Customer connections project report

c u s t o m e r c o n n e c t i o n

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

11
Collaboration between onshore and offshore.

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.

14
white space
This is basically everything that was written on the map.

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”.

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

17
?
No one seems to know who the end users
of the products/systems actually are.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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

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)

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

27
If production management succeeds in increasing production,
the workload for operations is consequently increased.

28
Typically tacit knowledge (top) vs. analytical knowledge (bottom).

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

30
The decision to focus efforts from the wellhead and up is based
upon ABBs existing operations rather than their customers needs.

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

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.

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

35
“It’s all about the human factors.”

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.

37
Image of the support centre at Statoil. Surprisingly tranquil, with a very pleasant staff.

38
“We lack a common terminology and data integration.
It sounds so simple, but we’ve been working on it since the 80’s.”

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)

40
Reflections
after stavanger
Thoughts/ideas?

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

49
Due to Net Present Value and a volatile price market operators
in general wish to produce as much as possible today.

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

51
production/recovery
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
logistics
ManageMent
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.
global
econoMy
stock
Market
Market
deMand
estiMated
oil prices
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
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
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)
production process
integ
ral
part
(offsh
ore)
integ
ral
part
(onsh
ore)
support
&superviso
ryfunction
support
function
expert 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).

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.

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.

55
Images of “spaghetti map”

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.

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).

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.

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

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

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

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...”.

63
Image of mini map and templates used in the data collection process.

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

65
The factor Facility design with first and second degree connections.

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.

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

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

70
Relations that affect facility design
Relations that are affected by facility design

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

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

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.

74
The tool used in a business development meeting to aid decision making and discussions.

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

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

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:

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

81
Perhaps a potential user of the interactive tool?

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

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.

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

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

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

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

89
This section of the report is a short reflection
regarding methods and processes used during
this project. Enjoy.

90
Colleen Ponto holding a workshop at the Systems Oriented Design Symposium.

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

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.

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.

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.

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 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
logistics
ManageMent
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.
Market
deMand
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
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
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)
production process
int
eg
ral
pa
rt(off
shore)
integral
part (on
shore
)
support &supervisoryfunction
support
function
expert 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

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

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

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

Customer connections project report

Customer connections project report

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (20)

Ähnlich wie Customer connections project report

Ähnlich wie Customer connections project report (20)

Mehr von Birger Sevaldson

Mehr von Birger Sevaldson (7)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Customer connections project report