase.
1) Is the working group elected? ´
2) Are chair, vice-chair and secretary appointed?
3) Is consortium development plan developed and approved by the board?
Gate 3 taking place after the drafting of due diligence exercise is placed into the Gannt chart
so that review of the phase can be managed. Questions to be asked:
1) Is due diligence exercise properly drafted?
2) Is due diligence exercise approved by the board?
And the last gate 4 takes place after the consortium development by signing the
Memorandum of Understanding. In this section, questions to be asked are:
1) Is the consortium formed?
2) Did everybody agree and sign the Memorandum of Understanding?
It is also important to define the key phases of the consortium project life cycle. See fig.11.

25. 24
Fig. 11: Key phases of the consortium project life cycle
Concept phase Initiation phase Execution Phase Closing Phase
Opportunity for the project in
decommissioning sector
defined.
Feasibility study
Requirement
analysis
Cost and benefit
analysis
Objectives set
Plan prepared
Alternatives
compared
Evaluation of the
proposed solution ->
CONSORTIUM.
Preferred option
introduced.
1) SWOT analysis.
2) Stakeholder analysis.
3) Objectives and
deliverables of the
project defined.
4) Assumptions,
considerations and
constraints of the project
considered.
5) Critical success criteria
and factors identified.
6) Identification of the
tasks and their
sequencing by using WBS.
7) Critical tasks defined.
8) Time and cost
estimations described.
9) Resources needed
identified.
10) Resources allocated.
11) Control tools
established.
Strategy and plan for
monitoring and control in
place.
1) Monitoring and review.
2) Report.
3) Review and schedule cost.
4) Change management in
place.
5) Control tools applied.
6) Communication plan
employed.
7) Quality management plan
exploited.
8) Review of stakeholders and
environmental factors
undertaken.
1) Monitoring and review.
2) Report.
3) Review and schedule cost.
4) Change management in
place.
5) Control tools applied.
6) Communication plan
employed.
7) Quality management plan
exploited.
8) Earned value management
Delivery of the project to
the project sponsor.
1) Client acceptance obtained.
2) Documentation completed.
3) Sign off.
4) Post audit applied.

26. 25
More specifically, concept phase of the consortium project defines the opportunity for
Rosemount Group in decommissioning of UKCS. Rosemount Group responded with three strategic
options with the aim of increasing its market position. Feasibility study for each of the proposed
option was conducted so that project’s fit with organisation’s strategic objectives could be
considered. Financial appraisal of the option is undertaken as well as business case for the chosen
strategic option.
Initiation phase of the project further evaluates and optimises preferred strategic option –
implementation of the consortium. Risk management plan as well as quality plan and
communication plan are prepared. Process is put in the place, identifying specific tasks needed for
implementation of the project as well as allocation of resources.
Execution phase is used for effective execution, monitoring and controlling of the project
management plan identified in the previous phase. Project manager monitors all the implementation
activities via earned value management and produces regular reports which are then communicated
to the project team and stakeholders.
Handover and closeout phase in consortium project occurs during the signing of the
Memorandum of Understanding, deliverables of the project are handed over to the sponsor and
users. Audit has to be in place to review if the deliverables met the acceptance criteria, therefore
project is ready to be formally accepted.
Each of the phases is accompanied with effective reviews of stakeholders and environmental
impacts which might have an effect on the project completion.

27. 26
Stakeholder analysis
Fig. 12: Stakeholder network – Rosemount Group
Based on the stakeholder analysis network by Gray and Larson, 2007.
It is important for Rosemount Group to determine the needs and expectations of
stakeholders so that project manager in charge of the consortium project can create an environment
where stakeholders can contribute their skills for the successful completion of the project. (Burke,
1999).
Internal stakeholders of the project are functional managers, more specifically -
procurement, risk, planning, finance, quality assurance, HR and governance and accountability
managers who can influence the project as well as project team, top management, administrative
support, project sponsor and project manager himself.
More specifically, project team consists of individual members under each functional
manager. (See fig. 13).

28. 27
Fig.13: Consortium project team
External stakeholders for consortium project are other companies such as Rosemount
Group’s competitors in decommissioning as well as companies trying to enter the consortium or
other associations.
Our main external stakeholders are the potential partners particularly because of the aim or
entering the consortium with us, therefore partnership with them as with key stakeholders must be
built and nurtured as suggested by Kerzner, 2009.
Our company has to consider government agencies such as DECC as the stakeholder as well
as UK government and other international agencies while building consortium focussed on
decommissioning. Special attention should be paid to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) and
Competition Commission while setting up consortium because of the threat of affecting competition
law.
Rosemount Group also has to be aware of its customers and their expectations as well as
contractors and environmental pressure groups which might have an impact on the project.

29. 28
Fig.14: Stakeholder grid (applied from APM, 2006).
AGAINST PROJECT FOR PROJECT
HIGH
POWER
LOW
POWER
HIGH LOW LOW HIGH
INTEREST
To be able to determine stakeholder management actions, stakeholder grid was used to
evaluate stakeholder’s position in relationship to the project as proposed by APM, 2006. Project
sponsor needs to manage stakeholders to ensure their positive interest in the project.
It is not recommended to give project manager the responsibility of stakeholder
management because of the potential conflict of interest as suggested by Kerzner, 2009.
As a tool for successful management of stakeholders communication plan can be used.
Communication lines for consortium project are introduced below in fig.15, followed by
communication plan in table 11.
Environmental groups Other organizations
OFT
Competition commission
Functional managers
Project team
UK government
Contractors
Administrative support
Customers
Top management
Project sponsor
Project manager
Consortium partners

30. 29
Fig.15 : Communication lines

31. 30
COMMUNICATION PLAN
Stakeholders Information
required by
project
Frequency Information
disseminated
from project
Frequency Format Responsible
Top
management
PID Once Milestones
Reports
Every 2
weeks
Email
Meeting
PM
Senior man.
Sponsor /
Shareholders
PID Once Report
Milestones
Every 2
weeks
Meeting PM
Senior man.
Project team PID Once Report
Milestones
Every 2
weeks
Meeting PM
Senior man.
Functional
managers
WBS,
Resources
Twice WBS
Gannt chart
Every 1
week
Meeting PM
Other
organizations
PID Once Milestones
Reports
Every 2
weeks
Meeting PM,
Senior man.
Other
organizations
Board reports Four times Reports Every 1
week
Email PM

32. 31
Risk assessment
Risk assessment was used as a part of this document especially because of the statement of
Loosemore et al., 2006 and other researchers who defined neglection of risk identification process as
one of the reason for project failure.
Risk management plan
To be able to identify, analyze and manage associated risks with the consortium project,
following risk management process was implemented:
Fig.16: Risk management process
Remodeled from: APM, 2004
It is useful tool for recording and monitoring of the risk management activities throughout
the life cycle. (APM, 2006).
To be able to identify most of the risks associated with the implementation of the consortium
project, project scope and objectives need to be identified as well as stakeholders of the project and
environmental factors which might affect project throughout the lifecycle. Project scope and
objectives are identified in table 4 and stakeholder analysis was performed in fig.12 therefore
environmental factors need to be identified.
To be able to identify environmental factors which might have an impact on the consortium
project, PESTLE analysis was used. (See table 12).

33. 32
Table 12 : PESTLE ANALYSIS OF THE CONSORTIUM PROJECT
PESTLE ANALYSIS OF THE CONSORTIUM PROJECT
POLITICAL DECC , UK government, OFT and Competiton Commission.
ECONOMIC Current economic crisis, inflation and interest rate, economic growth of the
country.
SOCIAL Cultural trends (waste disposal, protection of environment), little knowledge of
companies about decommissioning, collaboration of companies in
decommissioning sector.
TECHNOLOGICAL No procedures for successful development of consortium were introduced as
well as no procedures to follow while decommissioning oil rigs. Technology
requirements for decommissioning might differ from the requirements of the
jobs done by Rosemount Group at the moment. Also our partners might prefer
to use other technology and processes within the consortium.
LEGAL In terms of decommissioning: National governments obligations, Petroleum Act
1998, Health and Safety regulations, licensing required for decommissioning. In
terms of development of the consortium: acts and regulations developed by
OFT and Competition Commission.
ENVIRONMENTAL UKCS location – environmental protection.
Following table highlights the risk identified in the identification phase of the risk
management process. Risk categories are based on project objectives, stakeholders and factors
affecting the project described in table above. (See table 13).
Risk log table is followed by probability impact grid (PIG)(see fig.17), which was used for the
purpose of risk response planning. There are four possibilites of how to repond to the risks defined in
the risk log (table 13): avoid, mitigate, accept or transfer. It is recommended that risks within yellow
and red zones are assigned to the project team members. Therefore all of the risks identified in the
risk management process will be assigned to specific person in the project team to be reviewed and
mitigated.
After the third part of the process (responding to the project risks), project risks reviewing
needs to be done throughout the project life cycle so that mitigation as well as other responses to
them can be up to date.

34. 33
Last table was introduced as the third part of the risk process and it defines responses made
to the risk identified in the risk log which can be seen in table 14. Four types of responses can be
implemented, mitigation, accepting, avoding and transfering. Three types of the responses were
used as a part of the risk management, specifically mitigation, accepting and avoiding the risks.
Table 13: Risk log
RISK CATEGORY DESCRIPTION PROBABILITY IMPACT
1. Market share Difficulty of establishing an identity of the consortium MEDIUM 4
2. Market share Inability to develop trust and integration LOW 5
3. Market share Affection of future due to other parties‘ failure MEDIUM 4
4. Scope Ineffective negotiation – less time effective MEDIUM 4
5. Partners Inability to restrict/limit liability MEDIUM 3
6. Partners Inability to attract 3rd parties MEDIUM 3
7. Partners Lead company liable for everything MEDIUM 3
8. Stakeholders Inability to motivate project team MEDIUM 3
9. Stakeholders Lack of contribution of functional managers LOW 3
10. Stakeholders Regulation of government agencies LOW 4
11. Economic Economic crisis make costs bigger MEDIUM 2
12. Economic Inflation might cause loss of value of money MEDIUM 2
13. Social factor Entering consortium with companies with lack of
knowledge of decommissioning process
MEDIUM 5
14. Social factor Using different processes within consortium MEDIUM 4
15. Legal factor Regulations for decommissioning MEDIUM 2

35. 34
Fig.17: Probability Impact Grid of the risks
Impact
5 2 13
4 10 1, 3, 4, 14
3 9 5, 6, 7, 8
2 11, 12, 15
1
Low Medium High
Probability
Impact on achievment of objectives: Impact rating:
High
5
SIGNIFICANT Scale: 4 - 5
Moderate
4
MODERATE Scale: 2 - 3
Medium
3
MINOR Scale: 1
Minor
2
Low
1

36. 35
Table 14: Risk matrix with risk responses
RISK MATRIX WITH MITIGATION ACTIONS
RISK CATEGORY DESCRIPTION PROBABILITY IMPACT RESPONSE NEW PROBABILITY NEW IMPACT
1) Market share Difficult to establish an identity MEDIUM 4 Memorandum of understanding MEDIUM 3
2) Market share Inability ti develop trust / integration LOW 5 Memorandum of understanding MEDIUM 4
3) Market share Affection of future due to other's failure MEDIUM 4 Liability limited MEDIUM 3
4) Scope Time consuming if not negotiated MEDIUM 4 PM negotiation skills improved LOW 4
5) Partners Difficult to restrict / limit liability MEDIUM 3 Memorandum of understanding LOW 3
6) Partners Inability to attract 3rd parties MEDIUM 3 Memorandum of understanding LOW 3
7) Partners Lead company liable for everything MEDIUM 3 Memorandum of understanding MEDIUM 3
8) Stakeholders Inability to motivate project team LOW 3 Communication plan LOW 2
9) Stakeholders Lack of constribution of functional managers LOW 3 Communication plan LOW 2
10) Stakeholders Regulation of government agencies MEDIUM 4 Accept MEDIUM 4
11) Economic Econominc crisis make costs bigger MEDIUM 2 Accept MEDIUM 2
12) Economic Inflation - loss of value of money over the time MEDIUM 2 Accept MEDIUM 2
13) Social Entering consortium with companies no capabilites MEDIUM 5 Due diligence exercise LOW 3
14) Social Using different processes MEDIUM 4 Avoid MEDIUM 4
15) Legal Regulations for decommissioning MEDIUM 2 Accept MEDIUM 2

37. 36
Recommendations
This project initiation document identified strategic option of developing the consortium
with the aim of improving market position in the decommissioning market for Rosemount Group.
High level business case was introduced, project scope, deliverables and objectives were
identifed as well as any assumptions, considerations and constraints of the project. Financial budget
of the proposed project was introduced with estimated pay off time. Critical success criteria and
factors were defined followed by project management plan using WBS, Gannt Chart, milestone and
decision gates to show the sequences of the tasks and their importance. Key phases of the project
life cycle were evaluated and stakeholder analysis as well as risk assessment were conducted.
Therefore recommendations need to be made.
It is recommended for project manager to use Microsoft Project as a useful tool for project
planning, monitoring and controlling which is essential for successful project completion as defined
by Kerzner, 2009.
It is also recommended that project manager is not involved with dealing with project
stakeholders because of the posibility of conflict of interest.
It is also essential for project manager to regularly scan and review stakeholders,
environmental impacts and risks as long as it is critical for successful completion of the project.
Specific people need to be assign for risk mitigation process as defined in the last section of
the project iniation document.
Further research and meetings should be held to identify specific processes taking place in
the consortium such as contract management and so on as long as consortium project defined by
Rosemount Group is only used for implementation of the consortium, not for setting up specific
processes and rules within the association.
Project manager also needs to define quality management as well as change control process
for this particular project so that any changes required can be mitigated and therefore project is not
affected on time and budget.

38. 37
References
ASSOCIATION FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT (APM), 2004. Project Risk Analysis & Management Guide.
2nd
ed. Buckinghamshire, UK: APM Publishing.
ASSOCIATION FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT (APM), 2006. APM Body of Knowledge. 5th ed.
Buckinghamshire, UK: APM Publishing.
BURKE, R., 1999. Project Management: Planning and Control Techniques. 3rd
ed. West Sussex, UK:
John Wiley & Sons LTD.
DNS, 2011. Decommissioning mission. DECOM North Sea NEWS. [online]. 3, pp.9. Available from:
http://www.decomnorthsea.com/downloads/decom_news_3.pdf [Accessed 14 December].
EAST OF ENGLAND ENERGY GROUP, 2010. Platform decommissioning will be big business. EEEgr
News. [online]. 1, pp.24. Available from: http://www.eeegr.com/uploads/DOCS/november-2010-
newsletter.pdf [Accessed 14 December].
GRAY, C.F. and LARSON, E.W., 2007. Project management the managerial process. 5th
ed. Chicago,
USA: Irwin.
KERZNER, H., 2009. Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling and
Controlling. 10th
ed. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons LTD.
OIL & GAS UK, 2013. Economic Report 2013. [online]. Available at: https://publ.com/N6D1Taa#73/z
[Accessed 14 December 2013].
OIL AND GAS UK, 2013. 2012 Decommissioning Insight. [online]. Available at
http://www.oilandgasuk.co.uk/cmsfiles/modules/publications/pdfs/OP073.pdf [Accessed 14
December 2013].
RIGZONE, 2013. How Does Decommissioning Work? [online]. Available at:
http://www.rigzone.com/training/insight.asp?i_id=354 [Accessed 14 December 2013].
SCOTTISH ENTERPRISE. Decommissioning in the UKCS. [online]. Available at http://www.scottish-
enterprise.com/~/media/SE_2013/Knowledge%20Hub/Publication/Decommission%20ing%20UKCS%
20study.PDF [Accessed 14 December 2013].
Bibliography
ARCHIBALD, R.D., 1988. Variations in Critical Success Factors over the Stages in the Project Life Cycle.
Journal of Management, 14, pp. 5 – 18.
BRYSON, J. M. and BROMILEY, P., 1993. Critical factors affecting the planning and implementation of
major projects. Strategic Management Journal, 14, pp. 319 – 337.
BUREAU VERITAS, 2013. Decommissioning on the UK Continental Shelf – an overview of regulations.
[online]. Available at:

39. 38
http://www.bureauveritas.co.uk/wps/wcm/connect/57fff3804a9e19d68e3e8f1c64ad0a9f/BV_Deco
mmissioning+document_low+res-v3.pdf?MOD=AJPERES [Accessed 14 December 2013].
COLE, G. A., 2004. Management Theory and Practice. 6th
ed. London, UK: Geraldine Lyons.
DECC, 2013. Oil and gas: decommissioning of offshore installations and pipelines. [online]. Available
at: https://www.gov.uk/oil-and-gas-decommissioning-of-offshore-installations-and-pipelines
[Accessed 14 December 2013].
DONELLY, J.G., GIBSON, J.L. and IVANCEVICH, J.M., 1995. Fundamentals of management. 9th
ed.
Chicago, USA: Irwin.
HOWELL, J.M., and SHEA, C.M., 2001. Individual differences, environmental scanning, innovation
framing, and champion behaviour: key predictors of project performance. Journal of Product
Innovation Management, 18(1), pp. 15 – 27.
LOCK, D., 2007. Project Management. 9th
ed. Hampshire, UK: Gower Publishing Limited.
MANTEL, S. J. et al., 2011. Project Management in Practice. 4th
ed. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley &
Sons LTD.
PEARSON, J., 2011. AMEC plc – Capital markets event United Kingdom Continental Shelf (UKCS).
[online]. Available at: http://www.amec.com/documents/investors/events/30-capital-markets-
event/ukcs-john-pearson.pdf [Accessed 14 December 2013].