Wipro - Unleashing the full potential

By James Lawnin, Mark Allen, and S. Kent Gryskiewicz

WIPRO TECHNOLOGIES

Effective Execution in a Global Enterprise

Unleashing the Full Potential of Technology Initiatives

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Over the last ten years, an unprecedented array of technologies has become available to oil and

gas enterprises. There has been, and continues to be, a steady flow of technological innovations

that impact both upstream and downstream sectors. But in many cases the benefits of new

initiatives have not met expectations. Corporations often do not realize the promised return on

investment that led them to fund and resource key initiatives.

In our work with oil and gas companies over a number of years, we have seen the same

challenges arise over and over again, company after company. Ideas go through a disciplined

project creation methodology, receive approval and funding, and move to a well-executed design

phase and on to roll out— only to founder or die before full implementation is realized. The loss

of money, productivity, and business benefit that this causes are immeasurable.

Why is this a universal pattern when it comes to deploying global technology initiatives? We have

identified seven common “sticking points” that slow down or kill initiatives along with the leading

practices that will “unstick” them.

This white paper, the first in a series of leading practice white papers, addresses the problems that

are commonly encountered in global technology deployments and the solutions that will solve them.

Sticking Point Leading Practice

Too many initiatives in play

No business participation in project governance

Communication to the business falls short.

Business case preparation is limited.

Lack of a strong sales approach.

Business units are expected to fund implementation without a clear understanding of solution benefits.

Lack of project coordination leading to initiative burn out in the business

Include organizational capacity for new initiative adoption in selection criteria.

Select and commit to a well-balanced governance structure within the business unit as a prerequisite to project start.

Report both project progress and impact to the business in a meaningful way.

Create business cases tailored to specific audiences and stakeholders.

Formulate a sales approach for deployment.

Fund project design and proof of concept at corporate/group level and implementation at business unit level.

Create master plans to improve coordination and minimize overload.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ......................................................................................................................4

Sticking Points ...................................................................................................................5

Sticking Point 1: Too Many Initiatives in Play .....................................................................................5

Sticking Point 2: No Business Participation in Project Governance .............................................................6

Sticking Point 3: Communication to the Business Falls Short ....................................................................6

Sticking Point 4: Business Case Preparation Is Limited ..........................................................................6

Sticking Point 5: Lack of a Strong Sales Approach ................................................................................7

Sticking Point 6: Business units are expected to fund implementation without a clear understanding of

solution benefits....................................................................................................................7

Sticking Point 7: Lack of Project Coordination Leading to Initiative Burnout in the Business ................................7

Leading Practices for Effective Execution ..........................................................................8

Leading Practice 1: Include organizational capacity for new initiative adoption in selection criteria .......................8

Leading Practice 2: Select and commit to a well-balanced steering team as a prerequisite to project start ...............8

Leading Practice 3: Report both project progress and impact to the business in a meaningful way ........................9

Leading Practice 4: Create business cases tailored to specific audiences and stakeholders. ................................9

Leading Practice 5: Formulate a sales approach for deployment. .............................................................9

Leading Practice 6: Fund project assessment/design at the corporate level and implementation at the

business unit level. ...............................................................................................................10

Leading Practice 7: Create an overall master plan to improve project coordination and minimize overload. .............10

Unleashing Big Potential....................................................................................................11

Creating an Effective Deployment Model: A Client Experience.........................................12

About the Authors.............................................................................................................13

4 | www.wipro.com

Introduction“May you live in interesting times.”

This ancient Chinese saying, meant as a curse wishing the recipient much challenge and upheaval, can be used to

characterize the first decade of the twenty-first century, which has overflowed with interesting times for the oil and

gas industry. Upheaval in the global economy and a range of sociopolitical events has spawned unprecedented

business challenges.

Turning these challenges into opportunities, an impressive array of technologies has become available to oil and gas

enterprises over the past ten years. There has been, and continues to be, a steady flow of technological innovations

that impact both upstream and downstream sectors. Smart technology, process control, ERP systems, procurement

portals, digital oilfield, and intelligent refinery are examples of technological advancements with big potential for

finding and refining more oil, cutting operational costs, and improving safety performance.

These technologies provide tangible benefits to business when implemented; however, the dissemination of these

technologies across an enterprise continues to be a stumbling block for most corporations. As a result, corporations

often do not realize the promised return on investment that led them to fund and resource key initiatives. It is not

unusual for global initiatives, each with a compelling business case and well-executed design, to founder, balloon in

cost, or get cancelled before full implementation is realized.

The inability to fully unleash the potential of technology initiatives has a number of root causes. These programs are

complex, spanning multiple business units and many countries around the world. Their success depends on both

operational and human factors, and failure to fully execute each step of the implementation process can create one

or more “sticking points” that serve as obstacles to success.

WIPRO TECHNOLOGIES

Unleashing the Full Potential of Technology InitiativesEffective Execution in a Global Enterprise

5 | www.wipro.comWIPRO TECHNOLOGIES


Sticking PointsYear on year, business units must find ways to decrease costs and increase productivity in operational areas, while

corporate departments must do the same across the enterprise. Management commitment is high, impressive

expertise and knowledge is applied to the challenge, and innovations abound. But in spite of the focus, funding, and

attention put into deployment of difference-making technologies across an enterprise, a very small percentage of

launched projects actually reach the finish line and become part of operational processes.

In our work with a number of companies to increase the execution effectiveness of global technology initiatives, we

have identified universal “sticking points” that appear over and over again, no matter the nature of the initiative or

where the sponsoring entity sits in the organization. These sticking points impede project progress, project

completion, and achievement of the benefits upon which the funding decision was based.

Sticking Point 1: Too Many Initiatives in Play

Large scale deployment of an initiative requires good alignment of people, process, and technology and very often

requires that changes be made in all three areas. Various obstacles can significantly impede progress and end up

bogging down an initiative. Resources originally allocated to an initiative may be rerouted, unforeseen challenges

may arise that require additional time, and peoples' natural and almost reflexive resistance to change may play a

part in slowing things down. There are aspects of organizational culture that also contribute to the slowdown of

projects during implementation. These are some examples of what can cause initiatives to slow down significantly

once they enter the implementation phase.

Regardless of the origin of the slowdown, one thing is certain: It has very little impact on the selection of new

initiatives for deployment. Corporate decision making criteria often does not account for the possible impact on the

receiving organization's bandwidth and what it can accept and effectively execute when it comes to issuing a new

initiative. With each budget cycle, funding gets approved for additional projects meant to address operational

challenges and help improve business performance. And with funding, those projects move into implementation and

out into the businesses to join the other projects already in implementation. The result: Too many initiatives in play

requiring significant resources and business commitment to be deployed effectively and efficiently.



Sticking Point 2: No Business Participation in Project Governance

Generally speaking, internal project governance is effective and efficient over a project lifecycle. There are many best

practices and corporate standards for governance models, internal communication requirements, and performance

management. The sticking point in project governance is the absence of structured engagement and support from

multiple levels in the impacted business.

Typically, a project sponsor in the business receives periodic updates from project team, which assumes that he or

she will also provide governance and remove roadblocks that impact the project's success. However, if a project

sponsor is selected at a high level in the organization (which is common) and does not have additional governance

support from other levels of the organization, the role of the sponsor becomes that of information recipient rather

than active participant. Where this happens, the implementation team engages the business and meets significant,

and very valid, resistance. Resistance takes forms such as unwillingness to provide resources, disagreement with the

objective or need for the solution, or difference of opinion about the initiative priority. This is the result of a lack in

effective governance across the business to set priorities, override resistance, and actively support the project team

in implementation.

Sticking Point 3: Communication to the Business Falls Short

Project teams are generally good at keeping the business updated on project status in terms of timeline, activities,

and budget. But they don't do a good job of communicating about projects in a way that resonates with the focus of

the business. Each business has its own set of goals and priorities, and its own definition of what things look like

when they are working. Communication from the project team does not do a good job of tying the initiative to these

goals and priorities. In addition, there is not usually communication into the business about how the various in-flight

initiatives relate to each other. Without these linkages made clear, the only thing the business sees can are multiple

initiatives all asking for the same information and resources. With communication to the project team to the

business falling short, interest and support for the initiative can falter and fade.

Sticking Point 4: Business Case Preparation Is Limited

Project teams typically pursue one of two for business case preparation:

• They will create a single business case and apply it across the enterprise for project approval, regardless of

the variations in business unit geography, culture, recovery mechanisms; or

• They will focus a business case on a single audience (e.g., to top level business decision makers) and neglect

the development of additional business cases for other audiences (e.g., the end users).

Either tactic is insufficient.



Sticking Point 5: Lack of a Strong Sales Approach

While deployment of an initiative may be well planned from a project management perspective, there is rarely a

step that focuses on ensuring that intended beneficiaries of the initiative (e.g., the business unit management,

operations staff) have bought in to its business value. In other words, the project team doesn't sell the initiative into

the business. Without a strong sales approach, local leadership may resist any initiatives coming from outside

(especially corporate initiatives) and users may resist changes in work processes.

The importance of selling an initiative to all key audiences in a business is consistently underestimated by project

teams. Everything else could be well executed, and a project could fail solely because the need to sell (and continue

to sell throughout deployment) was trivialized or rejected.

Sticking Point 6: Business units are expected to fund implementation without a clear understanding of solution benefits.

Requiring a business unit to shoulder all the expenses of a new technology deployment can create a big sticking

point. The project could be perceived as being foisted upon business unit management with no proof of concept,

which raises resistance and creates friction between the business and the project team. In this situation, the project

is not likely to make meaningful progress or stay on track the implementation plan.

At the other end of the topic, 100 percent corporate funding is not likely to ensure a project's success. With no

investment from their own budget into the initiative, business unit management likely won't have the motivation

and commitment that would be present if they were fiscally accountable for a portion of the deployment.

Sticking Point 7: Lack of Project Coordination Leading to Initiative Burnout in the Business

This sticking point circles back to two prior points: the tendency to fund development of new ideas year on year

rather than focusing on in-flight projects and lack of communication outside of the project team.

Lack of coordination occurs due to initiatives being launched by different corporate groups and also within business

units. It is not unusual for projects to come into being in far flung parts of the enterprise with little or no cross-

communication with other projects.

Regardless of the reason, the impact on the organization is the use of the same key talent by different groups. One

engineer may receive visits from three or four project teams asking for assistance in the space of a month. Over

time, this kind of activity can lead to “initiative burnout,” and business units end up refusing or limiting staff

participation in the development of new ideas.



Leading Practices for Effective ExecutionIn the course of our work with clients in global enterprises, we have identified leading practices that will avoid or

“unstick” project obstacles. Further, these practices help corporate and business units unleash the huge unrealized

potential of the initiatives that are put into play.

Leading Practice 1: Include organizational capacity for new initiative adoption in selection criteria.

As we noted above, new initiatives in a business unit are often added to projects that are already in flight. However,

the unleashed potential of an in-flight project is huge, much bigger than any new initiative. Avoid spreading business

resources too thin by trying to deal with fifteen initiatives. Better to fine tune focus on the projects that offer the

most value and stop activities on those with less value. Six well-implemented initiatives will produce much greater

value to the business than fifteen that can't get completed.

In the longer term, a change in organizational culture can improve deployment effectiveness. In “hero” cultures,

there are more rewards for managing 15 projects (even if not done well) than for executing six (even if done well).

Alternatively, the culture may confer more rewards on originators of new projects than on the people who complete

them. Taking steps to shift the culture to support the execution of fewer ideas all the way to completion will pay off

big over time.

One way to do this is by including organizational capacity for new initiative adoption in selection criteria for

technology deployment across an enterprise.

Leading Practice 2: Select and commit to a well-balanced governance structure within the business unit as a prerequisite to project start.

The active participation by business decision makers in any project governance is a must. Members of the business

must be involved in the deployment process, making decisions about timing and resources, articulating business unit

requirements, and actively helping the project team succeed. This can be formalized through creation of a

governance structure that includes business staff as well as project team members. An active steering committee

with strong project governance, makes project decisions that align with business priorities, frees up needed

resources, and adjusts the project timeline.

Prior to any engagement, the selection of a well-balanced steering committee and the articulation of clear roles,

responsibilities, and time commitments must take place. If these prerequisites are not achieved, or the organization

does not commit, the project should be put on hold.



Leading Practice 3: Report both project progress and impact to the business in a meaningful way.

A communication methodology that addresses business interests is key to maintaining initiative momentum. In

addition to keeping the business informed about project progress, communicate the value that is being produced in

the process. Quantifying results that the business cares about (e.g., “we have saved the business $X million to date,”

or “we have helped cut 2 days from this activity”) will help management understand how the project is impacting

operations.

Leading Practice 4: Create business cases tailored to specific audiences and stakeholders.

Each business is different from the next, even if operations are similar. As a result, business cases must be tailored

and made fit-for-purpose based on unique objectives and context of the specific business units, and to various

stakeholders within each business unit.

The objectives of a business unit must be considered in preparation of a business case and emphasis must be

tailored for the various audiences. Typical business cases must demonstrate the impact of the technology on: 1)

capacity, 2) capability, 3) operation cost, and 4) production. Taking the time to thoroughly understand the culture,

processes, and issues of the business unit it is selling its solution to, and then creating a business case for that

particular group, will remove many barriers, and is the first step in measuring the post-implementation impact of the

initiative.

Leading Practice 5: Formulate a sales approach for deployment.

If an initiative is valuable enough to roll out globally, it is worth the effort and resources to sell it effectively. As with

any sales effort, clear articulation of pertinent and compelling benefits is needed. This requires a good

understanding of the “buyer” as well as excellent communication and influence skills. Selling the solution to the

business includes tactics like:

• Starting with “easy wins,” implementing the solution in business units or work groups who are already

bought in and who will share the value of the solution with peers.

• Cultivating business influencers and facilitating their advocacy of the solution.

• Communicating successes on a regular basis through multiple avenues.

• Measuring and reporting business benefits.



Leading Practice 6: Fund project design and proof of concept at corporate/group level and implementation at business unit level.

To make sure that initiatives meet the needs of the broadest group of stakeholders with a common solution, the

early phases of an initiative need to be funded centrally. Idea appraisal and solution design should be done in

collaboration with broad representation from the appropriate business units. This allows the cost to be spread

broadly and encourages synergies that would not be available if funding was business-unit based.

• Validate the business benefits.

• Develop specific business cases that will sell the solution to management and operational - staff .

• Execution of a proof of concept in each separate business.

Project design needs to include funds to:

Funding for implementation needs to come from the business unit. This gives the business unit a stake in the

project's success, helps hold it accountable, and motivates buy in for longer term success.

Leading Practice 7: Create overall master plans to improve project coordination and minimize overload.

A master plan is a timeline-based document that aggregates major initiatives, including project stages, estimates,

and resource requirements. It includes all major initiatives and develops a detailed overarching plan showing inter-

project dependencies, project milestones, and staging processes. A master plan allows multiple initiatives to be

transparent to each other, so that one project team knows what other project teams are doing. As a high level

summary of all project plans, a master plan will also mitigate initiative overload because teams are less likely to

repeatedly tap the same talent. Each business unit should also develop a master plan to coordinate business unit

activities with corporate initiatives. These plans can ensure effective coordination and align expectations with

management, project teams, and business unit staff.

Unleashing Big PotentialThe seven sticking points presented in this paper are the most common obstacles we have encountered when

helping clients deploy global technology initiatives. We identified the corresponding leading practices over time and

by way of multiple engagements and we are confident that they will allow enterprises to unleash the big potential of

their own technology initiatives.

It is important to keep in mind that correcting the deployment process will be a project itself. It will need to be

planned and managed accordingly—using the leading practices we have discussed. Communication, change

management, sales, and business unit governance, for example, will be elements of the correction project.

When a company has pinpointed the sticking points that are impeding its project deployment process, we

recommend prioritizing and concentrating on unsticking one at a time. For example, if a company determines that

ineffective deployment of in-flight projects, lack of a strong sales approach, and lack of coordination leading to

initiative overload are adversely impacting project success, it would be best to correct the most significant sticking

point first, then move on to the second, and then the third. They may require several months to several years,

depending on the severity and how much of the company the sticking point is affecting.





Creating an Effective Deployment Model: A Client ExperienceA global oil giant elected to develop proprietary software for a strategic upstream program. Each application would

require global deployment; however, at the time the first application was ready, the enterprise did not have a

standard deployment process in place. As a result, the implementation of the solution across the company’s many

business units was extremely challenging. For example:

Though the application implementation was completed, it required more time, resources, and problem solving than

initially expected. The initiative was an important strategic undertaking for the company, and it was extremely

important that its applications be effectively deployed across the enterprise, no matter the location, the business, or

the asset. Based on this less-than-effective initial experience, the company launched an effort to ensure that future

deployments would take place at the required efficiency level.

We participated with the project team in this effort and helped the client model their deployment process to a

commercial software vendor model. In other words, we assisted in creating the types of processes and tools that

third party vendors utilize to sell, implement, and support their applications. Today, four years after that first difficult

deployment, the company has a clear approach to its global application implementations. The approach addresses

business requirements, technical requirements, deployment scale, timing, and tasks, and post-deployment support.

Standard templates have been created and stored in a central repository. Because each business unit has unique

characteristics, project teams tailor these templates as needed for specific deployments.

The creation of a multi-faceted, business-focused process will support significant performance improvement in

deployments as the company’s program becomes firmly established.

• Business managers did not buy in to the solution as the team has assumed they would.

• Documents pertaining to the application were sitting in multiple repositories with no version control.

• The deployment project did not have established processes, templates, or documentation to support the team’s activities.

• No post-deployment plans had been created (e.g., how the application would be supported from a business perspective, or how to ensure that benefits realization is documented)



James Lawnin

About the Authors

Mr. Lawnin is Vice President and leader of Wipro’s Global Energy Consulting Practice. He has over 25 years oil and

gas experience: 15 years as an energy consultant for several large management consulting firms and 10 years

experience as a petroleum engineer, Before joining Wipro, Mr. Lawnin led the oil and gas industry practice for SAIC,

a large consulting and outsourcing firm. He also led their global consulting and systems integration practice. He

holds certifications as a Project Management Professional (PMP) and a Black Belt 6 Sigma, and has held certifications

as a licensed CPA, a Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA), Certified Financial Planner (CFP) and licensed Professional

Engineer (PE). He is a frequent lecturer on solving complex oil and gas industry issues through innovative solutions.

S. Kent Gryskiewicz

Mr. Gryskiewicz is a Senior Manager with Wipro’s Energy & Utilities Global Consulting Practice. Mr. Gryskiewicz is

accountable for global strategy, delivery, management, and growth of the Digital Oilfield Solutions program for a

Super Major. Mr. Gryskiewicz has over four years of major technology deployment in the Energy space. Prior to

working in the energy sector Mr. Gryskiewicz played a similar role for US Government agencies. Experienced in

national and international political, defense, and energy sectors, Mr. Gryskiewicz has cross-cultural business fluency

in the Middle East, Europe, South East Asia, and Americas. Mr. Gryskiewicz is fluent in English, Turkish, and

conversational French.

Mark Allen

Mr. Allen is a Partner in Wipro’s Global Energy Consulting Practice. He has over 20 years of experience in the oil and

gas industry, working for one of the industry’s Super Majors for six years, then 14 years with two global management

consulting firms. Prior to joining Wipro, Mr. Allen was the upstream industry lead for SAIC’s oil and gas practice. Mr.

Allen’s focus is in the upstream oil and gas, and midstream natural gas and liquids energy segments. He has a long

history of helping oil and gas clients with process improvements, cost management, system implementations and

strategy execution.



Wipro is the first PCMM Level 5 and SEI CMMi Level 5 certified IT Services Company globally. Wipro provides comprehensive IT solutions and services (including systems integration, IS outsourcing, package implementation, software application development and maintenance) and Research & Development services (hardware and software design, development and implementation) to corporations globally.

Wipro's unique value proposition is further delivered through our pioneering Offshore Outsourcing Model and stringent Quality Processes of SEI and Six Sigma.

ABOUT WIPRO TECHNOLOGIES

Wipro Global Energy Consulting offers solutions across the entire oil and gas value chain. Practice consultants apply field-tested and deep knowledge of the industry to a wide range of projects, programs, and services that improve performance, ensure safety, and offer cost benefits. They also draw from Wipro’s entire enterprise to bring innovative and leading edge technologies from other industries for effective application in upstream and downstream operations. Our strong strategic partnerships with key technology providers to the oil and gas industry allow client to take full advantage of comprehensive solutions that include both the tools and the means to implement them into business unit workflows.

ABOUT WIPRO GLOBAL ENERGY CONSULTING