-
Delivering Predictable Project Outcomes Jamie Morien1
1Lead Project Delivery Consultant, GRS Consultants, E-mail:
[email protected] (Corresponding author); This
article draws upon intellectual property and concepts developed by
GRS Consultants Principal David Bollands and
employees in the creation and marketing of the proprietary GRS
Project Management System discussed herein. The author thanks David
Bollands, Daniel Cahalarn and David Kast for additional editorial
comments and suggestions.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract: For decades, persistent failure has marred the
delivery of capital investment projects in the resource development
sector. Regrettably even though the causes are well known,
companies have been slow to respond with effective control
strategies. As the scale and complexity of projects has increased
so too has the magnitude of shareholder value destruction. It seems
that when the biggest projects fail, they fail spectacularly.
Performance statistics going back several decades demonstrate that
mining projects of all sizes and complexity mostly fail to achieve
objectives. For a time, the commodities super cycle, which peaked
in 2011, concealed poor capital expenditure discipline. High sales
prices cover many sins, but recent price turbulence has exposed
companies to a legacy of record impairments and over-priced and
under-performing assets unprecedented in the modern era. This has
led to a renewed focus on reducing or eliminating capital
expenditure. Companies spending on capital developments have an
opportunity to apply new levels of discipline to both the
allocation and delivery of capital in an environment of stagnating
labour costs and increasing competitiveness. Contracting approaches
that provide greater opportunities for cost certainty or gross cost
reduction are now more readily available as contractors are
prepared to accept greater levels of cost and schedule risk to
secure work. Mining companies must also improve in-house project
management capability, especially in risk management and
performance control. Teams of proven performers should be equipped
with sound management processes and tools to capture the value of
the opportunity at the front-end of the project delivery cycle and
maintain that value through to completion. We conclude with an
overview of our proprietary capital delivery process and management
system to demonstrate a methodology that reduces risks in a project
portfolio and greatly increases the likelihood of achieving
predictable project outcomes.
Keywords: Predictable project outcomes, mining project
management system, project management framework, project failure,
project success, risk management, front-end loading, project
controls, procedures, processes
_________________________________________________________________________________________
1. Mining Projects are Risky
Creation of a mine, process plant and infrastructure (the mining
project facilities as shown in Figure 1) is an exceptionally risky
business endeavour. The Mining Life Cycle 1 begins with a search
for a mineral deposit (exploration), and in the unlikely event of
success the deposit is classified into mineral resources and
reserves.2The greatest uncertainty lies in this early phase and
problems relating to the resource and reserve estimate is the most
likely technical problem to account for failure of mining
projects.3
Following a successful exploration program, a planning phase and
feasibility assessment will ensue, culminating in a Detailed
Feasibility Study. The feasibility assessment is phased using a
stage-gate process to eliminate and limit expenditure on projects
that will fail to achieve the Owners goals. Definition of key scope
details and the plan and process for project delivery are the
greatest determinants of the eventual success of the project. Some
70% of eventual project cost is tied up with the process design
locked in at the start of Detailed Feasibility. 4 Specific
processes are implemented to reduce uncertainty to a level that
matches
the Owners appetite for risk. Once in execution, the control
strategies developed during feasibility allow strategic management
of risks that may emerge. Failure to follow a proven, disciplined
and rigorous project delivery process greatly increases the
possibility of project failure.
Figure1 RepresentativeMiningProjectFacilities
-
2
2. What is Project Failure?
Project failure is not meeting objectives (within specified
limits) of the sanctioned business case, typically defined in a
feasibility study, with respect to the following criteria:
Failure to meet objectives with respect to Health, Safety,
Environment and Community;
Not completed and ramped-up on schedule;
Not delivered within budget;
Does not achieve sustained plant performance; and
Does not deliver the expected business value and return on
investment (including such issues as recovered grade and sales
revenue).
3. Statistics on Failure
Net Present Value (NPV) measured at project completion provides
the best composite indicator of performance. Issues beyond the
control of the project team such as sales revenue are excluded,
whilst cost-schedule trade-offs conducted during the project are
included in the calculation. It has been estimated that only about
10 - 20% of all mining projects produce the return on investment
and NPV projected in their respective feasibility studies.5
Numerous studies demonstrate that capital costs consistently
eclipse budget projections on average by 29% (Table 1)6, and, over
time performance has apparently been getting worse. One assessment
of the status of all mining projects publicly reported between
October 2010 and March 2011 showed an average overrun of 71%.7
As the size and complexity of projects increases, so increases
the quantity and magnitude of risks. Across all industries, around
65% of so-called mega-projects fail. 8 Catastrophic failures of
mining and metals mega-projects in the last few years include a $10
billion near write-off of a venture to make steel slabs in Brazil9,
a $4 billion write down in Brazil on an iron ore mine,10 and the
indefinite suspension of a major gold and silver mine estimated to
eventually cost 300% of the originally sanctioned budget.11
Table 1. Mineral development project capital overruns
Period Surveyed Authors
No. Projects
Avg. Over-run
1965 1981 Castle12 18 33%
< 1980 Merrow13 44 27% < 1996 Bennet14 16 27%
1987 - 1997 Gypton & Ward15 37 31%
1980 - 2002 Gypton16 60 22%
1980 - 2001 Bertisen & Davis17 63 25%
2010 2011 Mitchell18 >18 71%
Average ~256 29%
4. Attributes of Successful Projects
We deem the following to be the key attributes of a successful
project management process applied to major mining projects.
A rigorous project management process and management system;
Sound planning and risk management;
Implementation in accordance with the business process and
project plan;
Comprehensive scoping and estimating;
Robust instruments of control: contracts; schedules;
budgets;
Reliable, timely, informative and accurate control
reporting;
Continuous review, revision and improvement;
An ego-free environment for harmonious working; and
A no secrets, no surprises approach to all activities.
Ignoring any of these key attributes will prevent creation of,
or contribute to, breakdown of the control environment.
Establishment of an effective control environment is one of the
most fundamental yet neglected requirements of mining project
management.
Space does not permit us to provide comprehensive descriptions
of each of the above attributes in this article. Here we focus on
the first prerequisite for a successful project: the implementation
of a rigorous project management process and management system.
Of course there are other practices attributed to the
achievement of consistent and predictable project outcomes. The
National Research Council found 92 such characteristics of
successful mega-projects.19 All of these characteristics and the
above attributes are embedded into the Principles and Rules that
dictate our project management process and system. This ensures
successful project management principles are implicit in the very
processes applied by the project team in the implementation of the
project.
5. Project Management Process
The project management process, depicted in figure 2, is a
structured framework of activities intended to enable the
identification, definition and development of a mine and process
plant that meets the cost, time and quality objectives of the
enterprise. The project management process begins with the framing
of the project opportunity, and finishes with the close-out of the
project.
A process-based approach ensures objectives, expectations, roles
and responsibilities, metrics, key activities, inputs, resources,
outputs, deliverables and products are clearly defined for the
entire process. It further assures that projects are sufficiently
scoped, planned and estimated so that an accurate and functional
control baseline can be established and used to control the
project.
6. Project Management System
The Project Management System (PMS) is a business process
solution built around the project management process. It includes
all the standards, processes, procedures, guidelines, templates,
tools and applications to apply the corporate policy for delivery
of capital.
-
Project (Study) ManagementFeasibility Studies
Project(Study)
Initiation
RiskManagement
ScopeDefinition
CostEstimating
JFC Process(Scoping Study)
Planning/Scheduling
All studiescomplete?
ScopeVerification
No
Project Management
ProjectInitiation
RiskManagement
ScopeFinalisation
CostEstimating
Planning/Scheduling
Procurement& Contracts
Yes
Design (PFS/DFS only)
DetailedDesign Construction
Commiss-ioning Close-out
JFC Process(PFS/DFS)
Project (Study) Controls
JFC Process(Project Execution)
Verify StudyDocumentation
Project Controls
Risk Management
OpportunityFraming
Procurement(Major Supplier
Enquiries)
Figure2ProjectManagementProcess(MajorProjects)
3
7. Scope of the Project Management System
The PMS, depicted in figure 3, encompasses the entire project
delivery life cycle and is organised around the following
groupings:
Capital Projects Policy
PMS Business Process Overview
Principles and Rules;
Opportunity Development;
Program Management;
Project Management;
Project Initiation;
Quality and Risk;
Support Services;
Project Controls;
Engineering;
Procurement;
Contracting;
Construction;
Commissioning; and
Project Closeout.
In all, there are more than 250 separate tools integrated in the
system.
8. System Architecture
Our system architecture utilises a proprietary three-tier
hierarchy which places at the highest level a policy document that
defines the vision, mission and objectives for
each management area. The second tier enshrines the Principles
and Rules at the heart of the management system which distil best
practice into a succinct handbook for, in this instance, capital
projects. Tier 3 system components include all the standards,
processes, procedures, guidelines, templates, tools and
applications.
This three-tier system architecture is replicated across all
management areas e.g. Operations Management, Information
Technology, Risk and Assurance etc. and is not exclusive to project
management. The architecture supports a simple, yet powerful
solution to the communication challenge faced by all companies that
wish to direct both their employees and service providers in how
the company wishes to conduct itself in business. The Principles
and Rules for capital projects engender generally accepted best
practice and, as such, present nothing onerous to a good
contractor.
Figure3ProjectManagementSysteminContextofMineMOS
-
4
9. Opportunity Development
Before an opportunity becomes a project it must be accepted by
the organisation and included in the Capital Plan. Rigorous
opportunity development procedures and tools optimise the
allocation of capital and ensure the portfolio management process
aligns with shareholder expectations. They ensure rigour
around:
Capturing, documenting and carrying out preliminary assessments
of ideas and opportunities;
Gaining endorsement of the idea for inclusion into a companys
budget and capital plan; and ultimately
Creation of a Justification for Capital (JFC) for approval to
advance the opportunity.
10. Feasibility
The feasibility management system ensures a uniform approach to
the planning and implementation of all types of studies and the
production of study deliverables.
Strictly following the process ensures that:
Due consideration has been made on whether the project should be
investigated further;
All of the alternatives are investigated before a particular
direction is taken;
Project viability has been investigated in detail and confirmed
prior to carrying out additional design and estimating and
committing significant funds; and
Due processes are followed in determining and fine-tuning the
project scope, timeframes and cost estimates.
The management system includes procedures for conducting studies
and economic evaluations of the project. Support tools include
checklists that are used to determine whether the level of
definition and therefore accuracy has been reached to meet the
requirements of the study and capital cost estimate. It also
includes a sophisticated economic modelling tool with
instructions.
Owner standards around feasibility study quality are essential.
An Owner must overcome the moral hazard that arises when using a
consultant who may later be engaged under an EPC or EPCM contract
to deliver the project.
11. Initiation, Setup and Project Management
Project management procedures define the roles, responsibilities
and processes to be followed in the overall management of projects
including:
Establishment of a structure for project governance, capital
expenditure approvals and authority levels, delegation and
limitation of authority; and
Project organization requirements and appointment of project
personnel;
Project initiation procedures and templates ensure disciplined
set-up of the following:
Roles, responsibilities and accountabilities;
Communication and document distribution matrices and workflows,
meeting and reporting processes and matrices, project diary;
Project information management systems;
Establishment of support services (e.g. Human Resources,
Information Technology etc.) and other administrative
requirements;
Development of the Project Charter, a project briefing
mechanism, broadly framing project purpose, scope, timing, quality,
cost, and key project personnel, their acceptance of the charter
and the Project Managers acceptance of responsibility for delivery
of the project;
Project categorization and the consolidation of the Project
Procedures Manual;
Development of the Project Roadmap, a concise and powerful
communication tool setting out the game plan for delivery of the
project opportunity;
Development of the Study or Project Execution Plan (PEP);
and
Scope definition guidelines and tools for development of the
scope of work and scope of services.
12. Document Management
Project teams must establish a controlled environment for
document management and team collaboration. As the primary
decisions-makers it is crucial for the Owners team to have
unfettered access to all project information. This supports good
project governance and reduces uncertainty. Exclusive reliance on
the document management systems of the contractor invariably
results in information asymmetry and places the Owner in a weak
position in the event of a commercial dispute. Procedures and
standards dictate the management of documents, including numbering,
registration, transmittal, filing, storage and retention.
13. Program Management
Program management procedures and tools support a Project Review
Process to monitor the status of a project and its performance
against the PMS business process, the Principles and Rules and a
projects identified objectives and associated deliverables.
Periodic and planned reviews provide ongoing insight into
company-wide project performance and business process compliance.
The system also defines the requirements and provides templates for
enterprise-wide reporting of project performance.
14. Quality and Risk Management
Project Risk Management is principally used to determine whether
the Project Execution Plan and supporting management plans
adequately address the risks associated with project specific
activities. The risk management system components include a
procedure and support tools for identification and classification
of a projects overall risk profile. The tools include a
sophisticated risk register database tool to track mitigation of
project risks and the ongoing risk profile of the project. To judge
whether risk management practices are effective, objective measures
of success are established and both the inherent risk (prior to
controls) and the residual risk (subsequent to the application
-
5
of controls) are measured on an ongoing basis so that the team
can know the control mechanism is working.
The project quality process is a fundamental element of the
project risk management process. The quality management procedure
covers the processes associated with defining the business
processes that will govern the conduct of work on the project
(preparing a Project Quality Plan), the method of checking
compliance with the business process and triggering remedial action
if necessary (project quality auditing) and confirming the
technical adequacy of the basic parameters, the methodology and the
product (project technical reviews).
15. Project Controls
Effective decision making relies on accurate and timely project
controls information. The project controls system must provide
accurate measurement and forecasts of cost, resources, progress and
productivity at an appropriate level of detail to deliver the
necessary intelligence for decision makers to make project critical
decisions in a proactive environment rather than a reactive
environment where potential deviations occur.
It is essential that the Owner sets minimum requirements for
project controls. The management system provides standards,
guidelines, procedures and tools to support the following:
Development of the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and Code of
Accounts;
Cost control procedures including budget management, change
control, commitments and payment procedures;
Planning and scheduling standards;
Project progress and performance management
Preparation and review of estimates;
Estimating standards and guidelines; and
Reporting requirements.
16. Engineering
Engineering management system tools ensure a uniform and
appropriately reviewed design of the project plant and processes to
the companys technical standards.
17. Procurement
The procurement procedures, templates and tools ensure a uniform
and controlled approach to project procurement activities,
including the processes, responsibilities and methods to be
followed for the planning, bidding, management, expediting,
inspection and receipt of goods for the project.
18. Contracting
Contract management procedures and tools support the execution
of the contracts function for a project. They apply to the Owners
team managing an EPCM, EPC or other form of contract and set the
standard for contractors executing projects on the Owners
behalf.
The system includes:
Pre-contract tools for development of the contract plan,
identification and pre-qualification of potential contractors,
quotation and tendering
processes, tender receipt and opening through to the tabulation,
and equalization of tenders, selection and justification of a
tender submission;
All templates and boilerplates for tendering, contracts,
administration guides and audit tools required to manage all types
of contracts including EPC, EPCM, construction and consultancy
agreements;
Contract administration processes encompassing the mobilization
of the contractor and kick-off, the governance processes including
issues around insurance, performance guarantees, monitoring and
review of the contractors performance, establishing contract files
and keeping and maintaining proper records, payment processes,
claims management and change management.
Contract close-out procedures ensuring all administration is
complete, all inspections have been conducted, all matters
resolved, all certificates have been issued and all claims and
disputes settled.
19. Construction
The procedures and tools to support best practice construction
management including:
Site establishment, coordination and management of temporary
facilities;
Site administration;
Contractor compliance with contract in areas of EH&S, IR and
QA/QC Mobilisation/ demobilisation and rehabilitation of site
Conduct of inductions of all site personnel
Inspection of the works
Scheduling and overall sequencing of the works Coordination of
interfaces between contracts
Contract administration
Control of Scope of Work
Monitoring of performance and progress
Contractor completion of contract works and demobilisation.
Provision of Field Engineering Services;
Management of site warehouse and free issue goods; and
Coordination between construction and commissioning
activities.
20. Commissioning and Operational Readiness
Ensures commissioning and operational readiness is in line with
company operational standards and achievement of sustainable plant
operation that meets or exceeds design capacity. System drives the
closeout of construction and commissioning execution via the
generation of the necessary handover packages, energisation notices
and transfer of care custody and control certificates. The system
includes an operational readiness-training program and manages all
elements of plant commissioning and operation.
-
6
21. Project Closeout
Ensures accounting, contractual, technical and commercial
close-out of projects and provides a platform for learning for
future projects.
22. Management System Interface
Embedding a management system into an organisation is vital to
ensure consistent application and broad acceptance. Once in place a
project management system is optimised by successive application
and is honed to reflect prevailing company policy. It becomes the
way of the company and requires only minor customisation for each
new project application.
Simplifying accessibility to the management system components
can be challenging. The system must be easily accessible,
searchable and comprehensible. We developed a Graphical User
Interface (GUI). The web-enabled GUI (screenshot in figure 4) is an
interactive flowsheet of the entire project management process that
enables users to step through the process and retrieve information
on an as required basis. Selecting a step in the process will
retrieve all relevant procedures and tools for rapid deployment. We
can offer many different GUI designs to match a companys branding
style and other preferences.
23. Does a Mining Company Really Need a PMS?
There are numerous reasons why mining companies do not implement
comprehensive end-to-end business solutions that also encompass the
project delivery cycle. Project management is primarily deemed a
non-core process and is supposedly the sole responsibility of a
contractor who designs and constructs the project. This attitude is
expressed by the senior executive of a company mentioned earlier
who suffered one of the worst project failures. Asserting that
future success relies on a more hands-off approach using an EPCM
contractor, he stated, were a mining company, not a construction
company, and were going to let the construction companies build
these mines for us. 20
With respect, we believe this proposition derives from a
confusion that abounds in regard to the differences between the EPC
and EPCM forms of contract. Many Owners incorrectly assume a level
of risk hedging in EPCM contracts that is simply not there.21 An
EPCM contract is merely a contract for services and there is no
guarantee in regard to price or schedule regardless of how
negligent the contractor may have been. Typically the EPCM
contractor has limited liability in terms of time, cost and
performance of design, manufacture and construction. 22 EPCM
contracts are often selected because they provide flexibility for
the Owner to fast-track a project and start construction with low
levels of scope definition; which implies high cost
and schedule risks.23 The Owner must be a very active
participant and drive the project, investing more resources and
assuming all risks... the contractor has little incentive to be
efficient. 24 EPCM commercial vehicles offer a range of other
management challenges which must be addressed by the Owner.
We would encourage all mining companies to consider a range of
delivery strategies based on an assessment of project needs in its
specific context. Herein lies the risk of continued failure and
also the opportunity for success, i.e.: What can be contracted to
external service providers, and what needs to be controlled
in-house to secure successful project outcomes and deliver capital
with confidence in a predictable project outcome? This is
fundamentally dependent on assigning work to resources that possess
the core competency to complete the tasks assigned. Access to such
resources is constrained by location, market and organisational
supply. Such constraints can lead to the assignment of works to
resources lacking the core competency to perform the work,
resulting in suboptimal outcomes. The common misperception that an
Owner can effectively contract out cost and schedule risk (to an
EPCM) often results in disastrous project delivery outcomes. Risk
when realised always returns to the Owner; the risk must be
controlled and managed.
Selection of a particular contracting strategy, from the mosaic
of different options, requires at the very least an Owners team
that is resourced adequately to manage the risks involved with the
particular strategy. The Owner must clearly understand and define
the roles, responsibilities, liabilities, and authorities of all
the various participants. Procedures in the Owners project
management system must provide guidance to the Owners team in the
development of the delivery strategy and management of the
contractor specific to the contracting approach. The Project
Management System contains all contracting procedures, tendering
templates, contract boilerplates, administration guides and audit
tools required to manage all types of contracts including EPC,
EPCM, construction and consultancy agreements.
Without a prescribed minimum standard for project management
processes, by what standard can the performance of the project
management entity be assessed? EPCM contracts, typically being
contracts for services only, are drafted to require the standard of
reasonable or best endeavours. During implementation there may be a
difference of opinion as to what that standard is. In a worst case
scenario how does a court or arbitrator interpret this? Our
solution is to append the Principles and Rules document to the
primary contract with the EPCM contractor so that expectations are
clear and unambiguous and the responsibilities of the contractor
are clearly understood from the outset. This aims to enhance and
define the behavior desired by the contracting parties.
In our experience, neither Owner organisations nor project
management service providers have adequately upgraded their project
management and control processes or systems to meet the new
challenges of mining mega-projects. Most companies with at least
one operating mine have documented business processes and
procedures to support a range of activities across back office
administration. Some have adopted Enterprise Resource Planning
(ERP) solutions such as SAP and Oracle to integrate processes
across the business into a single software platform. These ERP
systems, which typically
Figure4GraphicUserInterface
-
7
arose in discrete manufacturing environments, are inadequate for
the management of a project. The differences between an operation
and a project in terms of engineering management needs, supply
chain, contracting methodology, cost management processes,
reporting, etc.. make ERP systems simply the wrong tool for a
project. We have assisted many clients in configuring their ERP
systems with additional technology to support projects but ERP
systems alone cannot meet the needs a mining project.
24. Outcomes and Conclusion
Project management systems for the mining industry need to
encompass the full project delivery cycle from opportunity
identification through to project close-out. Development of a
robust, rigorous, comprehensive and effective suite of procedures,
tools and enabling processes from first principles is a significant
undertaking. Investment into first principles solution development
can cost millions of dollar, tens of thousands of labour hours and
should be practically complete prior to the execution phase of a
proejct.
The value of a project management system is measured in terms of
a reduced level of uncertainty and improvements in the efficiency
and effectiveness of the management process. A PMS is intended to
engender a behavioural change within an organisation whereby:
Project opportunities are identified, evaluated and converted to
projects in a uniform manner;
Rigour is applied to project planning and projects are
implemented as planned;
Projects are executed in a controlled and predictable
manner;
There is emphasis on accountability for performance;
Management attention is focused where it really matters on
control performance not merely reported project performance;
There are early identification and management of risks that may
compromise the project objectives and key result areas;
There exists a framework to manage the Owners project team,
consultants and EPCM/EPC contractors;
Business objectives are achieved.
About the Author
Jamie Morien has 14 years of experience and acquired
competencies in project delivery roles across some of the worlds
largest industrial, minerals processing and infrastructure
projects. He has university degrees in Construction Law, Project
Management and Construction Management from
Australian institutions. As a lead project delivery consultant
Jamie has completed assignments with management responsibilities
for project disciplines including contracts, procurement,
estimating, cost control, planning and scheduling, facilities
management, risk management, information management systems and
document control.
Past assignments include projects in Australia, Canada, Peru,
Kazakhstan, Laos, New Caledonia and the Dominican Republic.
About GRS
Global Resource Solutions (GRS) was established in 1994 to
provide Feasibility Study, Project Management and Operations
Management expertise to the petroleum, mining and chemical
processing industries.
Our core skills and resources encompass strategic consulting and
include the provision of:
Feasibility study management;
Project management and Turn Key delivery;
Project opportunity framing and planning;
Management of capital programs, throughout the project delivery
cycle; and
Operations improvement.
GRS mission is to select and nurture working relationships that
allow us to develop a business environment of excellence, knowledge
and trust, with a transparent approach to daily business
activities, assisting our clients in the realisation of their
objectives. We firmly believe that our collective attitudes and
beliefs structure our corporate and individual conduct and
achievements.
GRS focuses intensively on supporting clients in the development
and delivery of their business plans, with a spotlight on the
management of business risk and opportunity inherently embedded
within the execution plans and daily business activities. Gaining
more control over business outcomes, also allows a focus on
engaging people in the more rewarding challenge of driving
improvement and increasing profitability. With the benefit of
increased productivity, predictability and reliability clients are
better able to withstand negative market forces and capitalise on
periods of high commodity value. Operating as a consistent low-cost
producer enhances capability to convert marginal resources or
projects into more viable operations and business cases,
effectively reducing the risk envelope in growth and operating
strategy.
GRS has a market presence in Asia, Europe, Africa, Australasia,
North America and South America. The GRS Project Management System
(PMS) and GRS Operational Management System (OMS) business
solutions are packaged and sold, in units and as a complete
enterprise-wide solution, to companies around the world such as
Newcrest Mining, MMG, Doe Run, Newmont, Iluka Resources and
Chevron. These business solutions and their successes represent an
investment into first principles solution development over a
12-year period with an investment of some 120,000 man-hours. They
are optimised through successive application and honed to reflect
todays prevailing market providing clients access to what we
believe is the worlds best management system.
Working as a team with our clients personnel, we operate under
the principle:
NO SECRETS, NO SURPRISES, SIMPLY DELIVER
-
8
References
1GavinMMudd,TheSustainabilityofMininginAustralia:KeyProductionTrendsandTheirEnvironmentalImplicationsfortheFuture(2007)DepartmentofCivilEngineering,MonashUniversityandMineralPolicyInstitute,6.Availableonline:on13July2008.
2TheSouthAfricanCodefortheReportingofExplorationResults,MineralResourcesandMineralReserves(TheSAMRECCode),2007Edition,TheSouthAfricanMineralResourceCommittee(SAMREC)WorkingGroupUndertheJointAuspicesoftheSouthernAfricanInstituteofMiningandMetallurgyandtheGeologicalSocietyofSouthAfrica.
3Shillabeer,J,andGypton,C,HighlightingProjectRiskFollowingCompletionoftheFeasibilityStudy,inProceedingsMiningRiskManagement(2003)101109(TheAustralasianInstituteofMiningandMetallurgy:Melbourne).
4NickJLavingia,BestPracticesinCostEngineering(2004)AACEInternationalTransactions9.03.
5McMahon,2007,quotedbyBullockRL,AccuracyofFeasibilityStudyEvaluationsWouldImproveAccountabilityMiningEngineeringApril2011.
6Ibid,3.
7Ernst&Young,EffectiveCapitalProjectExecution:MiningandMetals,2011
8EdwardMerrowRevealsWhyMegaprojectsFailinProjectManager,IPAIndependentProjectAnalysis,January2012,http://ipaglobal.com/NewsRoom/Announcements/EdwardMerrowRevealsWhyMegaprojectsFailinPr,accessedon4Feb2014.
9Emerge,splurge,purge:Westernfirmshavepiledintoemergingmarketsinthepast20years.NowcomesthereckoningTheEconomistMar8th2014http://www.economist.com/news/business/21598642westernfirmshavepiledemergingmarketspast20yearsnowcomes
10Els,F.Report:AngloAmericansetfor$5bnMinasRiowritedown21Jan2013,AvailableOnline:http://www.mining.com/reportangloamericansetfor5bnwriteoffoverminasrio69010/
11Lazenby,H.BarrickGoldsuspendsPascuaLamaprojectMiningWeekly,31Oct2013,Availableonline:http://www.miningweekly.com/article/barrickgoldsuspendspascualamaproject20131031
12GRCastle,1985,Feasibilitystudiesandotherprojectestimates,Howreliablearethey?February,ProceedingsoftheFinancefortheMineralsIndustry,NewYork18.
13BullockRL,AccuracyofFeasibilityStudyEvaluationsWouldImproveAccountabilityMiningEngineeringApril2011.
14Ibid,n.13.
15CGyptonandD.Ward,2001,FeasibilityStudyQuality,CapitalOverruns&InvestmentDecisions,SpeechtotheNorthWestMiningAssociation,www.miningamerica.org
16CGypton,Howhavewedone?Feasibilitystudyperformancesince1980(2002)JanuaryEngineeringandMiningJournal,22.
17Bertisen,J.,andDavis,G.2007,Biasanderrorinmineprojectcapitalcostestimation.SMEPreprintNo.07082,Littleton,CO:SME.
18P.Mitchell,2011,AchievingmajorcapitalprojecteffectivenessandcorporateperformanceinEffectiveCapitalProjectExecutionMiningandMetals,Ernst&Young.
19NationalResearchCouncil,CharacteristicsofSuccessfulMegaprojects(2000)NationalAcademyofSciences.
20J.SokalskyquotedinWallStreetJournal,[online]
21PhilipLoots,NickHenchie,WorldsApart:EPCandEPCMContractRiskIssuesandAllocation,(2007)TheInternationalConstructionLawReview253.
22DougJones,WhereAretheStandardFormsGoing?47AustralianConstructionLawNewsletter15,21.
23ChristofvonBranconi,ChistophHLoch,ContractingforMajorProjects:EightBusinessLeversforTopManagement(2004)InternationalJournalofProjectManagement22,119,120.
24Ibid.
