One of the most pressing challenges in offshore energy development is the gap between project teams and operations teams. It doesn’t come from a conflict or disagreement, just simply the result of two groups working under very different pressures, timelines and expectations. But this gap affects everything from handovers to risk management, and over the years we have seen how costly it can be when the two sides don’t fully understand each other. 

Different pressures, different priorities

Those of us who have worked in subsea construction know how project environments operate. Deadlines drive every decision. Plans change quickly. Problems must be solved fast. A project team is often dealing with evolving scopes, tight windows and the constant need to keep work progressing. Flexibility becomes part of the culture, and teams grow comfortable with a high degree of change.

Operations is a different rhythm entirely. Once a field is online, the priority shifts to stability, predictability and safe performance. Operations teams work to avoid surprises, minimize disruption and maintain a reliable system. Every change represents a potential impact and even a small adjustment must be carefully considered.

Both approaches are necessary, but the contrast can create misunderstandings that make collaboration difficult. 

Identifying the gap

This difference becomes most visible during handovers. A project may deliver a stack of documents, but without the context behind decisions, operations inherit more questions than answers. Why was a particular route chosen? What installation challenges occurred offshore? Which record shows what was actually installed offshore, and which one reflects an earlier design that never made it into the field? These gaps force operations teams to spend valuable time reconstructing knowledge the project once held.

The solution is not just better documentation. It is shared visibility. When both project and operations teams can view the field the same way, within the same digital environment, the context becomes clear. Instead of interpreting information from multiple documents, teams can navigate a single visual model that reflects the real state of the asset. Installation details, equipment data, revisions, metadata and supporting documentation all sit together in one place rather than scattered across folders or systems.

This shared workspace transforms handovers from a moment in time into an ongoing collaboration. Project teams can build and refine their work with operations involved earlier, giving both sides a chance to raise concerns, validate decisions and anticipate future requirements. Operations can review concepts in context, assess risk and understand the rationale behind design choices before the asset ever reaches them. It becomes a continuous partnership rather than a one-directional transfer. 

A connected lifecycle

Cloud-based platforms enhance this relationship even further. With distributed teams common across the industry, real-time access to a shared model eliminates the delays that come from emailing files, reconciling versions or searching for the latest update. Everyone sees the same information, no matter where they are. That alignment improves decision-making and reduces the chance that information will be lost, misinterpreted or duplicated.

Over time, this level of visibility builds trust between project and operations teams. Each group gains a clearer understanding of the pressures and constraints the other faces. Project engineers begin to see how early decisions affect long-term operability. Operations teams gain insight into the challenges and compromises that shaped the installation. The result is a more connected lifecycle where knowledge flows naturally rather than being interrupted at each phase.

Bridging the gap between projects and operations is not about asking either side to change who they are. It is about giving both groups the same clarity and context. When teams see, understand and manage the field together, the entire offshore lifecycle becomes more efficient, more resilient and far better positioned for the increasing complexity of modern energy development.