Tom Wilker A common standard taught in historical geology courses at universities is the principle of uniformitarianism, which states that the same geological processes we see today have operated throughout the Earth’s history. Or, said differently: the present is the key to the past. A colloquial corollary to this that history has a way of repeating itself. The American author Mark Twain twisted it slightly when he said, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” Regretfully, the present employment workspace is somewhat tumultuous and as a new executive director, I must reflect on what this means for the future of the AAPG.
Layoffs and Efficiency
We are seeing layoffs across our industry as commodity prices have experienced a sustained slump, and employers have learned to produce more with fewer employees (figure 1), especially since the late-2014 commodity price collapse.
Figure 1: A comparison of U.S. oil extraction employment versus U.S. oil production and WTI pricing (Cushing, Okla. spot). Data sources include the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
This could be the result of several factors: 1) Unconventional resources are more about manufacturing processes and require different levels of work force support, 2) technology advances have made the oil industry workforce more efficient, 3) investor pressure on executive leadership has required improvements be made to fiscal performance metrics, 4) energy transition cultural pressures have resulted in oil producers reducing their conventional exploration efforts, and 5) the industry simply has gotten better at locating and producing hydrocarbons. It is likely a confluence of many reasons driving this increased efficiency, and it is truly an amazing accomplishment as the era of easy oil is over. Only complicated plays and reservoirs remain to be found and produced.
Furthermore, it might make this downturn different from previous downturns. In this downturn, lean organizations are going even trimmer, and it doesn’t feel like there is a rebound hiring wave coming, due to the industry’s enhanced efficiency. Artificial intelligence advancements will also drive efficiencies.
Yet, rumblings of conventional exploration coming back to life are present. Corporations are trading players looking for those with scarce conventional exploration competencies. Additionally, the energy transition dialogue is morphing into an energy addition conversation, as the world’s demand for power has eclipsed the near-term potential of alternative or renewable energy sources. I believe a leaner, efficient oil industry is here to stay.
Membership and Oil Industry Employment
The next question for the AAPG is an obvious one: What does fewer employed petroleum geoscientists mean for the AAPG membership.
The short answer is: Nothing good.
Figure 2: A comparison of U.S. oil extraction employment and AAPG total membership over time. Membership is as of the end of each calendar year. Data sourced from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
There appears to be a strong relationship between our total membership and U.S. oil extraction employment (figure 2). Please note that global oil employment is not available to make this analysis more complete.
Figure 3: A comparison of U.S. oil extraction employment versus AAPG total membership. Data sourced from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
From 2008 to 2024, the correlation of determination (R2) between U.S. oil industry extraction employment and AAPG total membership is 0.90 (figure 3).
Parsing this relationship further, the R2 from 2008 to 2021 and the COVID pandemic is 0.92 and the R2 from 2021 to 2024 is 0.54. The relationship from 2021 until now is especially disconcerting.
The linkage between our membership count and employment appears to have been broken. As employment has improved, our membership has not followed.
What might be causing this decoupling?
Several factors could be driving this change: 1) A mass of members left the industry and the AAPG during the COVID pandemic and are not returning. 2) Our internal discord over Reimagine and/or merger discussions with the Society of Petroleum Engineers might have disenchanted members, causing them to leave the society. 3) Young professionals now have their needs met via competing web-based resources and are less inclined to join professional associations (This is not unique to the petroleum industry and has been documented by other associations affiliated with other industries). 4) A mass of our members are aging out of the industry and membership.
Figure 4: Membership retention by membership category. Retention rate = (Ending member count - New member count)/Starting member count.
Some of these observations are founded in our membership retention rates (figure 4). Our member retention rates for full and total membership have declined to 83 and 77 percent, respectively. Our Emeritus membership rate remains a positive and sits at about 95 percent, whereas student member retention rates sit at a disappointing 60 percent.
Figure 5: AAPG total membership over time and age distribution. The width of a bar is based on the percentage of total membership by age group. Each bar represents a five-year age window. The bottom age group is 20 and under and the top bar is 80 or over.
This translates into an aging organization with a bimodal distribution. An analysis of our member age distribution over time (figure 5) shows that we have a growing percentage of members who are over 65. This demographic has been loyal members for years and we can trace their lineage in our data over time (gray-shaded area).
Figure 6: AAPG total membership over time and age distribution. Each year of member counts is represented by a different curve.
Regretfully, the mass of young professionals under the age of 30 has not transitioned over time into sustained membership, especially since 2021. In short, the aging of our membership and poor retention rates have exasperated the relationship of our membership to oil and gas employment. Figure 6 reaffirms these observations from a different time-series perspective.
We have a loyal maturing membership that has acted like a collapsing wave throughout our historical membership data, and we are failing to convert and sustain young professional members. Our young professionals saw growth up until the 2014 commodity price collapse and this demographic population has since been in decline. This young demographic has acted as a standing but declining wave in our historical membership data.
Figure 7: AAPG total membership and voting membership over time based on location. Members in sections are U.S.-based and region members are located outside the United States.
To complete the analysis, I also looked at our section (U.S.-based) and region (outside U.S.) membership data. On a percentage basis, membership outside the United States has grown relative to membership within the United States (figure 7).
This is true for both voting and total membership. Approximately 50 percent of our total membership resides outside the United States, and 30 percent of our voting membership is outside the United States.
Call to Action
This data analysis is sobering and needs to be a call to action. In a 1981 Narcotics Anonymous text, the phrase we all know so well was first penned: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
What is this data telling us that we must do differently?
1) First, as an Association, we need to see what we can do to assist displaced members, and we are working on revising our career services to meet current needs, but we will not be able to get members jobs. They will have to do this themselves largely through networking. Be open to their calls and conversations.
2) We need to treat each other with respect and remember our common passion is applied geoscience. This needs to frame our interactions and allow us to constructively collaborate on advancing the subsurface profession and the AAPG.
3) We need to do a better job of onboarding members. Engaged members are retained members.
4) Student and young professionals are our future. We must find ways to capture their interest. Per the analysis Brian Horn shared in last month’s Explorer, approximately 65 percent of geoscience students go on to careers in the environmental sector and 20 percent work in the engineering space. Only 4 percent go on to careers in oil or mining. This means we are chasing a small number of prospective members. Additionally, university geoscience programs are being shuttered or consolidated. Where are the careers going to be for these geoscience students in the future and how do we meet them there?
5) Mid-career professionals represent a small population of our membership. We must deliver value to bring and retain these professionals in membership.
6) We need to collaborate more with our sections, regions and divisions to meet our members in the workflow or where they are locally. We have a global reach but must increase efforts in these areas to deliver member value.
7) Our seasoned members need to remain active and mentor their replacements. How do we transition this demographic’s passion to the members coming behind them?
8) Lastly, the AAPG staff needs to continue to embrace a customer service focus. We must create “easy buttons” for our members and volunteers. More importantly, we must deliver value.
Conclusion
The Executive Committee has recently published a three-year strategy. This strategy has four strategic focus areas: 1) deliver a compelling value proposition, 2) diversify and add new sources of revenues to fund member value drivers, 3) position the organization for the future, and 4) motivate students to pursue a career in subsurface energy (which is the current president’s focus). This strategic focus should help address some of the member concerns outlined in this article, but we as a membership need to work together to improve the health of the AAPG. Please think about what you can do to help us to retain and grow membership and/or please let us know how we can improve our member value proposition. We are all in this together.