VEKSTSTRATEGI + KOMPETANSESTRATEGI = SANT?

I takt med de raske endringene i dagens samfunn undret vi oss over hvordan det jobbes med kompetanse og hvordan en kompetansestrategi i en bedrift. I utgangspunktet tenkte vi at det ville være interessant å se hvordan en stor veletablert virksomhet jobbet med dette. Men i stedet kom vi over Fonn AS, som er et ungt og raskt voksende firma. Etter å ha lest oss opp om dem falt vi pladask for tanken på å undersøke hvordan kompetansestrategi prioriteres når en virksomhet vokser hurtig. På bakgrunnen av dette valgte vi følgende problemstilling: «Hvordan jobbes det med kompetansestrategi i Fonn Byggemappen AS når de opplever hurtig vekst?» For å hjelpe oss å besvare problemstillingen og lettere få en oversikt over forskningsmaterialet endte vi opp med to forskningsspørsmål: 1: Hvor i livssyklusen/i hvilken vekstfase befinner organisasjonen seg? 2: Hvilke faktorer i kompetansestrategien legger organisasjonen vekt på? For å kunne svare på disse spørsmålene på en hensiktsmessig måte valgte vi kvalitativ metode, herunder seks semi-strukturerte intervjuer som ble transkribert. Materialet som vi samlet inn ble deretter kategorisert og analysert, og ut ifra dette gjorde vi flere interessante funn. For å kunne forklare våre funn tok vi utgangspunkt to livssyklusmodeller «The Greiner Growth Model» (1972;1998) samt Lewis og Churchill sin modell «The Five Stages of Small Business Growth» (1983). Gjennom de ulike fasene i disse modellene brukte vi Linda Lais (2013) modell for kompetansestrategi, og undersøkte hvordan det ble jobbet med stegene i Lais modell gjennom de forskjellige fasene i livssyklusmodellene. Vi undersøkte hvordan de jobbet med kompetanse fra oppstart til å bli en trygg og etablert virksomhet i Norge, og gjennom planlegging og gjennomføring av en internasjonaliseringsprosess. Ut i fra situasjonen virksomheten befinner seg i fant vi at det ble og blir brukt flere ulike strategier ustrukturert, både på vekst og kompetanse. Etter hvert som de opplever vekst så er vår forståelse at det blir mer struktur. Vår generelle anbefaling er å jobbe systematisk med kompetansestrategi uavhengig av kontekst

Tectonostratigraphic development of the Upper Triassic to Middle Jurassic in the Hoop Area, Barents Sea: Implications for understanding ultra-condensed reservoir units

The most prolific reservoir intervals in the Barents Sea are found in the Upper Triassic to Middle Jurassic Realgrunnen Subgroup, deposited during a major change in the structural evolution of the basin which greatly influenced its development and distribution. The effects are evident in one of the petroleum provinces in the SW Barents Sea, the Hoop Area. Due to the condensed nature of the succession, the tectonostratigraphic evolution has been enigmatic. We use a range of different methods and dataset, including high-resolution P-Cable seismic to determine the tectono-stratigraphic evolution of the succession. Results are important for exploration and production in the Hoop Area and beyond, but also for a broader understanding of how ultra-condensed successions might evolve during long periods of non-deposition and short bursts of deposition. Seven major phases of deposition and non-deposition/erosion are defined. Stage 1 represents fluvio-deltaic deposition in the Fruholmen Formation (Norian), followed by Stage 2 with significant truncation and non-deposition, lasting up to 35 million years. Deposition resumed with the shallow marine to fluvial Nordmela and Stø formations (Pliensbachian to Bajocian), which both encapsule long periods of erosion and non-deposition (stage 3–6). Stage 7 is represented by transgression and shelf deposition in the Fuglen Formation (Bathonian). The change from a high-accommodation setting with continuous and relatively high rate of accumulation in the Triassic, to a low-accommodation setting with episodic deposition and extensive sediment cannibalization in the Jurassic, resulted in cleaner sandstones with better reservoir properties. The low-accommodation setting also enabled coarse-graded detritus from hinterlands in Fennoscandia to prograde into distal part of the basin and more amalgamation of the sands during the Jurassic. Adversely, the low accommodation setting also caused a fragmented pattern of deposition and preservation that needs to be carefully considered in subsurface datasets, often with limited resolution.publishedVersio

Late Triassic (early Carnian–Norian) palynology of the Sentralbanken High, Norwegian Barents Sea

<p>Four stratigraphic cores (7533/2-U-1, 2-U-2, 3-U-7 and 7534/4-U-1) drilled in the Sentralbanken High provide important reference sections for the Upper Triassic succession in the northern Barents Sea. The cores span the De Geerdalen, Flatsalen and Svenskøya formations (Kapp Toscana Group), which are equivalent to the Snadd to middle Fruholmen formations of the southern Barents Sea. Only cursory palynological study of the cores has been conducted previously, and no published palynofacies data is available. We present a detailed palynostratigraphy from the cores, and describe six informal palynological assemblages. Comparison with independently dated sections from elsewhere in the region enables a revised age interpretation of early Carnian to Norian for the cored interval, thereby improving correlation between Sentralbanken, Svalbard and the southern Barents Sea. A dominance of amorphous organic matter (AOM) and marine palynomorphs indicates a distal suboxic–anoxic marine depositional environment for the lower De Geerdalen Formation, with an abrupt change to a nearshore marine environment above an erosion surface in core 7534/4-U-1. Palynofacies from the remainder of the formation are characterised by a dominance of phytoclasts and are interpreted as indicative of a delta front to coastal plain environment. The reappearance of AOM, microforaminiferal test linings and marine microphytoplankton in the Flatsalen Formation in cores 7533/2-U-1 and 2-U-2 reflects a regional transgression of early Norian age. Reworked palynomorphs, shale rip-up clasts and a transition to phytoclast-dominated palynofacies above an erosion surface at the base of the overlying Svenskøya Formation is consistent with a disconformity, which was previously identified as a possible sequence boundary on the neighbouring island of Hopen.</p

Tectonostratigraphic development of the Upper Triassic to Middle Jurassic in the Hoop Area, Barents Sea: Implications for understanding ultra-condensed reservoir units

The most prolific reservoir intervals in the Barents Sea are found in the Upper Triassic to Middle Jurassic Realgrunnen Subgroup, deposited during a major change in the structural evolution of the basin which greatly influenced its development and distribution. The effects are evident in one of the petroleum provinces in the SW Barents Sea, the Hoop Area. Due to the condensed nature of the succession, the tectonostratigraphic evolution has been enigmatic. We use a range of different methods and dataset, including high-resolution P-Cable seismic to determine the tectono-stratigraphic evolution of the succession. Results are important for exploration and production in the Hoop Area and beyond, but also for a broader understanding of how ultra-condensed successions might evolve during long periods of non-deposition and short bursts of deposition. Seven major phases of deposition and non-deposition/erosion are defined. Stage 1 represents fluvio-deltaic deposition in the Fruholmen Formation (Norian), followed by Stage 2 with significant truncation and non-deposition, lasting up to 35 million years. Deposition resumed with the shallow marine to fluvial Nordmela and Stø formations (Pliensbachian to Bajocian), which both encapsule long periods of erosion and non-deposition (stage 3–6). Stage 7 is represented by transgression and shelf deposition in the Fuglen Formation (Bathonian). The change from a high-accommodation setting with continuous and relatively high rate of accumulation in the Triassic, to a low-accommodation setting with episodic deposition and extensive sediment cannibalization in the Jurassic, resulted in cleaner sandstones with better reservoir properties. The low-accommodation setting also enabled coarse-graded detritus from hinterlands in Fennoscandia to prograde into distal part of the basin and more amalgamation of the sands during the Jurassic. Adversely, the low accommodation setting also caused a fragmented pattern of deposition and preservation that needs to be carefully considered in subsurface datasets, often with limited resolution