Competitive Strategy at Petro Canada Inc. Report

Executive Summary

The modern business strategy consists of identifying and adopting appropriate methods for tackling market competition and achieving and retaining market leadership in the long term. This means that the firm must possess a clear competitive advantage against its nearest competitors and necessarily implies that it must strive to add economic value continuously and along the entire corporate value chain through product differentiation, cost leadership, or selective focus on any one or more market segment. This paper studies the financial performances of three close competitors and the top three companies in terms of gross revenues, net incomes, etc., in the Canadian oil and gas industry. These companies, viz EnCana, Imperial Oils Ltd and the focus of this study, i.e., Petro Canada, are the top three companies in consecutive Energy Surveys (2007 & 2008) conducted by renowned global consultant Price Waterhouse Coopers which compares performances of 100 leading oil and gas companies in the market in 2005, 2006 and 2007. The three representative companies are studied in the course of this paper to find out whether Petro Canada has a competitive advantage or disadvantage in the oil and gas industry in Canada, what are the financial indicators that point out to this, what are the major reasons for such competitive advantage or disadvantage of the company, what strategy the company has adopted to gain competitive advantage in the given market and how successful or appropriate such strategy has been in gaining it a competitive advantage, if at all. The paper tries to establish that there is as such no clear leader in a complex market, where one company may have one advantage while another has another advantage. The paper also notes that Petro Canada still needs to adopt a further strategy for consolidating its hold on market shares and also develop suitable measures to resolve problem areas in its overall competitive strategy, considering the strengths and weaknesses of other competitors and the nature and synergy of the given regional oil and gas industry.

Introduction

The modern business strategy consists of concerted efforts on the part of operational management to evolve strategies designed to achieve competitive advantage and, once this is evolved, to sustain the same. The business strategy essentially consists of identifying and choosing appropriate mission and objectives, analyzing external and internal environments, identifying, selecting, and implementing suitable methods, and consistently assessing and driving business performances. Any competitive advantage which may be desired to be gained through such strategy essentially means that more economic value by the firm as compared to its competitors needs to be created. Charles Stabell (2001) says, “Effective competitive strategy is the search for a position where the firm can achieve and sustain above-average economic returns…Competitive advantage is achieved by being able to offer the same product at less cost while achieving above-average returns” The firm may be competitive with regards to value, cost, or price. Creation of value implies that any one or more of the firm’s logistics, operations, sales & marketing, services, materials management, technological development, human resources, and infrastructural activities are more efficient, more innovative, of better quality, and more responsive to customer requirements. More the value added by the firm along its value chain, the more competitive it will be. Whether a firm is having a competitive advantage or not in its primary given market can be judged by evaluating the efficiency and quality of its operational activities, how innovative it is, and how responsive it is to its customers’ needs. Such assessment requires an analysis of available company data and comparing this with those of its competitors. Whether a company actually has a competitive advantage or not vis-à-vis its key competitors, what are the key indicators of this, what reasons can be ascribed to its such competitive advantage or disadvantage, what strategy the company has adopted to maintain and improve its competitive position in the market and why the strategy is appropriate or inappropriate, these are the main issues that this paper attempts to analyze, based essentially on a comparison with its competitors.

Company Information

The company which is considered for this study is well known and one of the largest such companies in Canada, Petro Canada Inc. The company is a major presence in the integrated oil and gas sector. It primarily extracts and sells petroleum oil and related products and services and operates in Canada and internationally both in the upstream and downstream industrial sectors. It is headquartered in Calgary, Alberta in Canada, and its shares are traded on both the New York and Toronto Stock Exchanges. As per details provided on the company website, it supposedly produces 350 premium quality lubricants, special fluids, and greases in addition to around 99.9% pure base oil of capacity of 900 million liters annually from its refinery at Mississauga, Ontario, Canada (it states that it is the world’s largest producer of pharmaceutical white oils) (Petro Canada, 2008). Originally a full petroleum refinery, it was converted into a lubricants plant, expanded, and its capacity enhanced. The company website also states that its products are used by customers across diverse industries like food, manufacturing, transportation, power, mining, agriculture, forestry, and plastics, with its supply chains selling its products mostly outside Canada to more than 60 countries. The company’s mission statement reflects its objective of achieving leadership in pure oil production by value addition through product innovation, pricing strategy, and improved customer trust. It professes its innovative products that provide ‘tangible cost savings, enhance productivity and effect cost savings, its commitment to quality, and its focus on customer trust and satisfaction through enhanced profit fit for individual client/industry needs.

Major Competitors

Petro Canada is one of the largest oil and gas producing and exporting companies in Canada. Alberta region is rich in oil deposits. Canada is one of the richest sources of oil and natural gas globally. The country There is many Canadian oil and gas exploration and producing companies competing against Petro Canada in Alberta and other provinces, and this competition has driven Petro Canada into adopting various strategies relating to product innovation, cost efficiency, product pricing, and quality enhancement. Major competitors include Encana, Syncrude Canada Ltd, Suncor Energy, Canada Natural Resources, Shell Canada, and so many other senior and junior oil and gas producer and services companies located in Alberta and other parts of Canada.

Financial Data-Comparative Figures, Methods & Information

A few key financial parameters and information relevant to this study were compiled and are provided in the Appendix to this paper. A representative comparison of the competitive strategy of all the present competing companies could be performed by sourcing data relating to a few selected companies from leading Canadian oil and gas journals, Canadian government websites like Industry Canada or Sedar, leading industry experts, and watchdogs like Sayer Energy Advisors, Cera, IHS, and John S. Herald, or even a global consultancy like Price Waterhouse Coopers, and all such sourced data can be safely considered reliable, authentic, up-to-date and appropriate for this study. The study itself could be effectively performed by comparing corporate ROCE, gross margins, revenue growth, proportionate market share of the principal competitors, etc., which get value additions through corporate strategies for enhancing product and services innovativeness, efficiency, quality, and responsiveness to customer needs. The comparative analysis of the income statements, balance sheets, and capital markets may be enumerated in the following paragraphs for an understanding of the issue.

Analysis of Annual Reports

A comparison of the audited financial statements of 3 top companies based on gross revenues in the Price Water Coopers Annual Energy Survey 2007 and 2008 reports, namely, Imperial Oil Ltd, Petro Canada Inc., and EnCana Corporation, could yield some concrete results, which are given hereunder.

Sales or Revenues

1. Imperial Oil: The gross revenues of Imperial Oil were 27,797,000 in 2005, which went down to 24,505,000 in 2006 and then went up to 25,069,000 in 2007
2. Petro Canada: In 2005, gross revenues were 17,585,000, which went up to 18,911,000 in 2006 and up to 21,710,000 in 2007
3. EnCana Corporation: In 2005, EnCana recorded gross revenues of 17,656,647, which went up to 18,596,466 in 2006, which again went up to 24, 066,844 in 2007. (Compared in figures in 1,000s of USD as of 31^st March each year).

Relative Revenue Growth

We find that among the three companies, only Petro Canada and EnCana show consistent growth year on year. But whereas from 2005 to 2006 the gross revenues increased by 5.3% and from 2006 to 2007 by 29.4% for EnCana, in the case of Petro Canada, the corresponding increase was 7.54% and 14.8% respectively. Thus, the percentage of y-o-y gross revenue increase in the case of Petro Canada was much less than that of EnCana. The consistent increase in the case of both companies does reflect their abilities to satisfy customer needs, whereas the inconsistency in gross revenue growth in the case of Imperial Oil could point to the failure of business strategy.

Percentage Gross Sales as compared to Inflation Rate

Using the Bank of Canada’s historical data on inflation, we find that the year-end core inflation in 2005, 2006, and 2007 was 1.5% (2005), 2.3% (2006), and 1.6% (2007). The gross sales of Imperial were 27,797,000 in 2005, 24,505,000 in 2006 and 25,069,000 in 2007 while the corresponding figures for EnCana and Petro Canada were respectively 17,656,647, 18,596,466 and 24,066,844, and 17,585,000, 18,911,000 and 21,710,000. Thus percentage increase in gross sales for EnCana, Petro Canada and Imperial Oils would work out to 5.32 (2006) & 8.79 (2007), 7.54 (2006) & 14.8 (2007) and -11.84 (2006) & 2.30 (2007). Although all companies show an increase in this parameter, yet Petro Canada seems far ahead of its competitors in quantum of increase every year.

Comparison with Industrial Growth Rates/GDP

The gross domestic product GDP at basic prices by industry (in millions of chained dollars 2002) for the oil and gas industrial sector was 55,672 (2004), 55,796 (2005), 56,699 (2006), 57,288 (2007) and (2008) in a total GDP of 1,124,998 (2004) 1,155,681 (2005), 1,189,661 (2006) and 1,219,327 (2007). Thus the percentage increase in GDP rates for 2005, 2006, and 2007 for the oil and gas sector over the previous years was 0.22 (2005), 1.6 (2006), and 1.7 (2007). The corresponding gross sales improved by 7.54% in 2006 and 14.8% in 2007 in the case of Petro Canada and by 5.3% in 2006 and 29.4% in 2007 in the case of EnCana. Thus, in all cases, the sales improvement was at least equal to the growth or GDP rates of the oil and gas industrial sector viz. 1.6 in 2006 and 1.7 in 2007, comparing identical periods.

Cost of Sales (CGS)

The costs for Petro Canada were 10,868, 13,377, 14,697, and 16,343 for years 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007 respectively, and costs are thus consistently increasing. Sales show a marked increase, i.e. 14,270 in 2004, 17,585 in 2005, 18,911 in 2006 and 21,710 in 2007. Hence the cost as a percentage of sales works out to 76.16% in 2004, 76.07% in 2005, 77.72% in 2006, and 75.28% in 2007. Other than in 2006, the figures seem to be continually decreasing, which could signify the growth of business owing to economies of scale or other such factors.

The company included figures for the sale of assets in Syria in 2005 in the 2006 annual financial statements under discontinued operations, and this was worth $ 134 million. This could be the reason for the erratic figures for 2006 as above.

Gross Profit Margins

Net Incomes in 1,000s of $ for EnCana in 2005, 2006 and 2007 were respectively 4,150,942, 6,393,596 and 4,200,160 while for Petro Canada, the corresponding figures were 1,791,000 in 2005, 1,740,000 in 2006 and 2,733,000 in 2007. The same for Imperial Oil Ltd were 2,600,000 in 2005, 3,044,000 in 2006 and 3,188,000 in 2007. Among these, only Imperial showed a consistent increase in income. However, the gross margins percentages for EnCana, Petro Canada, and Imperial Oil were as follows:

2005 2006 2007

EnCana 23.51 34.40 17.45

Petro Canada 10.18 9.21 12.59

Imperial Oils 9.35 12.42 12.72

It appears from above that only in the case of Imperial is there a consistent increase in Gross Margins, while in the case of Petro Canada, the figure in 2006 is inconsistent and may be due to discontinued operations in Syria or elsewhere.

Return on Capital Employed (ROCE)

The ROCE figures for Petro Canada were 16.0 in 2005, 14.3 in 2006, and 19.8 in 2007, while the corresponding figures for Imperial Oils were 23.9 in 2005, 19.7 in 2006, and 28.3 in 2007, which although higher each year than that of Petro Canada, was nonetheless inconsistent and non-linear. EnCana, in contrast, recorded a ROCE of 25 and15 for 2006 and 2007, respectively. It appears that in the case of all companies, the figures in 2006 lie between values in 2005 and 2007. In any case, there appears to be no clear leader in this parameter, at least. However, the figures for Imperial are healthier.

Operating Costs

(Per BOE where BOE is Barrels of Oil Equivalent in 1000s):

2005 2006 2007

EnCana $ 30.72 $ 35.12 $ 39.32

Petro Canada INA $ 12.41 $ 12.05

Imperial Oils $ 15.11 $ 15.22 $ 16.04

As per the above data, the operating costs for EnCana are much more than that of either Imperial or Petro Canada, and while Imperial shows a gradual increase in costs over the years, costs are actually reducing in the case of Petro Canada, which implies a successful cost control and profit enhancement strategy on the part of the company management, giving Petro Canada a clear competitive advantage by way of lower costs, thus enabling it to sell its products at relatively lower prices and still maintain its level of operations.

Return on Equity (ROE)

Imperial Oils had ROE of 40.2 in 2005, 43.5 in 2006, and 41.6 in 2007, while EnCana had ROE of 34% and 21 % respectively in 2006 and 2007. Petro Canada had ROE of 19.7, 17.5, and 24.5 in 2005, 2006, and 2007 respectively. Of the 3 companies, Imperial appears to have higher ROE over the three-year period.

Cash Flows

The cash flows on operations in case of EnCana were 8,997,342 in 2005, 8,120,574 in 206 and 8,967,897 in 2007 and in case of Petro Canada these were 3,787,002 in 2005, 3,687,000 in 2006 and 3,762,000 in 2007. The same in case of Imperial Oils were 3,891,000 in 2005, 3,799,000 in 2006 and 3,905,000 in 2007. Higher cash flows imply higher net incomes. In the case of all companies, it is observed that cash flows decline in 2006 from 2005 and then increases in 2007.

Earnings per Share (EPS)

The EPS for the three companies could be studied, which could indicate a measure of increasing or decreasing profits

2005 2006 2007

EnCana 4.79 7.81 5.14

Petro Canada 3.45 3.45 5.59

Imperial Oils 2.54 3.12 3.43

Of the 3 companies, the EPS increase is steady in the case of Imperial Oils, while it is erratic in the case of EnCana. In the case of Petro Canada, a stagnant EPS followed by a sudden increase denotes unprecedented returns by way of share earnings, which may have been an effect of global economic turmoil, continuing till date. In this respect, Imperial appears more competitive than Petro Canada.

Some Important Data on Petro Canada

1. The net earnings of Petro Canada in 2005, 2006, and 2007 were respectively CND 1,791, 1,740, and 2,733. The net earnings from discontinues operations were CND 152.98 (Shown in Annual Report, 2006). The figures were thus showing consistent improvements y-o-y
2. Of the total net earnings, net earnings from continuing operations were CND 1,693, 1,588, and 2,733 in 2005, 2006, and 2008 respectively. This, too, showed healthy and consistent performances and gradual improvement y-o-y.
3. The Earnings per Share (EPS) in 2005, 2006, and 2007 (Basic, CND) were 3.27, 3.15, and 5.59 respectively, whereas the same (Diluted, CND) for the same period were 3.22, 3.11, and 5.53 respectively. The dip in EPS in 2006 was in part due to dismal company stock performances that year.
4. The actual EPS in CND for all operational activities (Consolidated/Basic) were 3.45, 3.45 and 5.59 in 2005, 2006 and 2007 respectively (Basic) whereas the same when diluted were 3.41, 3.41 and 5.53 respectively for an identical period
5. The total cash flows from continuing operational activities were CND 3,783, 3,608, and 3,339 for the years 2005, 2006, and 2007 respectively while the same as a percentage of the share-$ for continuing activities were 7.30, 7.16 and 6.83 in the identical period. This showed thus a consistent decline in cash flows over the given period.
6. The Debt for the year ended 2005, 2006, and 2007 were 2,913, 2,894, and 3,450, respectively. This was thus seen to be gradually increasing over the period.
7. The Cash & Cash Equivalents for the year ended 2005, 2006 and 2007 were respectively 789, 499 and 231 which thus showed a gradual decline over the period.
8. Average Capital showed a gradual increase over the years, with CND of 11,860, 12,868, and 14,328 in 2005, 2006, and 2007 respectively. His figures show a consistent increase in capital employed.
9. The Return on Capital Employed or ROCE in 2005, 2006, and 2007 were respectively 16.0%, 14.3%, and 19.8%
10. The Return on Equity or ROE were 19.7%, 17.5% and 24.5% in 2005, 2006 and 2007 respectively

In 2007, the continuing operations figures did not include the payment of CND 1,145 post-tax affected by the company in order to settle Buzzard contracts in derivatives exposures.

Efficiency, Quality, Innovation, and Customer Responsiveness

A firm needs to be efficient in its activities and support services, ensure quality of the same, often resort to innovation in product technologies, and also be successful in getting appropriate customer responses to its products and services if the firm is to become a market leader and also remain so. It is required to examine whether Petro Canada actually has a competitive advantage as regards value, cost, or product pricing. That the company has value is indisputable as it boasts of quality and innovative products, records y-o-y revenue growth, consistently improves its sales to customers, and declining cost of operations which do give it a competitive advantage in respect to improved economic value by way of reduced costs, the economy of scale, better customer responses by way of sales, etc. Petro Canada does have differentiated products like ENVIRON, Pure Spray Spray Oils, PURETOL White Mineral Oils, PURITY Base Oils, and oils which are 99.9% pure, afford ‘tangible net savings’ and even adopts special processes like HT Severe Hydro-cracking. In addition to product innovation, Petro Canada also boasts of innovative new marketing tools like Super Pass Cards, Super Pass Club Cards, and Pre-paid Cards to rope in selected retail and corporate customers as its loyal clientele. The company has also resorted to pricing strategies like the Rack pricing structure in addition to its range of specialized plastic cards.

Petro Canada maintains that it manufactures lubricants that are specially made so that they maximize equipment performance, protect machinery, reduce downtime, improve productivity and also effect substantial savings for the customer. The company has a special range of heavy-duty engine oil DURON-E made for ’07 EPA compliant engines with low emissions. It also boasts a No-nonsense Warranty that it says is a reflection of its commitment to quality. It has been awarded ISO 9001, ISO/TS 16949, and ISO 14001 registrations, which confirm its commitment to quality. Petro Canada also spends substantial amounts on R&D, science and technology, sets store by its innovative abilities, and is conscious of its duty to ensure a pollution-free environment. It believes in environment conservation, has a functional Quality and Environmental Management System in place, and wishes to contribute to a sustainable, environment-friendly energy solution. All these are in keeping with modern trends and comparable to the policies and philosophy of all of its competitors in the Canadian oil and gas industry.

Competitive Advantage

While Petro Canada is a clear cost leader, innovator, quality producer, and market differentiator, it still needs to address its weakness in areas like improvement of net incomes, EPS, and optimum use of the capital invested, meaning that its efficiency of operations needs to be streamlined, at the very least. Differentiation of products has also contributed to its edge in technologically advanced product lines as compared to its competitors. However, any advantage gained therefrom needs further detailed analysis based on primary data sourced from the company, which is beyond the scope of this study.

The competitive strategy of Petro Canada is clearly based on three distinct areas of consolidation, namely cost leadership through the economics of scale, ability to leverage its resources for lower-priced innovative products catering to a niche market, and a level of product differentiation targeted at the upstream, downstream as also international markets. The strategy is sought to be supported by its commitment to industry benchmarking, quality of products line, customer satisfaction by way of tailor-made warranty clauses, and environmental conservation through specialized energy solutions. In this respect, it appears to have a distinct advantage over its nearest competitors like EnCana and Imperial Oils and enjoys some degree of competitive advantage and hence value additions through carefully crafted business strategies. While this strategy is well motivated and somewhat successful, the company does need to address certain gray areas and conclusively prove many of its declarations of deep commitments customer quality and service so that such policies translate into a convincing and clear competitive advantage sustainable in the long term in the competitive and difficult oil and gas industry in a bear economy.

Miscellaneous Factors

The financial indicators for identifying the competitive strategy adopted by a company, the advantages gained by it in its primary or other activities, the indicators of such competitive advantages gained by the adoption of such strategy, and the effectiveness of adoption of such strategy for deriving the competitive advantage, all these have been studied in some detail in the preceding paragraphs. The key factors may have been so outlined in those paragraphs, but there exist other factors and indicators of competitive advantage like the amount of R&D spends in a company, the net income as a percentage of net profits, the variations in working capital sourced, the volume, quantum and outstanding of short and long term debts sourced by the company, debt to equity and other financial ratios, fluctuations in and comparative levels of shares prices in the stock exchanges, the ratio of share prices to share earnings, the degree of market capitalization, and dividends paid by the company over the years and as compared to competitor companies, may indicate or give some idea of the success or failure of business and competitive strategy of a company. Analysis needs to be performed on the basis of relevant data sourced from official websites, as has been done in the preceding paragraphs. However, in this particular study, all these factors have not been considered. The reason for this is that these indicators are not as conclusive in determining whether a company has a competitive advantage in a given market or not. Also, the study has only focused on relevant and important factors that directly impinge on the core considerations of the study. For example, unless a company has significant R&D spends, which signifies that its investments in technology and hence the quality of products and services may be improving, the same may not be considered any significant indicator of competitive advantage. It is also felt that any indicators like Dividends payouts by a company are dependent on stock value fluctuations which are generally due to external factors and the economic environment. As for the various leverage ratios, as long as these are equal to or more than the industry average and consistently improve over time, these do not significantly influence business strategy and maybe safely neglected in the study.

Differentiation and Cost Leadership

Arguably, the most important considerations for a company are cost leadership and product differentiation that can add value to a company across the length and breadth of its value chain. Thus it may try to cut its costs by streamlining its operations like inventory management, process flow modifications, etc. In the case of Petro Canada, economies of scale, a strong and higher capital base, a strategic product pricing structure, and comparatively lower operating costs have contributed to its cost leadership over its closest competitors and allows it to target a higher market share in a growing and competitive market. Since every company is primarily driven by the profit motive, cost assumes paramount importance, particularly in a competitive market where the prices of products like petroleum may be semi-elastic in a global or large market. Petro Canada could now target an improved market share based on its advantageous cost of operations and sales positions.

Companies in a competitive environment resort to product Differentiation where price variations may not be feasible or where the company sees very small leeway in cost gains. In the case of Petro Canada, which is a cost leader, the company has also chosen to sell well-differentiated products and has woven its product pricing around segmented markets viz. upstream and downstream retail and corporate markets. It thus has the special Rack pricing of its products, which are again broken up as daily, weekly or monthly lines. It has also strived to incorporate quality and utility-specific properties into its products, which again is a unique characteristic of the oil and gas industry where oils are chosen or supposed to be chosen by customers depending on the productivity, efficiency, tangible net savings, and other such properties that oil gives to machinery and equipment. Petro Canada is also conscious of its obligations to society and the environment and is quite well adaptive in policy to the changing global environmental and societal considerations. It is thus a Product Differentiator. Although how successful it is as a market maker is to be analyzed based on further concrete data.

Petro Canada has also, through carefully planned business strategy, sought to target selective markets through the so-called niche marketing. By this strategy, it has tried to adapt itself to the demands of the various sectors of the market viz., retail and corporate as also for upstream and downstream operations. In this respect, it has only followed a clearly defined strategy of market-making and consolidation whose efficacy can only be born out through consistently improved financial performances over the coming years. However, it can be said to be somewhat successful in gaining some competitive advantage against its closest competitors like Imperial Oils Ltd and EnCana. If it can successfully counter competition from its nearest competitors and record better profits, revenues, EPS, and productivity levels, then it can very well emerge as the undisputed industry leader, even if only in the regional oil and gas industry based in Canada. However, with the global economy facing impending recession and faced with bleak oil and gas sector performances, it may well need to redesign its strategies and refocus itself on its short-term and long-term goals, based on, of course, its mission values and overall corporate objectives.

Conclusion

A successful business strategy achieves a competitive advantage over nearest competitors in any difficult market situation and helps sustain such leadership in both the short and long runs. If at all Petro Canada is to achieve a distinct and comprehensive competitive advantage against its nearest top-level competitors, it needs to introspect and adapt and change its strategy based on changes in its internal and external challenges. It also needs to identify any new opportunities in a world faced by the prospect of economic recession. The stock market operations need to be based on both entrepreneurial and risk-focused portfolio mix strategy and in a close market like the Canadian oil and gas industry where so many capital-rich operators function in a resource (crude oil) rich base, it is essential that Petro Canada build up its market intelligence focused on tackling any and every challenge to its position among top Canadian oil and gas majors. Another parameter, i.e., that of market capitalization, only indicates the size of the company or even its ability to raise debt from the market. Also, although dividends increase with EPS, there appears to be no particular link between these two financial indicators that may relate to the competitiveness of a company. The P/E Ratio may not be rationally determined and only denoted how the public or market perceives the company; a high P/E Ratio may indicate growth prospects but in no way relates to the company’s competitive strategy. Another indicator, like the Prices of company shares, may be seen as the public perception of the business as a value proposition and in no way relates to the competitive advantage of the company, nor is it rationally determined.

Bibliography

2007 CAPP Stewardship Report (2008), Facing Our Challenges, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, Web.

EnCana (2007), Annual Report 2007, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, EnCana Corporation, Web.

Imperial Oils ltd (2007), Alberta, Canada, Annual Report.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis (2008), Canada, EnCana Corporation, Web.

Petro Canada (2008), Management, Audit, Finance and Risk Committee, and Auditor Reports, Annual Report 2007, Web.

Petro Canada (2008), Management, Audit, Finance and Risk Committee, and Auditor Reports, Annual Report. Web.

Stabell, C. (2001), New Models for Value Creation and Competitive Advantage in the Petroleum Industry, Sandvika, Norwegian School of Management BI.