Why? of O&G (CLIENTS at the center (Too many interfaces to clients…
Why? of O&G
CLIENTS at the center
Too many interfaces to clients
Clients complaining - More than 3 different GEM sales visited same hedge fund
Too long time-to-market
example: PPA we took to long to answer?
Sales not enough aware of client needs
Sometimes client needs emerge from operational teams
Our orga is not adaptable to customers needs
Customers now requesting commodity + green ppa + services
who is the front (ETS, CEM, CTO...) ?
how to price (the three or more entities have to debate the pricing, the p&l sharing..) leading to long time to market
once signed, everyone delivers its part of the service ? how ensure the support post contracting... ? differnt silos have to coordonate to satisfy the customer
GSS positionning : between GEM and M&S
do you apply "boost" ?
"support" are the clients of front
Front shall ensure that support is satisfied by the informations transmitted
Stop signing deals that could not be booked in the systems
make sure new deals could be "digitalized"
Clear and transparent
Need for more integrated value chain
Front to back too separated
Operational teams don't have control on their total costs, difficult to prioritise and make decisions
Difficult to have common objective and all go to the same direction
lot of validation from many teams
more than 1 year needed for creating EFET contract, while usual delay is 2 weeks
Legal structure too complex
GEC: several GEM organisations in UK, ES, IT
Need for create more value from our clients
Not enough link between Sales and Operations in Power
Some deals very complex to put in place operationnally.
P&L allocation can create battles and complexity
complex deal flow to represent CTO-XX deal
Bilocation is difficult
We stand for ENGERGY TRANSITION
Internal and external CLIENTS drive our energy
We embrace DIGITALIZATION
PEOPLE are our strength
We facilitate ENERGY WORLDS
AUTONOMY - DECENTRALISATION
Structure enables Culture
Dare to try and fail, but in reality we still have to follow hierarchy for decision - or unclear how to decide
Many people acting as volunteer in transversal working group, communities, but how to cope with traditional organisation? (example evaluation)
Currently part of GEM are already working in "circle like" and ressource allocation is still a problem. For example: allocation of back office and IS ressources whil they are part of the CODIR of a given business
When discussing allocation of "support ressources" (budget or ETP), divergences appears highlighting disalignement of objectives/interest between the "local decision"(incl support representant) and the support.