Opening the File: Quick Project Snapshot

• Briefly describe the project we're discussing (field name, brief geology/reservoir type, and the core objective).
• Which development type best describes this opportunity? Options: Brownfield tie-in/expansion, Greenfield new field, Satellite tie-back, Enhanced recovery (EOR), Marginal field redevelopment, Other
• What stage is the project currently in? Options: Concept screening / early scoping, Pre-FEED, FEED, Regulatory permitting, Execution/Procurement, Other
• Select the approximate capital band you expect for sanction (choose closest). Options: <$50M, $50M–$200M, $200M–$500M, $500M–$1B, $1B–$3B, >$3B, Undecided/Confidential
• Who is the primary sponsor or single point of contact on the operator side for this project (role/title)? Options: VP Development/Assets, Development Manager, Chief Engineer, Asset Manager, Head of Wells, CFO/Head of Finance, Other

Who Really Moves the Needle?

• If the board could change one underlying assumption tomorrow and still approve the project, which assumption would they change—and why hasn't that happened already?
• Which stakeholder groups will influence the sanction decision? (Select all that apply.) Options: Asset team, Development engineering, Reservoir/ARO, Subsurface (geology/geophysics), Drilling & completions, Facilities/Operations, Commercial/Trading, Finance/CFO, Legal/Contracts, Executive leadership/CEO/Board, Regulatory/Government affairs, Other
• Who must give the final sign-off for sanction, and how formal is that approval (board resolution, executive committee, delegated authority)? Options: Board of Directors, Executive committee/CEO, CFO approval within delegated limits, Asset steering committee, Partner JV committee, Other
• Describe an example of how two internal stakeholders have disagreed on a past sanction-level decision (what clashed and what broke the deadlock?).
• On a scale from 'Completely aligned' to 'Actively at odds', how would you rate stakeholder alignment today? Options: Completely aligned, Mostly aligned with some friction, Neutral / mixed signals, Significant misalignment, Actively at odds

Where the Clock Actually Starts Ticking

• What hidden timeline pressure do you think will break the schedule if it isn't solved in the next 90 days?
• What is your target sanction / FID timing today (quarter & year or 'no target yet')? Options: Next quarter, Within 6 months, 6–12 months, 12–24 months, No target set
• Which regulatory or external gates are on the critical path (select all that apply)? Options: Environmental permitting, Unitization/consent, Export license, Regulatory safety review, Stakeholder consultations/land access, None of the above / not applicable, Other
• Who owns the schedule for the critical path items you selected (role names)? Options: Asset Manager, Project/Program Manager, Regulatory Lead, Commercial Lead, External consultant, Other
• How much schedule slippage is acceptable before the board would reconsider the project? Options: <1 month, 1–3 months, 3–6 months, >6 months, Not acceptable / would re-evaluate immediately

If Money Talked, What Would It Say?

• If you could change one economic input today to make the sanction inevitable, which would it be—and who would push back?
• What are the primary investment criteria the finance team is insisting on? (Select all that apply.) Options: NPV (discounted cashflow), Internal Rate of Return (IRR), Payback period, Cost per barrel of oil equivalent, Free cash flow profile / funding timing, Capital intensity per recovery, Other
• What is the firm's maximum acceptable capex band or budget envelope for sanction (if confidential, choose closest band)? Options: <$50M, $50M–$200M, $200M–$500M, $500M–$1B, $1B–$3B, >$3B, Undisclosed
• Which three sensitivities are most likely to sway the economics (select up to 3)? Options: Oil/gas price, Reservoir deliverability, Well count/well productivity, Capex escalation, Operating cost assumptions, Export/takeaway constraints, Fiscal/royalty terms, Other
• How does the finance team prefer contingency to be presented: lump-sum percentage, quantified risk register, or scenario envelopes? Options: Lump-sum percentage, Quantified risk register with probabilities, Scenario envelopes (best/likely/worst), Combination, Undecided

What Will Make Them Sleep Well at Night?

• Imagine the CEO asks in one sentence 'How do we know this will succeed?'. What three measurable signals would you give them?
• Which success metrics matter most to your decision-makers? (Select up to 4.) Options: First production date (timing), Annual / peak production rate, Ultimate recovery (%), Sanction-grade capex accuracy, Unit operating cost, Reserve booking/certification, Regulatory approval status, HSE risk metrics
• For your top metric, what range would you consider 'acceptable' versus 'excellent' (give numbers or ranges)?
• Which stakeholder owns the verification of each success signal (select all roles that should own measurement or sign-off)? Options: Asset team, Reservoir engineering, Project controls/PMO, Finance, Operations/facilities, External auditor/independent certifier, Other
• If a key success signal starts to drift during delivery, what behavior does the company prefer—course-correct quickly, absorb the risk, pause and re-evaluate, or escalate to the board? Options: Course-correct quickly, Absorb risk and continue, Pause and re-evaluate, Escalate to board

Assumptions People Pretend Are True

• Which commonly held assumption about this field would be most damaging if proven false during execution?
• Which of the following assumptions currently underpin your concept choices? (Select all that apply.) Options: Reservoir continuity and connectivity, Well productivity and decline rates, Export capacity and timing, Availability of local services and rigs, Permitting timelines, Cost escalation rates, Partner/operator alignment
• What evidence (data, studies, tests) do you already have to validate those assumptions? Options: Full reservoir model and history match, Well test data, Analog field studies, Preliminary geotechnical / seabed surveys, Market/commercial agreements, None / limited
• How long and at what cost would you expect to fully de-risk the top two assumptions you selected? Options: <3 months, 3–6 months, 6–12 months, >12 months, Unknown / needs scoping
• Who should be accountable for de-risking each critical assumption (role or team)? Options: Reservoir team, Drilling & completions, Facilities engineering, External consultants, Project management office, Commercial/Legal

How Will We Decide to Move Forward?

• What does a clear, unarguable 'yes' look like in the boardroom—what documents, metrics, and assurances must be on the table?
• Which of these deliverables are mandatory for sanction in your governance? (Select all that apply.) Options: Sanction-grade cost estimate (class 3/2) with confidence, Production forecast with uncertainty ranges, Risk register and mitigation plan, Regulatory approval evidence, Firm commercial/export agreements, Procurement / long-lead item plan, Partner/JV approvals
• Are there absolute thresholds (e.g., minimum IRR, max capex, earliest first oil) that would automatically veto the project if unmet? Please list or select. Options: Minimum IRR threshold, Maximum capex envelope, Earliest acceptable first oil date, Reserve booking threshold, No absolute thresholds / case-by-case
• What review gates or committees will the project pass through between now and sanction, and how long does each gate typically take?
• If the required deliverables or thresholds cannot be met, what is the preferred default action: pause, down-scope, re-scope with partners, or cancel? Options: Pause and re-assess, Down-scope to meet thresholds, Re-scope and seek additional funding/partners, Cancel the project

Communication and Conflict — Where Conversations Break

• When disagreements arise on this program, who typically wins the argument and who tends to withdraw—what pattern does that create?
• How often would you like formal project updates and to whom should they be distributed? Options: Weekly to PMO and asset team, Bi-weekly to asset and engineering leads, Monthly to executive sponsors and finance, Gate-driven updates only, Other
• Which communication formats do decision-makers prefer for sensitive topics: short executive memos, slide decks, dashboards with numbers, or in-person reviews? Options: Executive memo (1–2 pages), Slide deck with appendices, Live dashboard with drill-down, In-person review session, Combination
• Share an example of a past miscommunication that cost time or dollars—what happened and how could it have been avoided?
• Who should we engage proactively to reduce the risk of late-stage surprises (select all that apply)? Options: CFO/Finance, Executive sponsor/CEO, Regulatory body contacts, JV partners, Operations/maintenance, Local stakeholders/communities, External certifiers

Next Steps That Actually Lead to Sanction

• If we had to deliver one thing in the next 30 days that materially improves your chance of sanction, what singular deliverable would it be?
• Which quick wins would you prioritize from this list (select up to 3)? Options: Risk register with mitigation owners, High-confidence cost estimate for top concept, Short list of preferred concepts with pros/cons, Regulatory path map with dates, Stakeholder alignment memo and RACI, Production forecasts for shortlisted concepts
• What level of confidence (probability band) would you accept for a 30-day deliverable intended to influence the sanction decision? Options: >90% confident, 70–90% confident, 50–70% confident, <50% confident but directional
• Who must be in the next decision meeting (roles), and what date or timeframe works best for them? Options: VP Development, Asset Manager, Chief Engineer, CFO/Finance rep, Regulatory lead, Other
• How would you like us to present our findings for maximum board impact (choices plus any style notes)? Options: Concise executive summary + 3 actionable recommendations, Full technical appendix with short decision slide, Interactive dashboard with what-if toggles, Independent third-party assurance report, Combination

Quick Project Snapshot — a two-minute orientation

• What is the project name or short identifier you use internally?
• Which basin/region is the field in? Options: North Sea, Gulf of Mexico, West Africa, SE Asia, South America, Onshore North America, Australia / Timor, Other
• What is the target capital scale for sanction? Options: <$50M, $50M–$250M, $250M–$1B, $1B–$3B, >$3B, Undecided
• What is your current target sanction/date for board approval or FID? Options: Next 3 months, 3–6 months, 6–12 months, 12–24 months, >24 months, No firm date
• Who are the core decision roles we should assume participate in sanction (pick all that apply)? Options: Asset Manager / VP Development, Reservoir Lead, Chief Engineer, Finance / CFO, Commercial / Marketing, Legal / Compliance, Executive Sponsor / CEO, JV partner representative, Government/regulator liaison

What's Actually Underneath the Surface?

• How confident are you that your current reservoir model would stand up to board-level scrutiny? Options: Very confident, Reasonably confident, Some concerns, Significant doubts, No model yet
• Which reservoir model types and versions exist today? Options: Static geological model (grids), Dynamic reservoir simulation (Eclipse/CMG), Simple decline / material balance, Ensemble/uncertainty realizations, Analogue / proxy models, Reservoir performance pilot data only, None
• When was the last full update to the reservoir model (month/year)? Options: <3 months ago, 3–12 months ago, 1–2 years ago, >2 years ago, Never / not sure
• What specific reservoir uncertainties would most change development choices if resolved? Options: Recoverable volume / recovery factor, Permeability/heterogeneity, Aquifer strength / water drive, Fault sealing and compartmentalization, Relative permeability / saturation behavior, Pressure communication between wells, Other
• Who owns the master reservoir model and how accessible is it for collaborators? Options: In-house with full access, In-house with restricted access, Third-party consultant holds it, Distributed files, unclear master, No formal owner

Have We Been Relying on Comfortable Assumptions?

• Which core assumption feels most optimistic to you today (and why)? Options: High recovery factor, Sustained high well productivity, Low CAPEX estimate, Fast permitting, Favourable commodity price, Contractor performance
• What baseline values are currently used for recovery factor, initial well rates, and decline behavior (please list or reference document)?
• How are uncertainty ranges captured in your forecasts—single deterministic case, low/likely/high, or probabilistic P10/P50/P90? Options: Deterministic single case, Low/Most Likely/High, P10/P50/P90 probabilistic, Full Monte Carlo ensembles, Not captured / unclear
• Have past forecasts or studies materially missed delivered performance? Tell us one concise example and the root cause.
• What level of conservatism do you need in numbers that will go to finance and the board? Options: Highly conservative (finance prefers downside), Balanced (mid-case with sensitivities), Aggressive (optimistic case), Depends on audience

Where the Roadblocks Hide

• If you had to name one regulatory or commercial gate that could stop sanction right now, what would it be? Options: Environmental permit, Export / pipeline access, JV partner approval, Government license, Project finance close, Contractor mobilization / long lead items
• Which permits or regulatory approvals are outstanding and which authorities issue them?
• Are there community, environmental, or social issues that have created delays or opposition? Options: Yes—active opposition, Yes—minor concerns, No, but watchlist, No known issues
• Is export or third‑party infrastructure (pipeline, FPSO, port) on the critical path? Options: Yes—on critical path, Yes—but alternative exists, No—self-contained export, Undetermined
• Which contractual milestones (e.g., FTAs, offtake, joint venture agreements) are unsigned or at risk?

Schedule and Sanction Risk — what happens if the calendar slips?

• If the current timeline slips by six months, how would that affect your chance of sanctioning the project? Options: Materially reduces sanction probability, Moderately reduces probability, Minor impact, No impact / manageable
• List your next three hard dates (board approval, funding decision, major contract award) and their current status.
• How much schedule float is built into your timeline (in months)? Options: None, 1–3 months, 3–6 months, 6–12 months, >12 months, Unknown
• Have you stress-tested the schedule with delay scenarios (permitting delay, weather season, contractor delay)? If yes, what was the biggest single vulnerability? Options: Permitting, Long-lead equipment, Weather/season, Contractor resourcing, Financing, Other
• Who is responsible for schedule oversight and escalation if milestones slip? Options: Asset Manager, Project Controls / PMO, External scheduler/consultant, No clear owner

Cost and Commercial Boundaries — how tightly wound is the budget?

• If the sanction estimate comes in 10% higher than your baseline, would you still proceed? Options: Yes — proceed, Yes — but require value engineering, Maybe — needs re-evaluation, No — likely stop
• What is the current maturity of your cost estimate (order of magnitude, feasibility, pre-FEED, FEED, firm quotes)? Options: Order of magnitude (concept), Feasibility study, Pre‑FEED level, FEED level / detailed, Contractor quotes received, Unknown
• What contingency or uncertainty policy is applied to estimates (percentage by phase or cost class)? Options: Standard corporate table (we will provide), Project-specific contingency, No formal contingency, Undisclosed/varies
• Which contracting strategies are preferred or mandated (choose all that apply)? Options: EPC lump-sum turnkey, EPCm / reimbursable, Multiple independent contracts, Alliance / integrated team, Owner‑led execution
• Are there commercial constraints we must respect (local content, domestic fabrication, currency rules, tax incentives)? Please list.

Data Gaps We're Nervous About

• Which missing dataset, if delivered tomorrow, would most change concept selection? Options: High-resolution 3D seismic, Well test / pressure transient data, Core analysis, Production pilot data, Geomechanics study, Reservoir fluid PVT
• What datasets are available to share today (select all that exist and are shareable)? Options: Raw 3D seismic, Reprocessed seismic, Well logs, Cores & lab results, RFT/MDT/well tests, Production history, PVT reports, Surface constraints drawings
• Are there legal, JV, or confidentiality restrictions that limit our ability to access or publish study inputs/outputs? Options: Yes—strict restrictions, Yes—limited sharing with NDAs, No significant restrictions, Unknown / need to confirm
• What formats and platforms do you use for key models and data (e.g., Petrel, RMS, Eclipse, CMG, proprietary)? Options: Petrel, RMS, Eclipse, CMG, Paleo / GeoCube, Excel / Access, Other
• Are there known quality issues with any critical datasets we should plan to remediate? Options: Seismic QC needed, Sparse well control, Incomplete PVT data, Inconsistent historical rates, No major issues, Other

Decision Confidence — who is likely to say yes or no?

• Which stakeholder is most likely to block sanction and what is their primary concern? Options: Finance—costs/returns, Executive—strategic fit, Regulator—permits, JV partner—allocation/terms, Commercial—export/offtake, Technical—reservoir uncertainty
• What decision criteria are non‑negotiable for sanction (minimum NPV, IRR, payback, production thresholds)?
• How does your finance team want to see downside risk presented (stress cases, probability-weighted, sensitivity tables)? Options: Probability-weighted cases, P50 with P10/P90, Explicit downside case, NPV sensitivities by input
• What level of independent validation or third‑party assurance will the board require (reserve certification, independent audit)? Options: Independent reserves audit required, Technical peer review sufficient, No external validation required, Undecided
• What evidence or deliverable would most increase executives' confidence in sanctioning this project?

If We Could Reduce Your Biggest Risk in 4 Weeks, What Would It Be?

• If you could get one targeted output from us in the next 4–6 weeks to materially lower sanction risk, what should it be? Options: Board-ready uncertainty report, Refined reservoir P50 forecast, Short list of concept trade-offs with cost ranges, Regulatory path gap analysis, Cost estimate update with contingency
• What level of deliverable detail do you need for immediate decision-making (slide deck summary, technical appendix, sanction pack ready)? Options: Executive summary / slides, Technical report + appendices, Sanction pack ready for board, Data package + model handoff
• Who should be included in the initial working group between our team and yours? Options: Asset Manager, Reservoir Lead, Project Manager, Finance rep, Regulatory lead, Commercial lead
• What cadence and format do you prefer for collaboration and status updates (weekly touchpoint, bi-weekly steering, shared workspace)? Options: Weekly working sessions, Bi-weekly steering committee, Ad-hoc as risks surface, Shared cloud workspace with asynchronous updates
• Are there immediate access needs or security clearances we should prepare for to start work?

Getting Started — Tell Us About the Project

• Give us a one‑paragraph summary of the project as you and your team describe it internally (field, development type, scale).
• Which of these best describes the current contracting objective for this opportunity? Options: Concept screening only, Pre‑FEED, FEED, FEED + procurement support, Full delivery through execution, Undecided
• What is the current target capital band for sanction (ballpark)? Options: <$50M, $50M–$250M, $250M–$1B, $1B–$3B, >$3B, Undisclosed
• What are the target milestones and timing you’re being held to (board FID date, first production target)?
• Which internal groups will need to sign off on sanction‑grade deliverables? Options: Asset team, Development engineering, Reservoir/production, Drilling & completions, Finance, HSE/regulatory, Executive/Board
• What existing studies, reservoir models, or regulatory filings can you share to help us scope a concept screening quickly?

Why Isn’t This Already Solved?

• If sanction hasn’t happened yet, what’s the single biggest reason — technical uncertainty, cost, timing, stakeholders, or something else? Options: Technical uncertainty, Cost estimate gap, Regulatory/permit timing, Stakeholder misalignment, Execution risk, Other
• Tell a specific story of a previous candidate concept or study that failed to get traction — what stopped it in its tracks?
• Which assumptions or data points do you suspect are most likely to be wrong and materially change the sanction decision?
• How has this uncertainty changed behaviour in the asset team or capital planning (e.g., delayed wells, conservative facilities sizing)?
• What have you already tried to reduce this uncertainty, and what were the results? Options: Additional reservoir simulation, Third‑party cost benchmarking, Regulatory engagement, Vendor quotes/FEED inputs, Stakeholder workshops, Nothing yet

If You Had a Clean Slate, What Would You Fix First?

• Imagine we could remove one persistent constraint overnight — which one would change the decision outcome fastest (and why)?
• How would removing that constraint change your target recovery, cost envelope, or schedule? Select all that apply and quantify if possible. Options: Improved recovery, Lower capex, Shorter time to first oil, Reduced technical risk, Easier regulatory path, No material change
• What trade‑offs are you and your stakeholders most willing to accept: a bit more cost for much faster production, or lower cost with extended schedule? Options: Pay up for speed, Constrain cost and accept longer schedule, Balance equally, Undecided
• How emotionally comfortable is leadership with uncertainty in the production forecast versus uncertainty in the cost estimate? Options: More worried about cost, More worried about production forecast, Equally worried, Leadership hasn’t spoken to priorities
• If we proposed a staged approach (concept → focused studies → sanction) that defers some work to de‑risk cost, what concerns would you raise?

Who’s Really Holding the Pen on Sanction?

• If we map the decision tree for sanction, whose approvals actually control schedule and budget — and who’s only advisory?
• Have you experienced a recent decision that was derailed by a stakeholder not being properly engaged? What happened?
• How clearly defined are roles and responsibilities for deliverable acceptance across asset, engineering, finance, and executive sponsors? Options: Well defined, Some gaps, Mostly undefined, Changing frequently
• What formal escalation path exists if a technical lead and finance disagree on sanction readiness? Options: Executive steering committee, Project governance board, Ad hoc escalation, No defined path
• Which stakeholder groups tend to slow decisions the most and why (give concrete examples)?

How Confident Are You in the Numbers?

• If you had to rate confidence in the current production forecast and cost estimate on a 1–10 scale, what are those two numbers and why?
• What is the maturity class of your current cost estimate and which cost components worry you most (facilities, drilling, contingency, other)? Options: AACE Class 5 / order‑of‑magnitude, Class 4 / prefeasibility, Class 3 / budgetary, Class 2 / preliminary, Class 1 / definitive
• Which reservoir data or modelling gaps would materially change recoverable volumes if improved? Options: Grid resolution/sectorization, Relative permeability/SCAL, Aquifer connectivity, Pressure transient data, PVT samples, Other
• How often have previous cost or schedule forecasts for this asset been exceeded — and by how much on average? Options: >30% overrun, 10–30% overrun, 0–10% overrun, Underrun, No history / first estimate
• Who owns the model and estimate updates (internal team, consultant, mixed)? Options: Internal only, External consultant, Hybrid team

Unseen Risks That Could Kill the Schedule

• What single regulatory or permitting hurdle keeps you awake at night about hitting the planned FID or first production date?
• List the regulatory or environmental gates we must clear before FID and the current status of each.
• How realistic are your procurement and vendor lead‑time assumptions for long‑lead items? Options: Optimistic, Realistic, Conservative, Unknown
• Do you have baseline as‑built or operating models and data handoffs prepared for the team that will start FEED/detailed design? Options: Complete and validated, Mostly ready, Partial, Not prepared
• What contingency and risk‑control measures are acceptable to leadership if a key permit or vendor slips? Options: Schedule buffer, Alternative vendors, Scope reduction, Additional contingency budget, Other

What Would Sanction Victory Actually Look Like?

• If sanction is successful, what are the three measurable outcomes that will prove it was the right decision?
• What is the minimum acceptable uplift in recovery or production that justifies the spend on this development? Options: <5%, 5–15%, 15–30%, >30%, Not defined
• What cost threshold (NPV/IRR targets or absolute capex) would cause the board to pause or reject the project?
• How important is having sanction‑grade deliverables that can withstand external audit or lender review? Options: Critical, Important but not critical, Preferable, Not required
• Which post‑sanction supports would increase the probability of on‑time execution (e.g., vendor pre‑qualification, early procurement, embedded engineering support)? Options: Advanced procurement, Vendor pre‑work, Site readiness packages, Embedded project engineers, None

How Should We Work Together to Reduce Risk?

• If we proposed a collaborative governance model for concept selection and pre‑FEED, what would make you say yes immediately and what would make you say no?
• Which working rhythm do you prefer during discovery and concept screening (weekly workshops, biweekly steering, on‑demand deep dives)? Options: Weekly workshops, Biweekly steering meetings, Monthly checkpoints, On‑demand as issues arise, Other
• What data access, confidentiality, or IT constraints should we know about before we ask for models and datasets?
• Which deliverables would convince you we’ve added value after concept screening (rank up to three)? Options: Validated production forecast, Concept comparison with risk-adjusted NPV, Preliminary capex/opex with class, Regulatory gate checklist, Work‑scope and acceptance criteria for pre‑FEED
• What are non‑negotiables for your team when selecting an external engineering partner (e.g., local content, safety record, basin experience)?

The Smallest Useful Next Step — Can We Do It Together?

• What is the smallest, time‑boxed engagement that would meaningfully reduce your top decision uncertainty (e.g., 4‑week concept screen, focused SCAL, vendor quote exercise)? Options: 4‑week concept screen, 6–8 week targeted study, Vendor long‑lead quote request, Regulatory pre‑engagement, Other
• How soon could you make the budget and data available to start that small engagement? Options: Immediately, In 2–4 weeks, 1–3 months, Longer / uncertain
• Who would need to approve the SOW and who would be the day‑to‑day contact from your side?
• What specific documents, models or approvals would you require in our proposal to feel comfortable signing on?
• What concerns would make you hesitate to take that next step right now, and how could we address them?

Getting Oriented — A quick snapshot to start us off

• What is the project name or shorthand we should use in meetings and documents?
• Briefly describe the resource and development context (choose the closest match) Options: Onshore — conventional reservoir, Onshore — tight / unconventional, Offshore shallow-water platform, Offshore deepwater FPS / spar, Subsea tieback to existing facility, Brownfield expansion tie-in, Other
• Which range best describes the expected capital scale of the development today? Options: <$50M, $50M–$200M, $200M–$500M, $500M–$1B, $1B–$3B, >$3B, Undecided
• What is your target decision window for sanction/FID (approximate quarter or year)? Options: Within 3 months, 3–6 months, 6–12 months, 12–24 months, More than 24 months, No target yet
• Who are the three primary internal contacts we should engage (name, role, email/phone)?
• Which outcomes matter most to you for this project right now? Options: Maximize recovery, Minimize capital cost, Meet committed first production date, Secure regulatory approvals, De-risk schedule, Achieve board/investor alignment, Other

If this project could speak, what would it cringe about?

• What single assumption today, if proven wrong, would change your willingness to sanction?
• Which subsurface uncertainties keep you up at night? Options: Reservoir connectivity and compartmentalization, Decline rate uncertainty, Fluid properties (PVT) variability, Well deliverability/per-well rates, Recovery factor uncertainty, Other
• How confident are you in the existing reservoir model and its uncertainty ranges? Options: Very confident, Reasonably confident, Significant doubts, Model insufficient / needs rebuild, Don't know
• What important studies or data are missing or suffer from poor quality today? Options: Well test data, 3D seismic re-interpretation, Dynamic reservoir modeling, Production history reconciliation, Facilities hydraulic model, Cost database for this basin, Regulatory baseline studies, Other
• Tell us about one past study or decision that you feel steered the project wrong — what happened and why?
• Which forecast range for first 12 months of production feels realistic to you today? Options: Conservative (lower decile), Most-likely (median), Optimistic (upper decile), We have multiple conflicting forecasts, No credible forecast yet

Who's actually at the table — and who quietly decides later?

• Who inside your organisation could stop the project at FID if they are unconvinced? Options: Asset Team Lead, VP Development / Head of Subsurface, CFO/Head of Finance, Chief Engineer / Technical Authority, CEO/Executive Board, Regulatory Affairs Lead, Other
• For each stakeholder group involved, what is the single success signal they expect at sanction (e.g., cost cap, schedule certainty, recovery uplift)?
• How aligned are the asset, engineering, finance and executive stakeholders on the sanction timeline and investment criteria? Options: Fully aligned, Mostly aligned with a few differences, Significant misalignment, Unknown / alignment not assessed
• Who is the internal champion that will drive day‑to‑day momentum, and who is the likely blocker?
• How do key stakeholders prefer to make trade-offs when recovery, cost and schedule conflict? Options: Prioritize recovery, Prioritize cost control, Prioritize schedule/time-to-first-oil, Balance via net-present-value, Case-by-case/No fixed rule
• When alignment breaks down, what usually triggers a reset or escalation (examples and typical cadence)?

Where money and risk rub against each other — the finance litmus test

• If the cost estimate landed 10–15% above board expectations tomorrow, what would realistically happen? Options: Delay sanction and re-scope, Proceed but reduce scope, Require additional justification/mitigation, Cancel the project, Undecided
• Which three items are the largest drivers of capital cost in your view? Options: Wells and drilling campaign, Processing facilities and topsides, Subsea hardware and tiebacks, Export pipeline and installation, Long‑lead equipment (compressors, turbines), Civil works / site preparation, Other
• What estimate class or fidelity does your finance team require for sanction (e.g., Class 2, deterministic +/- %)? Options: Class 4 / order-of-magnitude, Class 3 / budget estimate, Class 2 / +/- 15–25%, Class 1 / +/- 5–10%, We use bespoke criteria
• How is contingency allocated today and who owns the contingency release decision? Options: Single contingency bucket (corporate), Allocated by discipline (wells, facilities), Risk-based contingency with explicit register, No formal contingency process, Other
• Which economic thresholds must be achieved for sanction (select all that apply)? Options: Minimum IRR, Minimum NPV (after tax), Payback within X years, Maximum unit production cost, Breakeven oil price threshold, Other
• Who in your organisation typically validates third‑party cost estimates and what evidence convinces them? Options: Internal costing team, Third‑party cost auditor, Independent technical reviewer, Finance + external benchmark, No formal validator

Schedule matters — when slipping one date costs millions

• If first production shifts by 6–12 months, what are the commercial and contractual consequences?
• Which regulatory or supplier milestones currently define the critical path? Options: Environmental approval receipt, Fabrication yard slot confirmation, Long-lead equipment delivery, Drilling rig availability, Grid/export pipeline permit, Other
• What lead times for key items (rig, modules, compressors) are you most concerned about? Options: Rig availability, Module fabrication 12–18 months, Equipment lead 9–24 months, Local labour mobilisation, Transport/installation weather windows, Not sure / need confirmation
• How much schedule float exists between sanction and first production today? Options: >12 months, 6–12 months, 3–6 months, <3 months, No meaningful float identified
• What are the one or two pragmatic steps you would accept to buy schedule certainty?
• How do you currently quantify and report schedule risk to executives (format or metrics)? Options: Critical path with probabilistic dates, Deterministic Gantt with contingency, Risk register impact matrix, High/medium/low qualitative, We don't have a standard format

Regulation and social licence — are approvals a timing or existential threat?

• Is there a permit, consent, or community approval that, if delayed, would likely halt sanction? Options: Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) approval, Offshore safety/regulatory consent, Land access / surface use permit, Indigenous/rights-holder agreement, Export pipeline permit, None / unclear
• What is the current status of environmental and baseline studies (EIA, biodiversity, socio-economic)? Options: Complete and accepted, Underway with expected clearance, Not started, Outdated / needs refresh, Unknown
• Have you had recent interactions or pre-submission meetings with regulators? If yes, what was the tone and outcome?
• Are there known community or stakeholder concerns that could change the approval path? Options: Strong local opposition, Manageable concerns with mitigation, No major concerns known, Undisclosed / sensitive
• What contingency or mitigation actions are you willing to fund to accelerate approvals? Options: Additional baseline studies, Third-party stakeholder engagement, Design changes to reduce footprint, Underwriting social programs, Not willing to fund extra
• Who on your team is primarily responsible for regulatory submissions and stakeholder engagement?

Design & Constructability — can what we imagine actually be built on time and budget?

• Which current design choice, if left unchanged, would most increase execution cost or risk?
• What site or logistical constraints matter most for constructability? Options: Limited laydown/assembly area, Challenging marine access / weather windows, Remote/inadequate roads and ports, Local labour shortage, Fabrication yard capacity, Other
• Have you completed a constructability review or early contractor input (ECI) exercise? If so, what were the headline findings? Options: No review yet, Preliminary review only, Detailed constructability review completed, ECI underway, ECI completed with major changes recommended
• Which contracting and delivery model do you favour and why (e.g., EPC, EPCM, Owner‑led with multiple packages)? Options: EPC (single contractor), EPCM (owner engineer + contractors), Owner‑led with multiple vendors, Alliance/partnering model, Undecided
• Are there fabricator or supplier markets (local or international) you expect to be constrained? Options: Module yards, Subsea equipment suppliers, Specialty steel suppliers, Turbomachinery vendors, Drilling rigs, None anticipated, Not sure
• What interface risks (wells ↔ facilities ↔ export) keep recurring in reviews, and who owns resolving them?

What will make the Board say 'Yes' — defining sanction success

• If you had to name one non-negotiable deliverable for sanction, what would it be (e.g., Class 2 cost with risk register, regulatory consent, FID-ready schedule)?
• Which combination of outputs do you require at sanction (select all that apply)? Options: Sanction-grade cost estimate with contingency breakdown, Production forecast with uncertainty ranges, Regulatory approvals or clear path to approval, Constructability review and execution plan, Procurement plan with long-lead commitments, Final investment decision economic model
• How should we present uncertainty to the board so it is useful rather than confusing? Options: Probabilistic cost/schedule curves, Best‑case/most‑likely/worst‑case scenarios, Deterministic with sensitivity tables, Qualitative risk register with quantification, Other
• What would be a deal-breaker at sanction (briefly describe the condition or threshold)?
• Post-sanction, what minimum level of support or governance do you expect from your engineering partner during execution? Options: Detailed design and procurement support, Construction oversight and technical authority, Periodic assurance reviews only, Turnkey handover, Other
• How will you measure whether the delivered studies represented good value for money six months after sanction?

Agreeing next steps — how we start and who moves first

• If nothing changes in the next 30 days, what is the most likely trajectory for this project? Options: Proceed to immediate concept screening, Pause until internal alignment, Seek more funding/board approval, No progress / stalled, Other
• What would you need from us in the first 14 days to feel confident about moving into a discovery or concept screening phase? Options: Project kickoff and data request list, Initial gap analysis and work plan, High-level budget and schedule proposal, Team qualifications and references, All of the above
• What data and access can you commit to sharing promptly (reservoir model, PVT, well files, prior studies, regulatory files)? Options: Full reservoir model & history, PVT and fluid data, Well logs and completion reports, Previous study reports and cost data, Regulatory correspondence and permits, Limited/confidential only, Other
• Who must be involved in the initial discovery workshops from your side (names and roles)?
• How do you prefer to collaborate and review deliverables (weekly syncs, fortnightly checkpoints, monthly steering committee, shared workspace)? Options: Weekly working sessions, Biweekly checkpoints, Monthly steering committee, Ad-hoc by milestone, Asynchronous via shared platform
• Realistically, when could we start the discovery phase if scope and commercial terms are acceptable? Options: Immediately (within 2 weeks), Within 1 month, 1–3 months, 3+ months, Undecided
• What would make you decline an external engineering partner at this stage (red lines or deal-breakers)? Options: Insufficient basin experience, Team lacks relevant discipline leads, Unwilling to work under our governance, Commercial terms unacceptable, Track record concerns, Other