I jumped out of bed for THIS?

I have been working in industry for 20 years now, over which time I’ve seen a few things shift. The awareness and outcry of our non-industry stakeholders of the need for environmental protection, and the response by regulators and industry alike, to step up their game, to develop and abide by standards designed to reduce risks and impacts to people and the environment.

Industry has come a long way since I began on this journey. And at the same time, I feel there is much more work to be done.

Karen ChovanSeptember 12, 2016Enviro Integration Strategieschange, mining, environment Comment

Challenges in a Resource-Dependent World

Over the past 10-15 years, I’ve been working at the crossroads of what could be two very distinct career paths. Both necessary for our ways of living, and also for our future generations. These are mining, and sustainability - two worlds that don't often move hand in hand.

Karen ChovanSeptember 10, 2016Enviro Integration Strategiesvision, challenge, mining, sustainabilityComment

Are Sector-Specific Project Challenges Really So Different?

With a look at project management challenges, it seems it doesn't matter what sector the projects are in. They all face the same issues...

Without appropriate engagement and communications, project teams are bound to miss critical requirements for their project – and as such, develop an incomplete scope to proceed.

Without ensuring we are all well-aligned to the ultimate project goals, and to understanding when it might be okay to shift strategies to get there, we set ourselves up for failure.

Without taking a staged and iterative approach to our projects, and without a willingness to adjust scope and make alternate decisions, as more information is obtained, it is then inevitable that the ultimate goals of the project are put at risk.

Karen ChovanSeptember 9, 2016Enviro Integration Strategiesproject planning, project risks, sustainabilityComment

Shouldn't we De-Risk and Optimize first?

Everything comes with some form of risk.

As most commonly demonstrated, the concept of risk management conveys an acceptance of risks, an exercise performed to ensure we are identifying and managing our project risks, controlling them in some way.

But why do we focus on managing risk before we have eliminated as much of it as we can? What if, instead, we looked for as many opportunities to de-risk and optimize our projects first?

Karen ChovanAugust 29, 2016Enviro Integration Strategiesproject planning, risk management, leanComment

Should "Net Positive" be Put in a Box?

Environmental Compliance. Beyond Compliance. Leading Performer. Responsible Operations. Responsible Procurement. Cradle-to-Grave Material Management. All markers on the path of continual improvement and environmental sustainability.

A new initiative, headed by Forum for the Future, has a goal “to encourage more companies to make ambitious Net Positive commitments, then equip them with the tools to turn those goals into reality.”

This newest initiative, combining both environment and social, "opens its arms to all organisations committed to becoming Net Positive"…and this one seems to be setting the bar the highest, suggesting that there should not be an allowance for impacts in one place, that are offset by benefits elsewhere. It sounds inspirational, something we should all strive for.

With most performance measurement indices, it is typical to place bounds around what is being measured and reported on. This is done to show where an organisation has "control" over its operations.

But the premise behind Net Positive is that you would measure outside of the operational bounds - to show how an organisation will "put back more into society, the environment and the global economy than it takes out."

So, this commentary is situated around this premise, and the inconsistency around these goals and the general practices of the purveyors of sustainability.

Will the initiative fly as defined?

Or will it need to be bound in a box?

Karen ChovanJune 21, 2016Enviro Integration Strategiesnet positive, sustainability, miningComment

Risk and Agility in Design

This past week I shared a Huffington Post article regarding agile risk management, in which it was suggested that “risk agility is the key attribute of the survivors”, and that “compliance…is not an adequate form of risk management for the twenty-first century”.

I thought it a fitting article because it tied nicely to a couple of the themes I had planned on discussing:

complexity causing an amplification of risk, and
a reliance on historical methods, data, and false-positives to reassure ourselves that we have effectively managed our risks.

This article suggested that we should be willing and able to monitor and manage risks according to how they arise, to make decisions as our risks shift and change over time. The author wrote,

“Aversion to risk is dangerous and implies being stuck in another era and held at a standstill by the inertia of fear.”

Given, the context of the article is that risk averse businesses will not survive.

But what of the things that need to stand the test of time, regardless of the changing conditions that they may be exposed to? What of those things, like infrastructure we might design and build, that are more permanent, and might be difficult or even impossible to make adaptations to, once they are complete?

How can risk agility be applied in that context?

Karen ChovanMay 30, 2016Enviro Integration Strategiesmining, risk management, agilityComment

Find Your Risk Dragons!

Risk - to human health and life, to the environment. It's one of those fuzzy things that everyone has different perceptions about - how serious it is, whether something should be done to address it, how critical or impactful the consequences of an occurrence could be.

A thing that we can be blind to, become lazy about, particularly when no failures or instances occur over a long duration. Or when past failures had consequences which were deemed to be small.

Risk - something that should be assessed, avoided and addressed, mitigated. But to what end can an unknown be tempered?

Karen ChovanMay 18, 2016Enviro Integration Strategiesrisk management, mining, continuous improvementComment

Mining Not Just for 'Burly Guys'

I had an interesting inquiry from a project manager about the mining industry the other day. It went like this:

“Mind if I ask you something about your industry? For some reason, I see the mining / natural resources field as a lot of ‘burly guys.’ They may be a tough audience... Perhaps I am wrong. Please enlighten me."

My first response, of course, was a smile and chuckle to myself, because who hasn’t met a ‘burly guy’ in the mining sector? In fact, the term made me think of a number of 'burly guys' that I worked with throughout the years of my career in this sector.

But I had to give an appropriate response. And so I went on to explain the complexity, the extended life, the multiple stages, and all of the people that become involved with mining and natural resource developments over the years.

And then I admitted that, yes, of course you may run into some ‘burly guys’ in the sector (as there are in almost every industrial sector!) And although those ‘burly guys’ may look rough on the outside, they are a broadly diverse bunch who are generally caring, wise, experienced, and very knowledgable. Add to that the large amounts of time spent in remote, and sometimes pretty tough conditions, and they still get things done.

But let’s get on to the greater questions behind the inquiry.

How much does the general public really know about our industry? There are, unfortunately, ‘reality’ shows that purvey us as reckless people who go around destroying the environment just to make a buck.

And how many professionals, some who may be well qualified to serve our industry, would never consider it - simply because they just don’t know what they’re missing?

A Compelling Exploit...

In Defence of a Silo

About a month ago, you may have read a couple articles I posted that reviewed opinions on why projects fail - these were the result of some online research and a number of interviews I held late last year. At the end of my post, I asked your opinion - did you agree, disagree, and if so, what did you think were primary reasons?

There were some great responses, where some were in agreement to the findings, and others offered more in-depth and technically specific reasons, from their perspective. Many of these factors revolved around poor geological or mineralogical understanding and interpretation. Many suggested poor process design, and yet others named social pressures and objections. There were more than a few references to interdependent and complex issues. It was great engagement, and I appreciate your input!

To kick this article off, I'm digging into the accused geologic aspect a little more, because it is our primary starting point of a mine anyways, but more particularly because I've recently read a number of articles that have pointed the finger solely at resource and reserve estimations as the cause of failure of many mine development projects.

However, what you will find in my arguments, suggests that there may be more going on to consider, when it comes to failure.

The Urgency for Industrial Project Delivery to Evolve

How often have you been approached by social or environment-minded folks about integrating sustainability into your projects, designs and systems?

Never? Only on particular projects? More and more? Or all the time?

If you were asked to do this, would you know where to start?

Would you understand how to educate and gain the most traction with your teams?

This article highlights the necessity of making positive changes to our PMO guidance, and to integrating sustainability into our design and project management practices.

Karen ChovanFebruary 23, 2016Enviro Integration StrategiesPMO, project management, sustainability, change, improvementsComment

Articles

A Compelling Exploit...