129
Embracing New Technology in a Traditional Industry
Richard H. Johnson
Johnson Mining Consulting Services
ABSTRACT: What can we do as engineers to overcome the natural resistance to change within our perceived
“Risky Business.” Mining is a conservative industry and is slow to accept anything new. In SME’s 2015 Keynote
Session, the audience raised a question about why mining is so averse to change. Speakers from two major
mining companies addressed the question. The first said his company would not be the first to take risks on a
new and innovative technology. They were fast seconds, and it was the Mid-Tier companies that were the first
ones to take these risks. The second speaker said he did not agree, and that his firm does introduce innovation
but albeit they may not be the first. Mid-tier companies do seem to adapt innovative technology at a faster rate
than the majors. Do they take these risks to be more competitive or are they encouraged more to take risks? Let
us look at two areas in plant design that have driven changes in our industry in the last 50 years, i.e., Primary
Grinding and Rougher Flotation Circuits.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
A complicated issue for mining companies is the evaluation
of the risks and the potential rewards that come from the
introduction of an innovative technology. The main reasons
given for taking on these risks vary from the need to solve
a processing problem or the need to introduce a more cost-
effective solution in either Capex and/or Opex. When con-
fronted with the decision to use innovative technology, I
am reminded of this technology adoption curve (Figure 1)
that uses the bell curve system to categorize five types of
Source: TechnologyAdvice.com
Figure 1. Technology Adoption Life Cycle
Embracing New Technology in a Traditional Industry
Richard H. Johnson
Johnson Mining Consulting Services
ABSTRACT: What can we do as engineers to overcome the natural resistance to change within our perceived
“Risky Business.” Mining is a conservative industry and is slow to accept anything new. In SME’s 2015 Keynote
Session, the audience raised a question about why mining is so averse to change. Speakers from two major
mining companies addressed the question. The first said his company would not be the first to take risks on a
new and innovative technology. They were fast seconds, and it was the Mid-Tier companies that were the first
ones to take these risks. The second speaker said he did not agree, and that his firm does introduce innovation
but albeit they may not be the first. Mid-tier companies do seem to adapt innovative technology at a faster rate
than the majors. Do they take these risks to be more competitive or are they encouraged more to take risks? Let
us look at two areas in plant design that have driven changes in our industry in the last 50 years, i.e., Primary
Grinding and Rougher Flotation Circuits.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
A complicated issue for mining companies is the evaluation
of the risks and the potential rewards that come from the
introduction of an innovative technology. The main reasons
given for taking on these risks vary from the need to solve
a processing problem or the need to introduce a more cost-
effective solution in either Capex and/or Opex. When con-
fronted with the decision to use innovative technology, I
am reminded of this technology adoption curve (Figure 1)
that uses the bell curve system to categorize five types of
Source: TechnologyAdvice.com
Figure 1. Technology Adoption Life Cycle