Page 46 - 62

Over the last 10 years bureaucratic decision-making processes and with little
accountability on the part of middle and top
- Project cost increased 5-fold management.
- Productivity declined
- Project schedule slippage increased 1-2 yrs
- Construction cost 25% -> 50% of EPC The Innovation Factory
- Craft labour ~ 30% to 40% of project budget It was on the basis of these studies that, in 2016, the
- Competition stronger than ever Innovation Factory was launched, an incubator for
- O&G projects increasingly complex ideas and a fast-prototyping lab that aims to tackle
problems holistically, and to develop ground breaking
responses to the sector’s challenges. In a very short
Fig.2 - The industry remained pretty much where we were in the nineties. time, and not without difficulty, a physical and cyber
productivity evolution Processes in workshops and on site are still dangerous, network environment was created that was different
with a very high intensity of manual labour. Engineering from the usual offices of traditional companies. The
uses CAD 3D, ERP, calculation and simulation objective was, and still is, to modify behaviors through
programs that have no interconnection whatsoever, viral change whilst at the same time trying out innovative
with a very low rate of data reuse. technological solutions.
The third analysis looked at procurement and logistics. The apparent contrast in the name Innovation Factory
Although communications with suppliers occur on a aims to place the accent on the need for concrete
daily basis, and there may be some sort of collaboration, substance in the pursuit of tangible results, consistent
contractual relations are still transactional, regulated by with company traditions. At the same time, it aims to
contracts that are increasingly voluminous and consolidate an agile approach to innovation, focusing
crammed with pitfalls, penalties and often absurd on the rapid study and experimentation of potentially
presumed shifts of liability. The consequences mean transformative ideas. One is dealing, therefore, with a
having to resort to risk coverage that has an effect on “sprinting” method, which together with technology
prices and limited transparency in the relationship scouting supports the “marathon-running” pillar of the
between client and supplier. Moreover, the legacy level corporate innovation strategy, technology development,
as well as the mistrust that exists between the internal focusing on innovation projects with medium and long-
functions of the same company (for example, project term time-to-market.
management, procurement, audit) do not allow The Innovation Factory is run by a cross-functional
managers to privilege decisions in favour of the team of innovative thinkers, selected within the
business instead of the “rules”. This translates into organization according to their propensity for lateral
further burdens on the purchase prices of goods and thinking, creative problem-solving, entrepreneurship
services and into the automatic exclusion of small and and collaboration skills. The Factory continuously hosts
new suppliers, even if these might be offering innovative working groups in a physical and digital space where
solutions. people organise and manage their activities
Fig.3 - The Innovation The fourth analysis examined the internal culture and independently: what counts are the results. The
Factory integrated the organisations. The organisational structures appear challenges they are called upon to tackle are identified
approach very fragmented, divided into silos, with lengthy, directly by Top Management, and are steered and

IndustrIal Plants - May 2018
42