Integration Project Task Analyze the state of integration for the Exploration and Production (E&P) Division Develop an Integrated Environment Roadmap to guide all integration/interoperability efforts Conduct an analysis of the first 40 (out of 726) applications within E&P Prioritize and recommend integration projects for these 40 applications Estimate savings based solely on labor savings Recommend other savings factors Recommend next steps This project was the first step toward achieving an integrated environment, both horizontally and vertically for the Exploration and Production Division of a major international oil company.

Integrated Environment Roadmap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Select Applications to be analyzed Collect Data on each Application Analyze Interchanged Data Flows Prioritize Group into Projects Integration Approach Using Decision Tree Estimate Cost to Implement Perform ROI Calculation Execute Data Portfolio Update AIDB Reflecting Changes A Integrated Environment Roadmap was developed to provide the guidance and sequencing of events to aid their people in working toward to vision of the Integrated Environment

Integrated Data Flow Diagram This is the data flow diagram of the first 40 applications analyzed by SAIC. We identified both official and unofficial data interchanges, both electronic and manual. More than half of the data interchange among these applications is manual.

Data Flow Analysis Over 50% of E&P Interfaces are MANUAL In addition, 26 manual processes are required to support the data interfaces Assuming 8 hours per week for each interface or process and no errors, E&P requires 34.8 man-years to support manual data manipulation for just these 40 applications This is the detail of our analysis of the 40 applications and an extrapolation to the full set of applications being used in the E&P division. The estimates of labor needed to support manual interfaces and process is very conservative and, we were told by the company, are probably more likely 3 to 4 times higher than we estimated.

Cost Savings from Integration These estimates do not include the savings from error reductions, conflicting data, reduction in databases, and elimination of unneeded licenses and applications For the 40 applications analyzed: 34.8 man years X $100,000 (fully burdened)/ man year = $3.48 million/year Extrapolated to the rest of E&P: 631.6 man years X $100,00 /man year = $63.2 million per year in just labor savings

Integration Decision Tree Can source code be modified More than 5 applications Interfaces proprietary APIs No Is the DB schema known Yes Vendor Solution BI, DS, trend analysis, historical data Functionality available from multiple sources Part of 3 or more projects Savings greater than cost to integrate Integration mandatory Middleware exists Middleware Data Integration More than 8 interfaces Data Warehouse Are data integrated Interim solution needed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 This is a decision tree to help decide on the approach to take. It addresses integration, interoperability, middleware, and vendor-supplied solutions. It is provided for those who have to make a decision but lack the background in information technology to have confidence that the most cost-effective approach ahs been chosen. It is meant as a decision aid, not a mandate.

Data Integration Solution E&P DATA INTEGRATION ARCHITECTURE Project C Middleware Solution A31 DBA31 Management Information DSS1 M I D L E W A R E&P DW / DM Management Information DSS2 . A32 DBA32 Management Information DSSn . A3n DBA3n Project A Data Integration Solution Integrated Environment Database Project D API Solution API An1 DBAn1 API API API APIs Batch Manual This is the recommended architecture for E&P, which allows a seamless inclusion of all approaches to integration and interoperability. The purpose is to supply high quality, high confidence data and information to functional, operational, and strategic decision-makers. An2 DBAn2 Project B Commercial Solution A11 A12 . . . A1n A21 A22 . . . A2n API API DBA21 DBA22 DBA2n An3 DBAn3 Preliminar

Return on Investment ROI $ US Percent of E&P Integrated Decision Point No enterprise should attempt to achieve 100 percent integration. There comes a point where the return on investment exceeds the cost of integration. The enterprise needs to determine where the minimum return point or band and not invest beyond that point without a very compelling reason. This point varies for each company. Percent of E&P Integrated

Integration Project Decision Flow Engineering Team Collect Project Information Engineering Analysis Make Recommendation Review Candidate Project Accept Project? YES Integrated Environment Oversight Group Staff Impact Analysis Review Analyses NO Integrated Environment Oversight Group DEFER Decision ACCEPT This is a nominal decision and work flow for an integration project. REJECT E&P Projects Portfolio E&P Data Bases Metadata AIDB UPDATE Project Sources Return to Originator with Reasons for Rejection Needs Analysis Return to Originator for Rework Propose Project 19 Jan 2000

Decision Sensitivity Analysis Performance Gradient Dynamic Head-to-Head We used an Analytic Hierarchy Process-based decision support tool to provide objective decision support and sensitivity analysis in determining the projects that were recommended and the priority in which they were recommended to be undertaken.