Integrated operations and the need for a balanced development of people, technology and organisation
Authors: Ringstad Arne Jarl , Andersen Ketil 
Published: February 2016

A fundamental premise underlying the industry's focus on integrated operations (IO or 'i-field/e-field/smartfield') is that IO will improve decision making. Improved decisions should in turn lead to safer and more efficient operations. IO characteristics that are associated with better decision making include: Increased use of real time data, more multi-disciplinary teamwork, more work performed independent of physical location, and more work performed in a parallel as opposed to a serial work mode.

However, IO introduces potential threats to high quality decision making as well. These threats include: A sceptical workforce resisting change, group based and distributed decision making that blurs lines of command, information overload, reduced understanding of local (i.e. installation specific) factors as decision makers are removed from the drilling and production facilities, and heightened complexity and interactivity can make it difficult for decision makers to maintain overview during an incident.

The present paper describes how potential drawbacks of IO were met when IO was implemented on major oil fields in the North Sea. Emphasis was placed on end user involvement in the implementation of IO, development of training and information material focusing on new ways of working, human centred design of operation rooms and ICT, and controlled changes in relevant work processes.

The main conclusion that can be drawn this case study is the need to balance changes in technology with corresponding changes in people and organisation. Efforts to maintain, or create a new, equilibrium between people, technology and organisation are fundamental in achieving IO's goal: Better decisions. A myopic focus on technology, on the other hand, may result in resistance to change in the organisation, and the true potential of IO will not be realised.

Introduction

Studies on decision making in the oil and gas industry have shown that decision making processes regularly deviates from ideal or prescriptive models of decision making, and that outcomes frequently are suboptimal from a cost-benefit perspective (1, 2). Faulty decision making seems to flourish both in a major field development context and in a day-to-day operational context.

A number of factors can explain why high quality decision making is difficult in the industry. It is well known that cognitive biases have a strong influence on decision making (3), and the uncertainties associated with models, data and tools used by the industry (e.g. reservoir models) may give these biases a particularly powerful impact. Furthermore, in a volatile market with exploration and production in increasingly remote and politically unstable regions, the best strategic options are often clearly identifiable only in hindsight.

However, means to improve decision making may not be too far away. Today the oil and gas industry is undergoing a transition made possible by new and powerful information technology. Traditional work processes and organisational structures are challenged by more efficient and integrated approaches to exploration and production. The new approaches may reduce the impact of traditional obstacles - whether they are geographical, organisational or professional - to efficient decision making (4, 5).

Descriptions of the new approaches exist elsewhere (e.g. 15), and will not be repeated here. The approaches can be subsumed under the heading Integrated Operations (IO). Numerous definitions of IO exist in the industry. In (6) IO is defined as:

New work processes which use real time data to improve the collaboration between disciplines, organisations, companies and locations to achieve safer, better and faster decisions.

In this definition improved decision making is highlighted as the main goal of IO. It is assumed that improved decision making processes in turn will lead to increased production, less downtime, fewer irregularities, a reduced number of HSE-related incidents, and in general a more efficient and stream-lined operation.