CENTER FOR INTEGRATED OPERATIONS
IN THE PETROLEUM INDUSTRY
TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING
May 7TH-8TH, 2013 at Trondheim Airport
Agenda
Participants
Status report October 2012 - April 2013
1
CONTENTS
Page
AGENDA
3
PARTICIPANTS
4
STATUS REPORT OCTOBER 2012 – APRIL 2013
6
IO 1 IO TEAMWORK AND CAPABILITIES
7
IO2 INTEGRATED PLANNING AND LOGISTICS
10
IO3 PROACTIVE MANAGEMENT OF SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT
14
IO4 PRODUCTION AND PERFORMANCE OPTIMIZATION
16
T3 SYSTEM INTEGRITY AND DYNAMIC RISK ASSESSMENT
18
TELEMEDICINE
20
2
AGENDA
Location: Hotel Radisson Blu, Værnes
Start: May 7th at 09.30
End: May 8th at 14.30
Suggested air flights,
domestic
To Trondheim May 7th
Departure - Arrival
From Trondheim May 8th
Departure – Arrival
Stavanger
Bergen
Oslo
06:40 - 08:35
07.35 – 08.35
08.00 – 08.55 or 07.00 – 07.55
15:30 - 17:25
15.30 – 16.30
15.30 – 16.25
DAY 1, TUESDAY MAY 7th
09.30-10.00
10.00-10.45
Welcome, presentation of program and participants
Highlights from on-going projects
 Telemedicine
 IO1 IO Teamwork and Capability
 IO2 Integrated Planning and Logistics
10.45-11.15 Break
11.15-12.00 Highlights from on-going projects cont’d.
 T3 System Integrity and Dynamic Risk Assessment
 IO3 Proactive Management of Safety and Environment
 IO4 Production Optimization and Subsurface IO
12.00 - 13.00 Lunch
13.00 – 17.00 Parallel sessions (Including breaks)
Presentation of status and results, feedback from industry partners and academic collaboration
partners
IO1 - IO
IO2 - Integrated
IO3 - Proactive
IO4 - Production
T3 - System
Teamwork and
Planning and
Management of
Optimization and
Integrity and
Capability
Logistics
Safety and
Subsurface IO
Dynamic Risk
Environment
Assessment
18.45
19.30
“Discovery session from Antarctic Expedition and other places”,
Mike Herbert, ConocoPhillips.
Dinner
DAY 2, WEDNESDAY MAY 8th
08.30 – 09.30 Presentation of Knowledge Dissemination System, Jon Lippe
09.30 - 10.00 Break
10.00 – 11.30 Parallel sessions, continued from Day 1
IO1
IO2
IO3
IO4
11.30-12.30
Lunch
12.30-14.30
Plenary session
Experience with cooperation between industry partners and IO Center
Short presentations by industry partners on selected projects. Discussion.
T3
3
PARTICIPANTS
IO CENTER PARTNER
NAME
EMAIL
TC INDUSTRY
REPRESENTATIVES
Aker Solutions
Aker Solutions
Aker Solutions
Aker Solutions
Aker Solutions
BP
BP
BP
BP
BP
BP
ConocoPhillips
ConocoPhillips
DNV
DNV
DNV
Eni
Eni
FMC
FMC
GDF SUEZ
IBM
IBM
IBM
IBM
IBM
Kongsberg (KOGT)
Kongsberg (KOGT)
Kongsberg (KOGT)
Petrobras
Petrobras
Petrobras
Petrobras
Shell
Shell
SKF
SKF
Statoil
Statoil
Statoil
Rohit Singh
Rune Folstad
Øystein Bjaanes
Jonas Paulen
Erik Walle Mikkelsen
Paul Hocking
Malcolm Woodman
Greg Hickey
Asbjørn Tansø
Espen Arild Berge
Tore Tjøstheim
Mike Herbert
Tor Cranner
Erik Østby
Bjørn Tore Hellesøy
Sandra Hogenboom
Gregar Haugen
Eirik Holand
Knut Vannes
Bent Helge Nystad
Kjell Ola Jørgensen
Øystein Haaland
Frode Myren
Ulisses Melo
David Echeverria Ciaurri
Morten Dalsmo
Angela Myhre
Helge Didriksen
Roar Nilsen
Alex Furtado Teixeira
Francisco Sant Anna
Paulo Viana
Silva Francisco
Mei Choate
Rolf Einar Sæter
Jean-Luc Montesano
Geraint Jones
Øyvind Fevang
Trond Lilleng
Vidar Hepsø
rohit.singh@akersolutions.com
rune.folstad@akersolutions.com
oystein.bjaanes@akersolutions.com
jonas.paulen@akersolutions.com
erik.walle.mikkelsen@akersolutions.com
Paul.hocking@no.bp.com
malcolm.woodman@uk.bp.com
greg.hickey@uk.bp.com
asbjorn.tansoe@no.bp.com
espen-arild.berge@no.bp.com
tore.tjoestheim@no.bp.com
mike.herbert@conoccophillips.com
Tor.Cranner@conocophillips.com
Erik.Ostby@dnv.com
Bjorn.Tore.Hellesoy@dnv.com
sandra.hogenboom@dnv.com
gregar.haugen@eninorge.com
Eirik.Holand@eninorge.com
knut.vannes@fmcti.com
benthelge.nystad@fmcti.com
kjell-ola.jorgensen@gdfsuezep.no
oystein.haaland@no.ibm.com
MYREN@no.ibm.com
ulissesm@us.ibm.com
decheve@us.ibm.com
morten.dalsmo@no.ibm.com
Angela.myhre@kongsberg.com
hd@kdms.no
Roar.nilsen@kongsberg.com
alex.teixeira@petrobras.com.br
jlrangel@petrobras.com.br
pviana@petrobras.com.br
franciscocss@petrobras.com.br
mei.choate@shell.com
rolfeinar.saeter@shell.com
Jean-Luc.Montesano@skf.com
Geraint.Jones@skf.com
ofe@statoil.com
TRLIL@statoil.com
VIHE@statoil.com
4
IO CENTER PARTNER
TC INDUSTRY
REPRESENTATIVES,
CONT’D
Statoil
Statoil
Statoil
Statoil
Total
Total
Total
IO CENTER STAFF
SINTEF
NTNU
Petromanagement
IFE
Marintek
NTNU
Sintef
SINTEF
SINTEF
Marintek
NTNU
NTNU
NTNU
NTNU
NTNU
NTNU
IO CENTER, OTHER TEAM
MEMBERS
IFE
IFE
IFE
IFE
Marintek
Marintek
NTNU
NTNU
NAME
EMAIL
Gisle Nygård
Tor Tønnessen
Oskar Morten Fredagsvik
Vidar Olaf Eriksen
Ying Guo
Ida-Marie Kastrud
Åge Engen Pedersen
giny@statoil.com
torto@statoil.com
ofr@statoil.com
voer@statoil.com
Ying.Guo@ep.total.no
ida-marie.kastrud@ep.total.no
aage-engen.pedersen@ep.total.no
Lars Bodsberg
Bjarne Foss
Arild Nystad
Grete Rindahl
Lone Sletbak Ramstad
Vidar Gunnerud
Knut Steinar Bjørkevoll
Stein Hauge
Nicola Paltrinieri
Per Kristian Norddal
Eric Monteiro
Ingrid Bouwer Utne
Per Morten Schiefloe
Stein Haugen
Torgeir Haavik
Curtis Whitson
lars.bodsberg@sintef.no
Bjarne.Foss@itk.ntnu.no
arild.nystad@petromanagement.com
grete.rindahl@hrp.no
LoneSletbakk.Ramstad@marintek.sintef.no
vidar.gunnerud@itk.ntnu.no
KnutSteinar.Bjorkevoll@sintef.no
stein.hauge@sintef.no
nicola.paltrinieri@sintef.no
PerKristian.Norddal@marintek.sintef.no
Eric.Monteiro@idi.ntnu.no
ingrid.b.utne@ntnu.no
perms@svt.ntnu.no
stein.haugen@ntnu.no
torgeir.haavik@samfunn.ntnu.no
whitson@pera.no
Claire Taylor
Espen Nystad
Asgeir Droivoldsmo
Sizarta Sarshar
Even Ambros Holte
Grethe Ose
Harald Rødseth
Aleksander Juell
claire.taylor@hrp.no
espen.nystad@hrp.no
Asgeir.Droivoldsmo@hrp.no
Sizarta.Sarshar@hrp.no
EvenAmbros.Holte@marintek.sintef.no
Grethe.Ose@marintek.sintef.no
harald.rodseth@ntnu.no
aleksander.juell@ntnu.no
5
STATUS REPORT OCTOBER 2012 – APRIL 2013
6
IO1 IO TEAMWORK AND CAPABILITIES
The activities on Leadership, Teamwork and Capability development are working close together. The key industry
pilot for Capability development is Eni Norge’s development of the Goliat field. Focus areas for capability research
are


Fleshing out and operationalizing the capability framework
Development of methodology for practical utilization of a capability framework
The project works to establish practical guidance for use of the capabilities concept in a scalable IO implementation
model. The current phase of the pilot work covers the whole framework model (figure below), but is specifically
aimed at the identification and development of cross organisation resources to support next generation IO.
In order to understand the challenges faced by leaders, it is first important to identify a level of leadership and an
area of collaboration to focus on. We have so far decided to focus on leadership within and between operational
Distributed Collaboration Structures (DCSs) as these are probably the most visible example of a collaborative work
environment.
From Assessing the Quality of Collaboration in an Integrated Operations Organization. A. B. Skjerve, E. Nystad, G. Rindahl and S. Sarshar.
2013.
7
Two ongoing case studies of the IO 1 project have as main purpose of investigating teamwork challenges and
lessons learned from teamwork in IO. A case study of a production optimization meeting was initiated at Sleipner
(Statoil) in 2012. Another case study of a production optimization meeting at Gjøa (GDF) has started this year. A
first round of data collection has been finished at Sleipner, and results have been described in a paper that has
been delivered to the ESREL 2013 conference: " Assessing the Quality of collaboration in an Integrated Operations
Organization" by A.B. Skjerve, E. Nystad, G. Rindahl and S. Sarshar.
The paper describes the development of a method for assessing quality of collaboration in distributed collaboration
structures (DCS). The concept of DCS was introduced because within IO it makes more sense to look at teamwork in
a larger context than an isolated IO team. It is also a problem to define what constitutes an IO team. A DCS can be
defined as the organization of a set of distinct, interdependent collaborative activities, which are all required to
achieve an operational goal that: (1) cannot be achieved by co-located people on their own, and (2) cannot be
achieved through a single joint collaboration session.
8
9
IO2 INTEGRATED PLANNING AND LOGISTICS
IPL and Logistics
A key activity has been to develop an understanding of logistics role in integrated planning in offshore operations
and how new design of logistics planning processes can facilitate improvement of IPL. Further, an interesting topic
is how principles from Lean and Agile can benefit offshore integrated planning and logistics. This is described in the
white paper Integrated Planning and Logistics under stable and unstable conditions. Central in the work is the
distinction between Lean and Agile capabilities which are important for handling both stable and unstable logistical
conditions and Supply Chain Management in planning of offshore logistics. In this work the Statoil and the
Petrobras pilot have both been very useful. The Statoil pilot has been connected to the internal LERC (Logistics and
Emergency Response Center) project, focusing on how logistics can be implemented in the Planning Hierarchy and
the integrated planning processes. In further work it is important to conduct some experiments/action research
togheter with the industry partners to test how planning principles from Lean and Agile can conribute to more
efficient planning practices across boundaries. It is expected that the white paper will be updated during the
project, due to collaboration with industry partners and researchers from UC Berkeley who have years of
experiences with Lean and implementation of Lean in the construction industry.
IPL from a Subcontractor’s perspective
IO2 has just started a pilot with Aker Solutions where the objective is to identify challenges in Maintenance and
Modification (M&M) planning, improvement areas and assist in implementation of improvements. We are now
conducting a survey including interviews and questionnaires for identifying planning challenges across internal
boundaries and in the interfaces with Statoil, M&M Gullfaks. The IPL framework and tools are (or will be) used,
including the new web based version of the IPL screening tool for assessing IPL maturity in the organization. UC
Berkeley will participate in a workshop in June to plan the next phase of the pilot, where they plan to conduct an
action research experiment including planning principles of Lean philosophy. It is expected that this work will
contribute with valuable insight on how to improve integrated planning practices based on their extensive
experiences from planning across boundaries in the construction industry. It is important that we manage to
transfer this knowledge to the other industry partners especially when it comes to possible improvements of
integrated planning between operators and sub-contractors. We propose to use the IPL Laboratory as an arena for
sharing and further developing this knowledge.
IPL Laboratory Concept including "IPL-Apps"
This spring we have started the development of a concept named The IPL laboratory. This is a client focused and
module-based training arena/tool supporting development and implementation of IPL. It is an arena where
knowledge, tools and methods generated by IO2 can be tailored to the specific needs of a company, and thereby
support development of IPL practices. The specific content of the different modules depends on the "IPL maturity"
of the respective organization. Thus, the IPL Lab aims to support the mutual exchange of knowledge and
experience between the R&D sector and the industry in a user friendly way. The concept includes actively use of
interactive applications, "Apps", for strengthening the transfer of knowledge and learning experience. The
Laboratory is organized in 5 different modules. A draft concept has recently been presented to Petrobras. Provided
that we achieve positive response, the IO2-team would like to get the other industry partners on-board. The TC –
meeting is an important arena to get this feedback.
10
-
Module O
Definition of main
objectives
The IPL App
Introduction to IPL
Module 1
- Introduction to IPL
- Definition of AS-IS
Module 2
- Description of To-Be
Interactive IPL
Module 3
De-brief/ evaluation
Module 4
Follow- up
The IPL Laboratory - a client focused and module-based training arena/ tool supporting development and implementation of Integrated
Planning and Logistics
11
Milestone diagram 2013
PROJECT: IO 2 - INTEGRATED PLANNING AND LOGISTICS
Jan – March
Activity
Theme 1.
KPIs for IPL processes
and plans
PhD work:
Theme 2.
Optimization of logistics
operations
PhD work:
April - June
July - September
October - December
Paper 2
Paper 1
Field work/ Industry collaboration (IC)
Theory study
Field work / IC
Paper 1
2Master thesis
Theme 3.
Decision Making in
Cross-Professional Team
PhD thesis completed
Work shop IO Conf.
Theme 4
The IPL-Model /Concept
Case 1 Statoil
Paper 2
Paper
M6 work document
Continue Field work with Statoil- LERC focusing on logistics & collaboration
Master thesis
M6 work document
Paper
Postponed Decision Gate
Ongoing
activity
Workshop
or seminar
Completion
Technical report or paper
Decision Gate
Work document or collected data
Input KDS
Planned
Completed
Delayed
12
Milestone diagram 2013
PROJECT: IO 2 - INTEGRATED PLANNING AND LOGISTICS
Jan – March
Activity
April - June
July - September
To-be analysis
Case 2 Petrobras
Case 3 Aker Solutions
October - December
New solutions & testing
Master thesis
Field work Aker Solutions
M6 work document
M12 work document
Testing web based "Readiness assessment tool"
Industry Collaboration
KDS/WikiO
IPL Screening tool
Version 3
Version 3
Draft version 3
for review to
partners
IPL Handbook
Version 2 App & WikiO
Book: Different
Perspectives
on integrated planning
First draft
& Status report
Field work BP
GAP analysis
Case 4 BP
Delayed because of reorganization in BP
Ongoing
activity
Input
KDS
Workshop
or seminar
Technical report or paper
Completion
Decision Gate
Work document or collected data
Completed
Planned
Delayed
13
IO3 PROACTIVE MANAGEMENT OF SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT
The main objectives are to improve proactive management of safety and environment by applying IO-related
solutions to prevent major accidents, including new methods and work processes for monitoring and anomaly
detection during drilling and productions. Main industry partners involved in case studies are BP, ConocoPhillips,
DNV and Statoil.
Simplified
risk management framework in an IO context
Online monitoring of the risk picture
In the last period a report has been published on: "Proactive indicators for managing major accident risk in
integrated operations". The report presents a method that better utilizes "on-line" data to assess the impact on the
risk level for daily HSE management decision support. The case study has focused on process related risk and a set
of barrier indicators have been suggested as a means of monitoring the risk continuously. To visualise the risk, a
"risk barometer" has been proposed as shown below.
This barometer can be used as a qualitative aid to say something
about the estimated risk level at a given point in time
(instantaneous risk) and whether it is above or below the average
risk over the last period. Beyond this it can also be applied to
support certain decision criteria or rules. E.g. when the total risk
indicator is exceeding a certain value, no more work permits
related to work on HC-systems is allowed in that area, or when
the indicator is exceeding another values all work on HC-systems
in that area is stopped.
Facilitating sensemaking process and collective learning
Three reports have been published which documents results
from case studies at Statoil and ConocoPhillips. We have analyzed the dilemmas personnel face during drilling
operations when personnel must employ actions and strategies beyond the confines of the plan. The case study
report suggests measures such as alternative models, more hands-on involvement, better utilisation of existing
real-time data and explicit training on interpretation work. Another case study report explores the concept of
collective learning as a primary capability in facilitating sense making. Main recommendations refer to: 1) Collective
learning as a capability in drilling, 2) The value of learning-by-doing for drilling safety and performance, 3)
Exploitation of document repositories for experience transfer and dashboard development, 4) Robust sense making
and attention management for capturing “weak signals”.
Anomaly detection during drilling
With final versions of 2012 reports finished, work on more operational deliveries like guidelines and operational
recommendations has started. The work on refinement of mathematical methods to make it more robust and fit
for purpose has continued. We envision a "smart" alarm system which helps employ the human resources onshore
in investigating alarms and let the driller "talk back" to the computer. Recommendations will include description of
how mathematical methods should be adapted and further developed to better meet the needs seen in the
interaction with humans and alarm systems. Work on developing and testing prototypes accordingly is planned.
14
15
IO4 PRODUCTION OPTIMIZATION AND SUBSURFACE IO
The two programs IO4 Production and performance optimization and T2 Subsurface IO were merged
2013-01-01. The reason is to exploit the boundary between short term production optimization and
reservoir management. Several activities within the earlier separate programs were also merged so
IO4 now consists of seven separate activities as shown in the attached milestone diagram. All of the
seven activities are run in cooperation with IO center partners. Some selected results are presented
below. The selection is made to
complement earlier reports and is
hence not based on any
prioritization of results. Based on
feedback from the IO center board
and the last TC-meeting more
emphasis is currently placed on
dissemination of results.
1. SmartX – a method for well
monitoring
A new approach to testing of oil
and gas wells by means of
sinusoidal oscillations in flow and pressure instead of the traditional build-up test has been
developed. This approach allows faster and simultaneous testing of several wells, with no need
for a dedicated test header; it can also be adjusted to strike an appropriate compromise between
measurement precision and production loss. A SmartX video is developed to illustrate the
method’s potential, and field tests are performed in an associated project. Further, the SmartX
method is patented by NTNU and SINTEF.
2. IO center and SPE workshop on Norne data
The IO center has developed and supports a portal that makes Norne field data available for
research. The Norne data provide users with the ability to develop new knowledge on the
integration of data sources (in particular 4D seismics and production data) for rapid history
matching and reservoir management. A 2nd benchmark case is currently studied by research
groups who will come together at a IO center / SPE Advanced Technology Workshop in June 2013
in Trondheim to discuss and compare methods and approaches. We expect 80 participants to this
2nd Norne workshop.
3. Production optimization in shale gas systems
The shale gas (and oil) industry is developing rapidly. We have developed a new approach for
dynamic production scheduling. The method uses a cyclic shut-in scheme once the well gas rate
hits a lower critical rate, i.e., when liquid starts to accumulate in the wells, and is based on
mathematical optimization. The method provides a systematic approach to production scheduling
to for instance honor contractual obligations. Discussions are currently underway with IO center
partners to test the approach in a realistic environment.
4. Education account
The IO4 program (including earlier T2 program) has supported fully, or partially, 8 completed PhD
theses, and is currently supporting 6 on-going PhD projects. Moreover, the program has been
involved in 10-12 master student theses per year. The bulk of these students are currently
employed by IO center partner companies.
16
17
T3 SYSTEM INTEGRITY AND DYNAMIC RISK ASSESSMENT
Project T3 is working on 3 different cases;
Case 1 System
integrity and holistic risk understanding,
Case 2 Experience
transfer on usefulness of automation and
monitoring
systems for IO, and Case 3 Estimation of
remaining useful
life for turbo generators. Case 1 is in the
start-up phase
while Case 2 and 3 are well under way.
The case studies
conducted in T3 are related to collection and
utilisation of data
from technical systems, and how this can be
transformed into
valuable information in the decision making
process.
Experience transfer on usefulness of
automation and
monitoring systems for IO
Case 2 was performed in collaboration with GDF SUEZ, where condition monitoring (CM) systems on the platform Gjøa
was examined with regards to how well they performed. The main findings from the study were as follows:
1. Sharing of information – The CM solutions are to a various degree adapted to the IT infrastructure that permits
sharing of information across the organization. CM solutions that require on-site logon, or where the
communication is not based on a standard interface (e.g. OPC), tend to be less successful in an IO perspective.
2. Flexibility – The users require flexible solutions for grouping of data streams and displaying results. However,
there is also a need for a set of standardized data set-ups for specific personnel categories and disciplines.
3. Make decisions – Many of the CM systems generate large quantities of data, which do not necessarily support the
decision-making. When CM systems are being acquired, more emphasis needs to be placed on how the data
should be processed to support the decision-making process.
The last point is an area where organisations should put more emphasis both in the project phase and in operations in
order to utilise the investments in CM solutions.
Estimation of remaining useful life for turbo
generators
In the end of 2012 there was conducted a
workshop for Petrobras in Rio de Janeiro for
case 3. The case revealed a need for more
detailed technical information in order to
approach the RUL modelling. Petrobras has
since the workshop been working on these
issues. When their work is completed in May
2013, the RUL study will continue.
18
19
TELEMEDICINE
The pre-project `Telemedicine of the Future in O&G` 2012 was the predecessor to the next step of `Telemedicine of the
future in O&G 2013`. The kick off for next step was on February 28`th 2013. The demonstration of optimal workflow
between HSE personnel offshore and medical experts onshore is the focus for the next step Telemedicine project.
We have a governance structure in place and the scope of the project is acknowledged among the partners. The next step
Telemedicine project involves ConocoPhillips, Petrobras, IBM, The Operating Room of the Future St. Olavs Hospital and
the IO Center.
We are looking at a very user driven innovation process. ConocoPhillips, Petrobras and St.Olavs Hospital represent the
users, and we work to optimize the workflow and demonstrate decision support systems between medics onshore and
offshore. There are three key activities; 1) design of optimal workflow and 2) prototype and 3) demonstration of solution.
As we run demonstrations we bring the experiences back to the design of the workflow, which makes this an ongoing
process.
Milestone diagram 2013
PROJECT: TELEMEDICINE FOR THE FUTURE
IN OIL AND GAS
Jan –
March
Activit
yy
April June
July September
October December
Project start - Next
step Future of
telemedicine in O&G
Startup workshop
NTNU/St.Olavs, IBM
and ConocoPhillips
Optimal work-flow
design: Future of
telemedicine in O&G
Development of
medical iPad
application with IBM
Demonstration of
medical application
with the partners
Workshops St.Olavs
IBM, Petrobras
and
ConocoPhillips
Knowledge
(Stavanger/Trondheim)
(Rio de Janeiro)
SPE IE 2014
Paper
Short Video
Web page &
WikIO
dissemination and
publications
Evaluation and next
step decisions for
bringing the
solutions to the
market
Ongo
ing
activi
ty
Meeti
ng
Worksh
op
Work
document
Decision
Gate
Completi
on
Plan
ned
Comple
ted
Dela
yed
20
What we want to achieve is a decision support system that supports an optimal workflow and collaboration, between
medics onshore and offshore. The decision support system is primarily to be used when the medic offshore request
decision support for matters of diagnostics or treatment/evacuation. The goal is to make better and faster medical
decisions, and improve the quality of healthcare offshore.
State of the art telemedicine in O&G is decision support systems, particularly focusing the diagnostics of patients, using
High Density (HD) video conferencing systems and workflow. HD quality, preferably in real time, is essential as quality of
images is containing important medical information. As there has been a huge development in the use of video
consultation we believe the future of telemedicine in O&G will add to his workflow transmission of visual medical data
between “non-experts” and experts to improve diagnostics. The Vscan handheld ultrasound device is a strong evidence of
miniaturization of advanced medical technology that makes it well suited for use in remote locations.
We have learned so far that the telemedicine work process at ConocoPhillips and Petrobras has a lot of similarities. They
have much of the same structure and same challenges. As they acknowledge the status of their work process today we
have been investigating how an optimal workflow may work and how technology can support a new telemedicine work
process.

Our approach is to understand the telemedicine work processes of today and investigate the optimal workflow of
`tomorrow`. Key questions for the offshore medics at ConocoPhillips and Petrobras and medical experts at
St.Olavs Hospital have been; What are the telemedicine work processes today? What are inputs and outputs in
the work process? How are decisions made? What are the weaknesses of today`s decision making process? What
are the needs/visions of the medics workers offshore and onshore? What is the optimal workflow and
collaboration?

We are looking at all medical data obtained to monitor the patient offshore. We are aiming for a Generic platform
that can use any instrument. We shall not constraint ourselves to special instruments – but make the system
open to any instruments that are needed.
As the partners acknowledge the telemedicine work process of today and have agreed on the scope of the project we see
a common understanding among the partners. We see a big motivation in the group, and this is very important to make a
good progress. We have a progress plan and a governance structure in place – so with enthusiastic people and user
organizations in place we hope to make successful achievements during 2013.
21