10 common reasons why ai implmentations fail
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/30/2019 10 Common Reasons Why AI Implmentations Fail
1/3
The ten most common reasons
why asset integrity
implementations fail
Dr. Steven W. CiaraldiVelosi Asset Integrity Ltd, May 2012,
www.oilandgasfundamentals.com
This article is brought to you as part of a unique new
online learning resource for the global oil and gas
business aimed at educating the industry on the
essentials of asset integrity management. Find out
more by visitingwww.oilandgasfundamentals.com.
Compare the approachesof the top ten operatingcompanies around the world to tackling the asset
integrity challenge, and you will find many
similarities. Whether in the models used to identify
risks or the approaches used to manage them.
Industry thinking has evolved to a point where most
agree on the fundamental elements of how to
approach integrity management.
However, look closer and you might find some
further commonalities. The reasons why asset
integrity management strategies often fail to achieve
the results expected of them are also often the same
from operator to operator.
So what are these reasons, and how can you ensure
you are building them into your implementation
strategy to ensure you arent set to repeat them? In
this article, Velosis Stephen Ciaraldi, a 30 year BP
veteran, will walk you through the top 10 reasons
why integrity management implementations fail and
give you some valuable advice to ensure your
integrity programme to avoid the same fate.
Reason one: attempting to tackle integrity
in isolation
Perhaps the most common reasons for asset integrity
strategies to fail is integrity specialists trying to do
integrity in isolation. Integrity is not a subject which
thrives in a silo it requires the entire business to be
aware, on board, and supporting a unified effort. But
not only can integrity not success if standing alone in
order to succeed, it needs to be truly aligned with the
business. People need to know how integrity affects
their day to day job, they need to be encouraged,
cajoled, instructed and incentivised to ensure that
they are working together. Different groups have
different goals, not caring about others goals, and
areas where people dont like to be tasked with doing
others work is a demonstration of a silo mentality. If
that type of silo mentality exists, there will be
problems in implementing integrity management.
Reason two: losing sight of process, people
and plant
It may seem obvious, but an asset integrity plan is a
extremely complex undertaking with many moving
parts and even more stakeholders involved in its
successful execution. Recognising that there are
many reasons why asset integrity implementations
dont achieve the results expected of them is an
important starting point. Problems arent confined to
one particular area of an integrity implementation
and can just as easily emerge in either the process,
the people of the plant components which make up
an integrated integrity management programme.
Focus too narrowly on one area, and you can be sure
problems will emerge elsewhere. The key to
implementation is the effective working together of
these three components, and ensuring that checks
and balances exist at every stage to help you.
Reason three: not addressing the
competition between productivity and
integrity
Companies failing to properly budget for and book
production deferrals are also key reasons animplementation can fall down. It has been known for
individuals to go on site and say its not my job to
maximise productionits my job to assure integrity
of facilities and to implement the asset integrity
requirements which naturally brings them into
conflict with those whose job it is to maximise
production. In practice, an enormous amount of
resistance is often faced by integrity specialists from
people whose primary goal is to maximise production
and who are going to get less money in their bonus
because you are asking to do work on their facility.
Having that production loss booked in advance and
everyone agreeing is a really important obstacle to
overcome. Proactive companies incentive their staff
on operational safety as well as asset productivity.
http://www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/http://www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/http://www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/http://www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/http://www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/http://www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/http://www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/ -
7/30/2019 10 Common Reasons Why AI Implmentations Fail
2/3
Reason four: failing to monitor progress
once an implementation plan is underway
Many implementations fail because their architects
fail to effectively monitor their progress once the
implementation moves from theory to reality. No
plan is perfect, and once you finalise an integrity plan
and it may change within an hour. So it is important
to prepare for the fact that nothing goes to plan, so
constant monitoring will be required to ensure your
plan stays on track. Successful integrity strategies are
always putting corrective actions in place to ensure
you achieve at least your primary objective. If you
dont monitor, therefore, you will not achieve your
objective. Expect it, plan for it, you will need to flex to
achieve your plan. One of the techniques which can
be applied to help here is multiple-level KPI
monitoring using a wide range of KPIs. When things
go red, corrective actions need to be placed.
Reason five: failing to realise that asset
integrity management never actually ends
We all know that asset integrity is a cradle to grave
process, right? Of course we do, and yet in too many
cases, asset integrity advisors can approach a project
with a mind-set of having been brought into an
operation to carry out some integrity work, and once
that work has been done and that asset integrityadvisor has been allocated elsewhere, a perception
remains that that job will then be finished and go
away. It really doesnt work that way. Asset integrity
requires constant monitoring and constant vigilance
even when especially when responsibility shifts
from one team to another. Related to this, in cases
where things are going well, it is very easy for a
dangerous level of complacency to creep in. People
dont worry and people start to accept risks that
shouldnt be accepted. Its a continuous process and
needs constant vigilance. Never forget that.
Reason six: a lack of understanding of the
economics of integrity management
The reality in which we operate is such that in an
ageing facility requires increasing levels of
investment in asset integrity, even though production
levels and therefore profitability levels might be
declining. Facilities get older, more water is
produced, and asset integrity concerns rise. This
might sound like common sense to the integrity
specialists, but many non-technical people
including those in decision-making positions like to
maintain constant lifting costs in their field
development planning. In short: the need for
integrity rises as the barrels produced decline. It is
important that non-technical people involved in
planning understand that integrity implementation
costs are not production related, they are age-related
and need to be factored in accordingly to avoid
corner-cutting later on down the line.
Reason seven: a lack of an integrity
awareness culture
The best definition of culture I have seen describes it
as how we behave when no ones looking. Creating
a culture of integrity awareness is often cited as the
number one objective for an asset integrity
implementation. This, however, is much easier said
than done and is actually among the most common
reasons integrity rollouts fail. So how do we go about
building a robust integrity culture? First, people need
to know what asset integrity is. Training is required in
the fundamentals of the subject and how they apply
to the business they are operating in. Contractors
should be included in this training too. Leaders must
push the integrity agenda. If leaders push, people will
follow. Finally, you need to encourage honesty. If
staff are afraid to report a hydrocarbon leak and fear
it may affect their performance rank or pay, then you
have a problem.
Reason eight: failing to effectively prioritise
what needs to be done
An essential element of implementing a successful
asset integrity strategy is making sure you are doing
the right work in the right place at the right time. Too
many integrity strategies fail to prioritise the work
that needs to be done based on a clear
understanding of where the most serious risk lies,
instead, they prioritise based on financial
considerations or manpower availability. In a large
asset, your integrity strategy will be complex, will
contain a large number of moving parts, and will
require lots of manpower, so plan ahead, dont
underestimate the time and effort required for this,
start early and make multiple passes at each problem
you are tackling. Sometimes its not practical to do
major upgrades which require production to be
affected so planning on-the-job operational integrity
activities is the easier route to take, but never forget
that people still make mistakes.
-
7/30/2019 10 Common Reasons Why AI Implmentations Fail
3/3
Reason nine: not effectively balancing the
experience levels of site staff
In every operating scenario you can imagine, you
would expect new people to be part of the operating
unit, but too many new faces or raw recruits working
on the same project at any one time runs the risk of
integrity failure it is important to make sure there is
a balance. Added to this, effective management of
contractors is key as well. Too many people focus
only on their own staff and dont focus enough
attention on the other parties involved in operating
their asset. The final manpower lesson to bear in
mind is that once the programme is agreed and the
funding is approved, the time to get the team
together is typically longer than you ever imagine.
Good engineers may not be integrity experts and
dedicated integrity teams take a long time to
assemble and get in place bear this in mind and
start early to avoid repeating this common mistake.
Reason ten: Failing to get outside
perspectives
Weve all experienced situations where we have been
so consumed by a particular problem that we can fail
to see potential solutions which others with the
benefit of a different perspective might recognise
immediately. The same applies with an asset integrityimplementation, and that is why this represents the
final reason that many fail to achieve their objectives.
Furthermore, because implementations are such
dynamic activities, there can often seem to be no
time to take a strategic view of where you are. For
this reason, a tactical review defined as a periodic
assessment of a particular issue is key to carry out
on a regular basis ideally with the input of an
external party who can view the problem you are so
absorbed in with an independent eye. An annual
integrity review can help you see trends that you
wouldnt see if you just looked at the metrics day by
day.
Dr. Stephen W. Ciaraldi is a Senior
Integrity Management Specialist with
Velosi Asset Integrity, and is a 30-year
BP veteran with integrity experience
on five continents.
Stephen leads an online course on the
Fundamentals of Asset Integrity Implementation,
more details of which can be found at:
www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/courses/asset-integrity.
http://www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/courses/asset-integrityhttp://www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/courses/asset-integrityhttp://www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/courses/asset-integrityhttp://www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/courses/asset-integrityhttp://www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/courses/asset-integrity