You can start by facilitating open discussions where all perspectives are shared, supported by data and experience. Analyze formation-specific data (e.g., pore pressure, rock strength) to identify key challenges. Host a workshop to evaluate options using decision matrices or risk assessments. If needed, consult external experts for unbiased input. Finally, I will implement a trial phase to test parameters on a small scale (drill off test), using results to guide the final decision. This ensures a balanced, data-driven approach.

When a technical team is split, it’s rarely about data—it’s about trust. One side values experience, and the other values precision. The best solution? Bridge the gap with proof. —> A collaborative workshop isn’t a debate—it’s an experiment. Instead of arguing, let both sides build a case backed by evidence. —> External expert input removes ego from the equation. Someone without a stake in the outcome can challenge biases and introduce missing variables. —> A trial run is the ultimate decider. When real data is on the table, opinions become irrelevant. Let the numbers settle the debate. How do you approach internal technical disagreements without stalling progress?

To find common ground on the best drilling parameters for a tough formation, focus on data-driven decision-making and collaboration. Begin by gathering relevant data, including offset well reports, real-time drilling analytics, and rock formation characteristics. Use performance metrics such as Rate of Penetration (ROP), bit wear, and torque to compare different approaches objectively. Facilitate a structured discussion where team members present their perspectives with supporting evidence. Encourage open dialogue to understand concerns and potential trade-offs. Consider running simulations or pilot tests with controlled adjustments to drilling parameters to evaluate performance in real conditions.