A critique of Smart, A. ‘Digital “needs to be led by people who understand it”

Author: Andrew Smart Title of article: ‘Digital “needs to be led by people who understand it”

Title of Journal: Digital Energy Journal, Iss. 75, Nov- Dec 2018, pp.13

Introduction

In this article, Andrew Smart (2018) attempts to expound on the needs not just for digital technology in the oil and gas industry, but for the need to also ensure that the workforce is engaged and equipped to make use of these technologies to drive company performance upward.

His idea centers primarily around the idea that companies in the oil and gas industry can improve their processes and standards by employing the right use of digital technology accompanied by trained and skilled personnel. While his main ideas and propositions are clear, the article could have benefited from a more cohesive and logical structure as well as some research-based evidence to corroborate the writers’ assertions.

Critique

The article was written in a style more congruent with non-academic literature as the writer appears to be speaking largely based on experience and professional opinion.

It was centered mainly on the oil and gas industry with an overwhelming suggestion that the readers are familiar with many of the terms and examples given. Smart (2018) discusses an important topic of embracing digital technology.

This topic has several applications not just in the oil and gas industry but in many other industries such as Telecommunications, Fashion and Entertainment . However, the article starts with a paragraph that throws you off as it appears unrelated to the topic or the abstract of the article.

There is a mention of switching roles from offshore to onshore as happened in the preceding round of “integrated operations” projects (paragraph 1, line 5 – 6). It appears that the author is citing a specific example but with no clear reference, it is difficult to say.

The author then goes on to advise, and quite soundly that companies could change the way they do engineering to make it more simplified and standardized which will eventually lead to better predictability in how projects are executed (paragraph 5, line 6 -7). This paragraph would have been better if it was made clear exactly what changes companies could implement to reap the stated benefits or better still, given a specific example of a company who has reaped these benefits already.

The 7th paragraph also begins with a broad sweeping statement that a ‘big challenge with digital technology in the oil and gas industry is being able to get the systems deployed at scale’. In other words, the ability to broaden the applications of the system once it has been found to work in a specific area poses some challenges for companies. The examples given are unspecific and uncorroborated – the only credence one can lend to such assertions is the fact that the author is the Managing Director at one of the worlds’ leading firms in Energy and as such will have some insights into what is being said.

The oil and gas industry has indeed formed a consensus that digital technology is important, however the article could have taken this opportunity to highlight existing industry reports or articles that support this notion. Articles such as – ‘The role of innovation and technology in sustaining the petroleum and petrochemical industry’ from the Technological Forecasting and Social Change and the article on Smart thinking – cognitive computing with Repso’ would have supported the idea better.

In my role as an industry professional in the oil and gas industry, I can attest to the consensus on digital technology and its opportunities for significant business improvement having witnessed a noticeable focus on digitization and its benefits. In 2018, I was head of a project to digitize all legacy/old hard copied documents in my organization to centralize access to documents which in turn resulted in faster decision making and ultimately improved business performance.

Another key area of note in this article is the paragraph on leadership engagement and determination as a precursor to company efficiency and agility (paragraph 9, line 8 – 10) to which I am inclined to agree. The role of leadership cannot be over-emphasized in relation to attempting any change in an organization. (Kotter, Rathgeber 2006).

The section on ‘Working Better’ can be summarized by the last paragraph in that section which states that “digital technologies offer cost and performance improvement to all forms of analytical activity…” (paragraph 18). This would have been a clearer way to pass the intent of the message than the preceding paragraphs which was presented in a manner that did not appear cohesive or related to the section prior.

In passing across messages, I would expect that words are only used to the extent that they are required to convey the message. This section also speaks on “conventional” and “unconventional” industries to which no clear definition of these industries was supplied.

The last section of the article advices that companies employ “digital improvement managers” whose primary task will be to keep abreast of digital technology trends with a view to seeing how their companies can improve their processes and standards. This is in line with Smart’s (2018) idea that Digital “needs to be led by people who understand it”, in this case Digital Improvement Managers. While organizations may choose to designate the job title with some other choice of words, the main idea behind the suggestion is that specific people are empowered and employed to take on the role of managing a company’s digital space.

Summary

In summary, the writers’ position is clear on the need for digital technology in companies to be led by people who understand this technology and have been empowered to use them. He also states that it is not simply a matter of adding technical resources, but it is about engaging the entire workforce and leadership in the new ways of working to achieve the desired performance.

The article was clear in its main idea but lacking in the supporting evidence to back up the main points. The reason for this evaluation is based largely on a lack of any referenced research or article to support the writer’s key statements.

My recommendations for improvement will be mostly in line with most of the negative critique in this submission. The writer should not make assumptions that the readers are familiar with the industry in question or the examples being cited. The writer should take the time to cite specific examples and explain any commonly used industry term that may not be immediately apparent to a person outside the industry. The writer should take the time to set out a clear and cohesive outline to enable a better flow of the thoughts and messages being passed across.

Lastly, I would advise that the writer be clear on what key message he or she intends to pass and takes out any sentences, paragraphs or words not required to properly convey the message.

References

Hassani, H 2017, ‘The role of innovation and technology in sustaining the petroleum and petrochemical industry, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 119, pp. 1-17

InnovOil, 2016, ‘Smart thinking – cognitive computing with Repso’, Issue 44

Kotter, J 2006, Our Iceberg is Melting, 10th edn. Macmillan, UK

Smart, A 2018, ‘Digital “needs to be led by people who understand it”, Digital Energy Journal, iss. 75, pp. 13