The ten most common reasons why asset integrity implementations fail

Dr. Steven W. Ciaraldi Velosi Asset Integrity Ltd, May 2012, www.oilandgasfundamentals.com

strategy to ensure you arent set to repeat them? In this article, Velosis Stephen Ciaraldi, a 30 year BP veteran, will walk you through the top 10 reasons why integrity management implementations fail and give you some valuable advice to ensure your integrity programme to avoid the same fate.

Reason one: attempting to tackle integrity in isolation

Perhaps the most common reasons for asset integrity strategies to fail is integrity specialists trying to do integrity in isolation. Integrity is not a subject which thrives in a silo it requires the entire business to be aware, on board, and supporting a unified effort. But not only can integrity not success if standing alone in order to succeed, it needs to be truly aligned with the business. People need to know how integrity affects their day to day job, they need to be encouraged, cajoled, instructed and incentivised to ensure that they are working together. Different groups have different goals, not caring about others goals, and areas where people dont like to be tasked with doing others work is a demonstration of a silo mentality. If that type of silo mentality exists, there will be problems in implementing integrity management.

dont achieve the results expected of them is an important starting point. Problems arent confined to one particular area of an integrity implementation and can just as easily emerge in either the process, the people of the plant components which make up an integrated integrity management programme. Focus too narrowly on one area, and you can be sure problems will emerge elsewhere. The key to implementation is the effective working together of these three components, and ensuring that checks and balances exist at every stage to help you.

This article is brought to you as part of a unique new online learning resource for the global oil and gas business aimed at educating the industry on the essentials of asset integrity management. Find out more by visiting www.oilandgasfundamentals.com.

Reason three: not addressing the competition between productivity and integrity
Companies failing to properly budget for and book production deferrals are also key reasons an implementation can fall down. It has been known for individuals to go on site and say its not my job to maximise production its my job to assure integrity of facilities and to implement the asset integrity requirements which naturally brings them into conflict with those whose job it is to maximise production. In practice, an enormous amount of resistance is often faced by integrity specialists from people whose primary goal is to maximise production and who are going to get less money in their bonus because you are asking to do work on their facility. Having that production loss booked in advance and everyone agreeing is a really important obstacle to overcome. Proactive companies incentive their staff on operational safety as well as asset productivity.

Compare the approaches of the top ten operating

companies around the world to tackling the asset integrity challenge, and you will find many similarities. Whether in the models used to identify risks or the approaches used to manage them. Industry thinking has evolved to a point where most agree on the fundamental elements of how to approach integrity management. However, look closer and you might find some further commonalities. The reasons why asset integrity management strategies often fail to achieve the results expected of them are also often the same from operator to operator. So what are these reasons, and how can you ensure you are building them into your implementation

Reason two: losing sight of process, people and plant

It may seem obvious, but an asset integrity plan is a extremely complex undertaking with many moving parts and even more stakeholders involved in its successful execution. Recognising that there are many reasons why asset integrity implementations

Reason four: failing to monitor progress once an implementation plan is underway

Many implementations fail because their architects fail to effectively monitor their progress once the implementation moves from theory to reality. No plan is perfect, and once you finalise an integrity plan and it may change within an hour. So it is important to prepare for the fact that nothing goes to plan, so constant monitoring will be required to ensure your plan stays on track. Successful integrity strategies are always putting corrective actions in place to ensure you achieve at least your primary objective. If you dont monitor, therefore, you will not achieve your objective. Expect it, plan for it, you will need to flex to achieve your plan. One of the techniques which can be applied to help here is multiple-level KPI monitoring using a wide range of KPIs. When things go red, corrective actions need to be placed.

where things are going well, it is very easy for a dangerous level of complacency to creep in. People dont worry and people start to accept risks that shouldnt be accepted. Its a continuous process and needs constant vigilance. Never forget that.

Reason six: a lack of understanding of the economics of integrity management

The reality in which we operate is such that in an ageing facility requires increasing levels of investment in asset integrity, even though production levels and therefore profitability levels might be declining. Facilities get older, more water is produced, and asset integrity concerns rise. This might sound like common sense to the integrity specialists, but many non-technical people including those in decision-making positions like to maintain constant lifting costs in their field development planning. In short: the need for integrity rises as the barrels produced decline. It is important that non-technical people involved in planning understand that integrity implementation costs are not production related, they are age-related and need to be factored in accordingly to avoid corner-cutting later on down the line.

than done and is actually among the most common reasons integrity rollouts fail. So how do we go about building a robust integrity culture? First, people need to know what asset integrity is. Training is required in the fundamentals of the subject and how they apply to the business they are operating in. Contractors should be included in this training too. Leaders must push the integrity agenda. If leaders push, people will follow. Finally, you need to encourage honesty. If staff are afraid to report a hydrocarbon leak and fear it may affect their performance rank or pay, then you have a problem.

Reason eight: failing to effectively prioritise what needs to be done

An essential element of implementing a successful asset integrity strategy is making sure you are doing the right work in the right place at the right time. Too many integrity strategies fail to prioritise the work that needs to be done based on a clear understanding of where the most serious risk lies, instead, they prioritise based on financial considerations or manpower availability. In a large asset, your integrity strategy will be complex, will contain a large number of moving parts, and will require lots of manpower, so plan ahead, dont underestimate the time and effort required for this, start early and make multiple passes at each problem you are tackling. Sometimes its not practical to do major upgrades which require production to be affected so planning on-the-job operational integrity activities is the easier route to take, but never forget that people still make mistakes.

Reason five: failing to realise that asset integrity management never actually ends
We all know that asset integrity is a cradle to grave process, right? Of course we do, and yet in too many cases, asset integrity advisors can approach a project with a mind-set of having been brought into an operation to carry out some integrity work, and once that work has been done and that asset integrity advisor has been allocated elsewhere, a perception remains that that job will then be finished and go away. It really doesnt work that way. Asset integrity requires constant monitoring and constant vigilance even when especially when responsibility shifts from one team to another. Related to this, in cases

Reason seven: a lack of an integrity awareness culture

The best definition of culture I have seen describes it as how we behave when no ones looking. Creating a culture of integrity awareness is often cited as the number one objective for an asset integrity implementation. This, however, is much easier said

Reason nine: not effectively balancing the experience levels of site staff
In every operating scenario you can imagine, you would expect new people to be part of the operating unit, but too many new faces or raw recruits working on the same project at any one time runs the risk of integrity failure it is important to make sure there is a balance. Added to this, effective management of contractors is key as well. Too many people focus only on their own staff and dont focus enough attention on the other parties involved in operating their asset. The final manpower lesson to bear in mind is that once the programme is agreed and the funding is approved, the time to get the team together is typically longer than you ever imagine. Good engineers may not be integrity experts and dedicated integrity teams take a long time to assemble and get in place bear this in mind and start early to avoid repeating this common mistake.

assessment of a particular issue is key to carry out on a regular basis ideally with the input of an external party who can view the problem you are so absorbed in with an independent eye. An annual integrity review can help you see trends that you wouldnt see if you just looked at the metrics day by day. Dr. Stephen W. Ciaraldi is a Senior Integrity Management Specialist with Velosi Asset Integrity, and is a 30-year BP veteran with integrity experience on five continents. Stephen leads an online course on the Fundamentals of Asset Integrity Implementation, more details of which can be found at: www.oilandgasfundamentals.com/courses/assetintegrity.

Reason ten: Failing to get outside perspectives

Weve all experienced situations where we have been so consumed by a particular problem that we can fail to see potential solutions which others with the benefit of a different perspective might recognise immediately. The same applies with an asset integrity implementation, and that is why this represents the final reason that many fail to achieve their objectives. Furthermore, because implementations are such dynamic activities, there can often seem to be no time to take a strategic view of where you are. For this reason, a tactical review defined as a periodic