##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Indonesia’s Offshore platform decommissioning is a complex activity involving lots of stakeholders with different interest and power. To date only one (1) platform that has been removed from its origin place offshore and sank as rig-to-reef near Kalimantan, Indonesia. The whole business process took 7 (seven) years from the first discussion in 2017 until the execution in 2022, which is not desirable for future decommissioning projects. This research collected data from the key stakeholders including the Production Sharing Contract (PSC) Contractor and several institutions involved in the project to examine the complexities of stakeholder alignment as study case for future decommissioning project. The qualitative analysis utilizes Current Reality Tree to find the root cause and Future Reality Tree to identify required injection to improve the stakeholder alignment. The results show three main challenges: unavailability of Abandonment and Site Restoration (ASR) Fund, decision of end-of-state of the facilities, and process approval for Asset Write-Off. The root causes are weak implementation of existing decommissioning regulations and lack of understanding of stakeholder’s needs. Injection into the future reality tree include formalizing funding mechanism for the PSC with no ASR fund, introduction of umbrella regulation to cover different business process in different ministries and establishment of ASR strategy by taking into account the PSC organizational capability.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Aaltonen, K., Jaakko, K., & Tuomas, O. (2008). Stakeholder salience in global projects. International Journal of Project Management, 26(5), 509–516.
     Google Scholar
  2. Aaltonen, K., Kujala, J., Havela, L., & Savage, G. (2015). Stakeholder dynamics during the project front-end: The case of nuclear waste repository projects. Project Management Journal, 46(6), 15–41.
     Google Scholar
  3. Bahadorestani, A., Karlsen, J. T., & Farimani, N. M. (2020). Novel approach to satisfy stakeholders in megaprojects: Balancing mutual values. Journal of Management in Engineering, 36(2), 1-19.
     Google Scholar
  4. Bowie, N. E., & Werhane, P. H. (2005). Management ethics (Vol. 5). Blackwell.
     Google Scholar
  5. Cleland, D. I. (1999). Project management strategic design and implementation. McGraw-Hill.
     Google Scholar
  6. Chinyio, E. A., & Akintoye, A. (2008). Practical approaches for engaging stakeholders: findings from the UK. Construction Management and Economics, 26(6), 591–599, 591-599.
     Google Scholar
  7. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
     Google Scholar
  8. Eskerod, P., Huemann, M., & Savage, G. (2015). Project stakeholder management – past and present. Project Management Journal, 46(6), 6–14.
     Google Scholar
  9. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.
     Google Scholar
  10. Goldratt, E. (2016). The goal: A process of ongoing improvement (3rd ed.). Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
     Google Scholar
  11. Greenwood, M. (2007). Stakeholder engagement: Beyond the myth of corporate responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(4), 315–327.
     Google Scholar
  12. Jiang, J., & Klein, G. (1999). Risks to different aspects of system success. Information and Management, 36(5), 263–271.
     Google Scholar
  13. Lemon, W. F., Bowitz, J., Burn, J., & Hackney, R, (2002). Information systems project failure: A comparative study of two countries. Journal of Global Information Management, 10(2), 28–40.
     Google Scholar
  14. Meredith, J. R., & Mantel, S. J., Jr. (2000). Project management: A managerial approach. John Wiley & Sons.
     Google Scholar
  15. Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources. (2018). Regulation No. 15 of 2018 concerning post-operation activities in upstream oil and gas business activities.
     Google Scholar
  16. Ministry of Finance. (2020). Regulation No. 140/PMK06/2020 on upstream oil and gas state property management.
     Google Scholar
  17. Nguyen, T. S., Mohamed, S., & Panuwatwanich, K. (2018). Stakeholder management in complex project: Review of contemporary literature. Journal of Engineering Project and Production Management, 8(2), 75-89.
     Google Scholar
  18. Post, J. E., Preston, L. E., & Sachs, S. (2002). Managing the extended enterprise: The new stakeholder view. California Management Review, 45(1), 6–28.
     Google Scholar
  19. Project Management Institute. (2017). A guide to the project management book of knowledge (6th ed.). Project Management Institute.
     Google Scholar
  20. Pudyantoro, A. R. (2014). Proyek hulu migas, evaluasi dan analisis petro ekonomi [Upstream oil and gas project, petro economic evaluation and analysis]. Petromindo.
     Google Scholar
  21. Sauer, C. (1993). Why information systems fail: A case study approach. Alfred Waller.
     Google Scholar
  22. Suhardono, R. (2022). Offshore facilities decommissioning. Forum Fasilitas Produksi Migas. IAFMI.
     Google Scholar
  23. Walker, D. H. T., Bourne, L., & Rowlinson, S. (2008). Stakeholders and the supply chain procurement systems – A cross industry project management perspective. Taylor and Francis Group.
     Google Scholar