The three dimensions of complexity of Mega projects according to Edward and Nandurdikar are about Scope, Organizational and Shaping. According to Edward and Nandurdikar in "Leading Complex Projects", there are instances where a Mega project with a regular scope can result to extra-ordinary scope and organizational complexity. The experience we intend to share in this paper demonstrates that a project with a simple scope can have a complex shaping process. In projects maturation, the shaping process is where the value is created, while in the execution and operation phases we realize the value. In the Niger Delta case study that we share in this paper, a simple upstream project that initially required drilling of 5 non-associated gas (NAG) wells (in a first phase of development), flowlines, and hookup to a manifold 100 meters away from the wells, manifested high shaping complexity. This was due to different reasons stemming from involvement of large number of stakeholders (internal and external), technical (subsurface and surface) and non-technical risks including commercials. This paper will discuss the early wins in the subsurface development strategy, changes in regulatory environment from introduction of Petroleum Industry Act (PIA). The PIA impacts on regulator availability, required different interfaces for upstream and downstream and risks to resource ownership within the projects contract period and the impact on the shaping process are discussed. The objective is to share these learnings on the key shaping issues and perspectives on things that could have been done differently for a more desirable shaping outcome. Some of these issues include subsurface uncertainties, risks, and the robustness of the development strategy to support the gas supply obligation, the phased development and confidence of external stakeholders to the operators planned development strategy and commercial aspects of a required update to the gas supply agreement.

You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.