Best Practices and Methods in Hydrocarbon Resource Estimation, Production and Emissions Forecasting, Uncertainty Evaluation and Decision Making

2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.M. Jonkman ◽  
C.F.M. Bos ◽  
J.N. Breunese ◽  
D.T.K. Morgan ◽  
J.A. Spencer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Uncertainty Evaluation ◽  
Resource Estimation ◽  
Hydrocarbon Resource

Best Practices and Methods in Hydrocarbon Resource Estimation, Production and Emissions Forecasting, Uncertainty Evaluation, and Decision Making

2002 ◽  
Vol 5 (02) ◽  
pp. 146-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.M. Jonkman ◽  
C.F.M. Bos ◽  
J.N. Breunese ◽  
D.T.K. Morgan ◽  
J.A. Spencer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Work Group ◽  
Probabilistic Methods ◽  
Uncertainty Evaluation ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Resource Estimation ◽  
Oil Companies ◽  
Hydrocarbon Resource ◽  
Current Practices

Summary On behalf of a group of sponsors consisting of the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate (NPD) and most E&P companies active in Norway, a work group was established to author a report on the best practices and methods in hydrocarbon resource estimation, production and emissions forecasting, uncertainty evaluation, and decision making. The work group is part of Norway's forum for Forecasting and Uncertainty evaluatioN (FUN). Following a detailed data acquisition and interviewing phase used to establish an inventory of the current practice of all sponsors involved, the work group postulated a relationship between a company's practices and its economic performance. A key distinguishing factor between companies is the degree to which probabilistic methods are adopted in integrated multidisciplinary processes aimed at supporting the decision-making process throughout the asset life cycle and portfolio of assets. Companies have been ranked in terms of this degree of integration, and best practices are recommended. In many companies, a gap seems to exist between available and applied technology. Data and (aggregated) information exchange between governments and companies is also discussed. A best practice based on their respective decision-making processes is recommended. Introduction FUN1 was established in 1997 and has 18 member companies, in addition to NPD. The forum is a Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS) arena used to determine best practices and methods for hydrocarbon resource and emissions estimation, forecasting uncertainty evaluation, and decision making. It focuses on matters related to forecasting and uncertainty evaluation of future oil and gas production. Its main purpose is to optimize the interplay between the private industry and the national authorities wishing to regulate their national assets. The basic question that began the FUN Best Practices project was whether the accuracy of Norway's historical production forecasts has been disappointing because of erroneous contributions from the companies or because of wrong aggregation by NPD. Which best practices could improve this situation? Whereas reserves form the basis for production, capital expenditures, operating expenditures, and emissions forecasting, the decision-making process in the various companies and national authorities links the various components together. Using the latest guidelines created by SPE, the World Petroleum Congresses (WPC), and the American Assn. Of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG)2 for reserves reporting (allowing the use of probabilistic methods), the project concentrated on assessing the potential advantages of probabilistic techniques when used in combination with fully integrated asset management workflow processes. After a discussion of the current practices of the various companies and authorities visited, best practices are formulated in the fields of estimating reserves, production, costs and emissions forecasting, decision making, planning, and communications. The paper concludes with recommendations on how to move from the current practices to the desired best practices. Methodology of the Study The methodology used by the FUN Best Practices Team involved a series of interviews with:The Norwegian Operating Units of the oil companies sponsoring the project to obtain their views on the current practices.The Norwegian authorities.The headquarters of several major oil companies to obtain their views on best practices in production and emissions forecasting and decision making.Government officials in other major oil- or gas-producing countries to learn from their experiences. The interview comments were analyzed, and a set of best practices was formulated. A project currently in progress concentrates on disseminating the best practices through workshops and elearning combined with classical training courses. Current Practices Reserves Estimation. All companies trading on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) use the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reporting standards, which are encumbered with anomalies as to changes in (end-year) oil prices, novel contracts (production sharing), and a modification for North Sea fields (by exception). They are difficult to change because such changes would have consequences for financial reporting by means of the (unit of production) depreciation of capital assets by the oil companies. Most companies adhere to the SEC rules for reporting proved reserves as a single, deterministic number. Commonly, however, probabilistic methods are used internally; only recently did a few governments start to ask for probabilistic reserves reporting from the companies. In response, SPE, WPC, and AAPG have formulated guidelines that include the option for probabilistic reserves reporting. The standard adopted by NPD3 relates reserves to their maturity and is, with a few minor modifications, eminently suitable to be linked with business processes, as is done internally by several oil companies. It appears that, for a number of companies, the NPD classification is not too different from the systems used internally, which are indeed linked, in some cases, to a business process. For some companies with simpler classifications, additional work will be required to comply with the NPD standards. In Table 1, the various standard classifications and those used by the companies are compared.

A Unifying Principle for a Researcher Learning Safety: Reduce Uncertainty!

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilla Kao ◽  
Russell Furr
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Mission Statement ◽  
Safety Information ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Mission Statements ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Physical And Chemical

Conveying safety information to researchers is challenging. A list of rules and best practices often is not remembered thoroughly even by individuals who want to remember everything. Researchers in science thinking according to principles: mathematical, physical, and chemical laws; biological paradigms. They use frameworks and logic, rather than memorization, to achieve the bulk of their work. Can safety be taught to researchers in a manner that matches with how they are trained to think? Is there a principle more defined than "Think safety!" that can help researchers make good decisions in situations that are complex, new, and demanding?<div><br></div><div>Effective trainings in other professions can arise from the use of a mission statement that participants internalize as a mental framework or model for future decision-making. We propose that mission statements incorporating the concept of <b>reducing uncertainty</b> could provide such a framework for learning safety. This essay briefly explains the definition of <b>uncertainty</b> in the context of health and safety, discusses the need for an individual to <b>personalize</b> a mission statement in order to internalize it, and connects the idea of <b>greater control</b> over a situation with less uncertainty with respect to safety. The principle of reducing uncertainty might also help <b>non-researchers</b> think about safety. People from all walks of life should be able to understand that more control over their situations provides more protection for them, their colleagues, and the environment.</div>

Formulating Industry-Academic Collaborations That Work: Best Practices to Ensure a Strong Relationship After the Agreements are Signed

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-177
Author(s):  
Michael B. Dilling ◽  
Anne C. DiSante ◽  
Ross Durland ◽  
Christine E. Flynn ◽  
Leonid Metelitsa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Product Development ◽  
Strong Relationship ◽  
Governance Structure ◽  
Collaborative Relationships ◽  
Skill Sets ◽  
Pragmatic Aspects

Collaborations between academia and industry are growing in scope, duration, and sophistication. The best collaborations recognize the unique strengths and skill sets of both parties and are structured to leverage what each party does best. In many cases, these collaborations develop into long-term relationships, and it is important to develop the systems and structures needed to support these relationships to ensure that they meet the needs of both sides. Successful collaborations require the formulation of a governance structure to facilitate communication, decision-making, assessment of progress, and the inevitable changes of direction that accompany product development. This panel explored the pragmatic aspects of successfully structuring collaborations and managing the relationships after the deal is done. Several dominant themes associated with successful collaborative relationships emerged from the discussion, and these will be explored in this article.

scholarly journals Engaging Multidisciplinary Stakeholders to Drive Shared Decision-Making in Oncology

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabrielle Rocque ◽  
Ellen Miller-Sonnet ◽  
Alan Balch ◽  
Carrie Stricker ◽  
Josh Seidman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Oncology Practice ◽  
Development And Validation

Although recognized as best practice, regular integration of shared decision-making (SDM) approaches between patients and oncologists remains an elusive goal. It is clear that usable, feasible, and practical tools are needed to drive increased SDM in oncology. To address this goal, we convened a multidisciplinary collaborative inclusive of experts across the health-care delivery ecosystem to identify key principles in designing and testing processes to promote SDM in routine oncology practice. In this commentary, we describe 3 best practices for addressing challenges associated with implementing SDM that emerged from a multidisciplinary collaborative: (1) engagement of diverse stakeholders who have interest in SDM, (2) development and validation of an evidence-based SDM tool grounded within an established conceptual framework, and (3) development of the necessary roadmap and consideration of the infrastructure needed for engendering patient engagement in decision-making. We believe these 3 principles are critical to the success of creating SDM tools to be utilized both within and outside of clinical practice. We are optimistic that shared use across settings will support adoption of this tool and overcome barriers to implementing SDM within busy clinical workflows. Ultimately, we hope that this work will offer new perspectives on what is important to patients and provide an important impetus for leveraging patient preferences and values in decision-making.

Contingency Management Programs in Corrections: Another Panacea?

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Gendreau ◽  
Shelley J. Listwan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Contingency Management ◽  
The United States ◽  
Community Corrections ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Track Record ◽  
Highly Skilled ◽  
Skilled Staff

The mantra of best practices in corrections, while well intended, may lead to iatrogenic consequences. Community corrections and prisons are under increasing pressures to manage their caseloads; moreover, the current accountability and get-tough agenda in corrections demands offenders take on more responsibility for their behaviors. As a consequence, we predict more episodes of “panaceaphilia” or quick fix solutions because corrections jurisdictions in the United States are under tremendous pressure to handle their populations at this point in time. In this article, we focus on contingency management programs as the potential next panacea, not because they do not have a proven track record of success, but because they require highly skilled staff and make great demands upon correctional agencies’ decision-making practices. To help counteract panaceaphilia from happening with contingency management, we describe the theory and practice of contingency management, the demands they place on programmers, the type of research needed to evaluate their effectiveness, and how to prevent these programs from turning into punitive punishment regimes.

Naturalistic Decision Making and the Practice of Health Care

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 178-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul R. Falzer
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Resistance To Change ◽  
Care Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Naturalistic Decision Making ◽  
Late 20Th Century ◽  
Care Community

A recent essay in this journal identified health care as a fertile domain for extending the reach of naturalistic decision making (NDM). It targeted the “best practices regimen,” a host of initiatives begun in the late 20th century that address problems in service delivery, skyrocketing costs, and impediments in transforming products of basic science into effective treatments. Of particular importance are efforts to base treatment decisions on empirical research findings and to gauge the quality of decisions by their conformance to evidence-based practices. The challenges that the essay identified and the ways of addressing these challenges are well known in the health care community. They have had limited impact owing to several factors, including how advocates of the best practices regimen envision clinical decision making and their tendency to equate the exercise of skill with resistance to change. This paper describes the regimen’s concept of decision making and its principles and deficiencies. It also identifies a conundrum: oversimplification prevents complexity from being recognized; as a result, evidence-based recommendations frequently have unforeseeable and deleterious consequences. The paper proposes that NDM is well positioned to address these problems and make a valuable contribution to health care practice. It illustrates NDM-based theories and concepts with a research example and describes their ability to address complex issues that arise in treating chronic illnesses.

The Bush Administration’s Decision to Surge in Iraq

The Last Card ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 328-343
Author(s):  
Richard H. Immerman
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
New Media ◽  
National Security ◽  
Vietnam War ◽  
Eisenhower Administration ◽  
Military Leadership ◽  
Sensitive Information ◽  
Political Climate ◽  
Comprehensive Review

This chapter argues—using the Eisenhower administration as a model of peacetime national security decision making—that the surge decision-making process displayed by the oral histories was idiosyncratic, excessively compartmentalized, and profoundly flawed. No president since Dwight D. Eisenhower has fully adopted his model, and each has tailored procedures appropriate for his needs. The Bush process had to take into account his lack of expertise in military affairs, an increasingly polarized political climate, the legacy of the Vietnam War, the proliferation of leaks of sensitive information in the new media age, the resistance of the uniformed military leadership, and most important, Rumsfeld. Administration insiders argue that for these reasons Bush jettisoned fundamental tenets of Eisenhower's system in an effort to make a virtue out of necessity. Yet the evidence suggests that Eisenhower's best practices are just that—best practices. It further suggests that their rigorous application would have benefited Bush's process by expediting the instigation of a comprehensive review, co-opting opponents of a change in strategy, mitigating politicization, facilitating the exchange of information and advice, and accelerating implementation.

How Do We Make and Reflect on Decisions?

We the Gamers ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 141-156
Author(s):  
Karen Schrier
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Critical Thinking ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Critical Skills ◽  
Practice Skills

Chapter 9 describes how games may help in the practice of critical skills such as reasoning, making decisions, and reflection. How do people ask questions and posit answers, and how might games support this? What are the best practices and strategies for supporting critical thinking using games? The chapter includes an overview of why decision-making and reflection matter in civics and ethics, and why games may support this. It also includes the limitations of using games to explore peoples’ choices, and how to minimize those limitations. Finally, it reviews strategies that teachers can take to use games to practice skills related to critical thinking. It opens with the example of the game Life Is Strange, and also shares three examples-in-action: Moral Machine, Undertale, and Walden.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document