Background. The relevance of the study is caused by dynamic changes occurring in the global and Russian oil industry market. Major oil companies are preparing a number of “mega-projects” aimed at improving production performance and quality of the final product. However, it is expected that the implementation of such projects will be associated with an increased negative impact on the environment, increasing the risk of social rejection of new initiatives by the public. In this connection, it becomes crucial to have the effective management of investment projects implementation that can take into account as much interests of all participants of investmentprocesses as possible, increase economic, social and environmental benefits in development of the oil drilling technological complex on the basis of modern technologies.
Materials and methods. The study was based on the industry statistics prepared by Rosstat, methods of investment project management at Russian oil enterprises, publicly available oil companies’ programmes in implementation of strategic initiatives, as well as expert opinions, which allowed to generate a comprehensive set of indicators to assess the technological complex of oil drilling. The basis of the author’s technique was the systematic approach to solve the problem of choosing a technological complex at the system level, taking into account a wide range of indicators covering different aspects of investment project implementation in oil production.
Results. The author has described main features of the proposed procedures for selection of an oil drilling technological complex: the procedure of investment desion- making has been expounded, the framework of a drilling technological complex has been provided, the indicators that should be assessed within a technological complex have been described, the formula for calculation of individual utility system and multi-criteria utility system parameters has been adduced , the role of system components’ sensitivity to changes of weights and scores as the final stage of the investment decision on selection of a technological complex has been defined. Also, the author has assessed the prospects for the use of this technique in practice of Russian oil and other enterprises.
Conclusions. Examination of the current practice of making investment decisions on selection of a technological complex has revealed gaps in the pre-investment stage of oil drilling projects. The use of techniques that allow the system to enter the decision-making level will allow companies to make more effective decisions, allowing to obtain the best result on the basis of the complex index, which is proposed by the author as a multicriteria utility index. One of its obvious advantages is the flexibility to take into account peculiarities of different companies, their approaches to decision-making, priority systems of decision-makers.
1. Druzhina V., Kivizhe G. Vestnik McKinsey – teoriya i praktika upravleniya [McKinsey bulletin – theory and practice of management]. 2013, no. 28, pp. 28–43.
2. Budina V. I., Kezhapkina O. V. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedeniy. Povolzhskiy region. Obshchestvennye nauki [University proceedings. Volga region. Social sciences]. 2014, no. 4 (32), pp. 123–132.
3. Bezrodnyy Yu. G. Zashchita okruzhayushchey sredy v neftegazovom komplekse [Environmental protection in the oil and gas sector]. 2012, no. 2, pp. 4–9.
4. Bezrodnyy Yu. G. Stroitel'stvo neftyanykh i gazovykh skvazhin na sushe i na more [Building of oil and gas wells on land and sea]. 2008, no. 8, pp. 19–23.
5. Tsipes G. L., Tovb A. S. Menedzhment proektov v praktike sovremennoy kompanii [Management projects in the practice of modern companies]. Moscow: Olimp-Biznes, 2006, 304 p.
6. Ewing B., Reed A., Galli A., Kitzes J., Wackernagel M. Calculation Methodology for the National Footprint Accounts, 2010 Edition. Available at: http://www.footprintnet work.org/images/uploads/ National_Footprint_Accounts_Method_Paper_2010.pdf (accessed February 25, 2015).
7. Galli A., Kitzes J., Wermer P., Wackernagel M., Niccolucci V., Tiezzi E. International Journal of Ecodynamics. 2007, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 250–257.
8. Kitzes J., Galli A., Bagliani M., Barrett J., Dige G., Ede S., Erb K.-H., Giljum S., Haberl H., Hails C., Jungwirth S., Lenzen M., Lewis K., Loh J., Marchettini N., Messinger H., Milne K., Moles R., Monfreda C., Moran D., Nakano K., Pyhälä A., Rees W., Simmons C., Wackernagel M., Wada Y., Walsh C., Wiedmann T. Ecological Economics. 2009, vol. 68, no. 7, 1991–2007.
9. Kitzes J., Peller A., Goldfinger S., Wackernagel M. Science for Environment & Sustainable Society (Research Center for Sustainability and Environment, Shiga University). 2007, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–9.
10. Lesnykh Yu. G. Ekonomicheskaya bezopasnost' Rossii v usloviyakh integratsii v mirovoe khozyaystvo v koordinatakh neftyanogo klastera (teoriya i metodologiya): dis. d-ra ekon. nauk: 08.00.05 [Economic security of Russian in conditions of integration into the world economy in terms of the oil cluster (theory and methodology): dissertation to aplly for the degree of the doctor of economic sciences]. Stavropol,2012,241p.