Delivering World-Class Exploration Drilling-Integration of Design, Planning, and Execution
Authors: Thorogood J.L. , Jackson M.D. , Thorsen O.H. 
Published: June 2014

Summary
Over the last 2 years, a series of organizational structures, systems, and processes produced outstanding results from a five-well exploration drilling program that involved three different rigs and teams. Risk assessment is a key thread that runs through the process, from high level risks in a conceptual design to details of day-to-day execution. It is robustly linked to the process for estimating well times and contingency costs and provides a means of communicating risks to business delivery up to management.
A correct set of well objectives and design basis is the foundation of an effective detailed planning phase involving a large team of contractors. Integration of service suppliers and drilling contractor into a comprehensive planning effort is key to planning and execution success. Standard project-management techniques are combined with structuring of the organization around delivery of key elements of the well to ensure that a large project team is properly focused on achieving a world-class operational target. Detailed planning ensures flawless operation and efficient recovery from setbacks. The rig team is critical to getting the detail right. In the end, rigorous post-analysis is essential to ensure that lessons learned, not only about the technical aspects of the well, but also the process, are fed back into the planning of future operations.

Introduction
Development of the work described here coincided with many things happening throughout the industry during 1997-98. BP Norway was evolving into an organization that delivered its activities on a project basis, while an industry wide capital projects benchmarking study demonstrated a close correlation between the quality of preplanning (front-end loading) and efficiency of execution. Added to this, the deepwater drilling campaign in Norway was a cause for management concern. None of the wells drilled by early 1998 delivered within budget (Fig. 1). Seen in this context-as an issue of credibility for BP's Norwegian operation-continuation of the status quo was unacceptable. Consequently, in late 1997, we reviewed factors that contributed to previously successful projects and seemed to be common to these operations. From these factors and subsequent experience, we have developed a set of 10 principles.Commitment of project manager and full management support.Highly competent team members.Clear delivery-focused accountabilities.Early and effective planning.In-depth risk assessment and management.Efficient processes (cost, schedule, documentation, logistics).Alignment of the team to a world-class goal.Everyone involved and able to listen and speak openly.Performance assessed continuously vs. stretch targets.Seriousness about the principles rather than just lip service.
In addition, we concluded that the conventional plan needed to be extended and made the execute/evaluate cycle into a five-stage project.Prepare to plan.Plan the operation.Prepare to drill.Drill the well.Close the loop-learn.
The motivation here is that "business-as-usual" results follow from standard working practices. To do things differently, we had to spend time early in the project thinking about how to do the planning and execution rather than jumping straight into them like we normally do.
Earlier work1–3 indicated that critical attributes of the project team included its ability to learn, its sense of purpose, its structure, associated work processes, target setting, and performance measurement. This paper describes how we put that thinking into action, from the original well concept, through the planning phase, to execution and post-analysis; how the risk-assessment process is an integral part of the whole and the results achieved to date on the Norwegian operations; and how our approach is evolving as our experience grows.

Conceptual Well Design
Clearly defined well objectives are critical to an effective and efficient operation. In many instances, compromises are made during well operations for "operational reasons," such as not running logs and not cutting cores. This is symptomatic of a defective objective-setting process. If the data from the missing logs really are required to fulfill well objectives, the drilling team must ensure that the proposed design guarantees delivery rather than leaving it to operational chance. Colocating an experienced drilling engineer with the exploration team (geologist, geophysicist, petroleum engineer, operations geologist, and petrophysicist) during prospect development seems to work.