1. 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.

2. Integrated Environment Roadmap1 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

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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: man years X $100,00 /man year = $63.2 million per year in just labor savings

6. 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.

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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.