Value creation through big data application process management: the case of the oil and gas industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study is twofold: to investigate the role of big data in firms’ co-knowledge and value creation and to understand the underlying drivers behind value creation through big data in the oil and gas industry by underscoring the role of firms’ capabilities, trends and challenges. Design/methodology/approach Following an inductive approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with senior managers and analysts working in oil and gas companies across eight countries. The data collected from these key informants were then analysed using the qualitative data analysis software ATLAS.ti. Findings Value creation through big data is an important factor for enhancing performance. It has a positive impact on both tangible (organisational performance) and intangible (societal) aspects depending on the context. Oil and gas companies understand the importance of big data to creating value in their operations. However, implementing and using big data has been problematic. In this study, a framework was developed to show that factors such as the shortage of data experts, poor data quality, the risk of cyber-attacks and unsupportive organisational cultures impede its implementation and utilisation. Research limitations/implications The findings from this study have implications for managers and executives implementing big data and creating value across various data-intensive industries. The research findings, are contextual, however, and should be applied cautiously. Originality/value This study contributes to the value creation literature in the big data context. The findings identify the key areas to be considered for the effective implementation and utilisation of big data in the oil and gas sector. This study addresses a broad but under-explored issue (i.e. knowledge creation from big data and its implementation) and strengthens the academic debate within this research stream.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".