Driving operational performance in oil and gas
ey-driving-operational-performance-in-oil-and-gas
ey-driving-operational-performance-in-oil-and-gas
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
1<br />
2<br />
3<br />
We identified three ma<strong>in</strong> reasons why companies first <strong>in</strong>troduced an <strong>operational</strong> excellence program:<br />
To improve HSE <strong>performance</strong>,<br />
typically follow<strong>in</strong>g an HSE<br />
<strong>in</strong>cident. Companies that had<br />
not experienced an HSE <strong>in</strong>cident<br />
<strong>in</strong>trodu ced an <strong>operational</strong><br />
excellence program <strong>in</strong> response<br />
to high-profile HSE <strong>in</strong>cidents <strong>in</strong><br />
the <strong>in</strong>dustry.<br />
To improve f<strong>in</strong>ancial <strong>and</strong><br />
operat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>performance</strong>, with<br />
a focu s on redu c<strong>in</strong>g costs <strong>and</strong><br />
clos<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>performance</strong> gap<br />
relative to peers.<br />
As part of a wider corporate<br />
transformation program or a<br />
shift <strong>in</strong> strategic direction.<br />
Six most common <strong>operational</strong> excellence focus areas<br />
8 0 % 8 0 %<br />
7 3 % 6 0 % 2 0 % 1 3 %<br />
E x p an s i v e<br />
as s e t re l i ab i l i t y<br />
E x p an s i v e<br />
p ro d u ct i o n<br />
efficiency<br />
Man ag e m e n t<br />
of HSE risk<br />
O p e rat i n g co s t<br />
re d u ct i o n<br />
F o cu s o n<br />
cu l t u re<br />
E m p l o y e e<br />
re t e n t i o n<br />
F ou r ma<strong>in</strong> ou tcomes of companies u s<strong>in</strong>g O E programs<br />
$<br />
Improved HSE metrics<br />
4 3 %<br />
C o m p an i e s re p o rt e d d e cl i n e s<br />
i n b o t h t he t o t al re co rd ab l e<br />
i n j u ry / i n ci d e n t rat e an d d ay s -<br />
away-from-work <strong>in</strong>cidents for<br />
e m p l o y e e s an d co n t ract o rs . T w o<br />
co m p an i e s achi e v e d t he i r b e s t -<br />
e v e r re s u l t s o n s p i l l an d p e rs o n al<br />
s af e t y m e as u re s .<br />
C ost sav<strong>in</strong>gs<br />
4 3 %<br />
C o s t s av i n g s i n cl u d e d achi e v i n g<br />
re d u ct i o n s i n t o t al o p e rat i n g<br />
co s t s as w e l l as i n are as s u ch as<br />
w e l l d ri l l i n g co s t s . T he m aj o ri t y<br />
re p o rt e d t hat t he y d e l i v e re d o n<br />
co s t re d u ct i o n t arg e t s ahe ad o f<br />
s che d u l e .<br />
I mproved asset u ptime/<br />
availability<br />
2 9 %<br />
O i l an d g as co m p an i e s w i t h O E<br />
p ro g ram s re p o rt e d i m p ro v e d<br />
as s e t u p t i m e o r av ai l ab i l i t y .<br />
T w o co m p an i e s had t arg e t e d<br />
top-quartile <strong>performance</strong> <strong>in</strong><br />
as s e t av ai l ab i l i t y .<br />
I ncreased <strong>oil</strong>/ <strong>gas</strong><br />
produ ction<br />
2 9 %<br />
T he i n cre as e d as s e t u p t i m e m ay<br />
be l<strong>in</strong>ked to the <strong>in</strong>creased <strong>oil</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
g as p ro d u ct i o n achi e v e d i n 29 %<br />
o f O E p ro g ram s .<br />
<strong>Driv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>operational</strong> <strong>performance</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>oil</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>gas</strong> |<br />
1 3