14 XXXI International Mineral Processing Congress 2024 Proceedings/Washington, DC/Sep 29–Oct 3
amongst mining companies who work in this complex
space balancing public need and public good. How can
we rationalize the apparent ‘trust’ gap that lies between the
engineer and the corporation? This is at the heart of the
question as to how we reconcile the dilemma of driving
increased production to satisfy the demands for electrical
metals and minerals versus the need to focus on redesign to
assure rapid transition to net-zero operation.
But let’s look at what mining companies contribute –
we will argue that accounts do not necessarily portray the
realities. For example, if we look at the way in which profit,
and true value is described. Mayer has insightful comments
on the reality of how financial revenues and impact of cor-
porations should be better understood (Mayer, 2024). This
is highly relevant to the mining sector. Whilst the accounts
describe revenue in terms of operational measured cost
(capital, supplies and wages) and the measured profit (dif-
ference between these costs and revenue) this is not a rep-
resentation of some realities. It is a fact that mining and
processing can cause detriments to peoples’ welfare, the
local and wider environment of the landscape, air and water
and the embedded supply chains. Further, these impacts
are not normally remedied or being paid for as a part of
the total surplus (measured profit) created. These repre-
sent three detriments whose costs are not accounted for as
true measured costs and hence the actual profit is much
smaller, this can be referred to as the ‘just profit’ (as illus-
trated in Figure 6 (a)). But besides the financial revenue the
total value enabled by mining corporations is greater than
appears in the fiscal record! Mineral and mining engineers
have devised and invested in innovations that have ben-
efited communities beyond their domain both in terms of
social improvements and environmental improvements. So,
beyond the formal accounts there is undoubtedly a need to
add a ‘just profit increment’ to express more accurately the
total value brought about by corporations. Taken overall,
part of the action of corporations has been in ‘producing
problems’ (shown as negative in Figure 6) and part has been
in ‘solving problems for society.’
Standing back, the fact is that minerals engineers need
to articulate more clearly the concept that (hopefully) they
and their employers adopt the principles of ‘Corporate
Purpose’ (Figure 6 (b)). The underpinning realities are that
the corporations will not profit unjustly from producing
problems and they will be recognized and acknowledged
for producing new profitable solutions that are energizing a
future new economy. Characteristics of Corporate Purpose
is that its purpose is not to be a marketing campaign but a
genuinely held belief throughout the corporation, by every
employee, that the existence of the company is to achieve
its Corporate Purpose. Mayer (2024) cited core characteris-
tics of this being: a simple alignment to the strategy of the
Figure 6. Accounting for true costs and total value in mining operations in terms of a ‘just profit
increment’ as part of behaving as an organization with Corporate Purpose (after Mayer, 2024)
amongst mining companies who work in this complex
space balancing public need and public good. How can
we rationalize the apparent ‘trust’ gap that lies between the
engineer and the corporation? This is at the heart of the
question as to how we reconcile the dilemma of driving
increased production to satisfy the demands for electrical
metals and minerals versus the need to focus on redesign to
assure rapid transition to net-zero operation.
But let’s look at what mining companies contribute –
we will argue that accounts do not necessarily portray the
realities. For example, if we look at the way in which profit,
and true value is described. Mayer has insightful comments
on the reality of how financial revenues and impact of cor-
porations should be better understood (Mayer, 2024). This
is highly relevant to the mining sector. Whilst the accounts
describe revenue in terms of operational measured cost
(capital, supplies and wages) and the measured profit (dif-
ference between these costs and revenue) this is not a rep-
resentation of some realities. It is a fact that mining and
processing can cause detriments to peoples’ welfare, the
local and wider environment of the landscape, air and water
and the embedded supply chains. Further, these impacts
are not normally remedied or being paid for as a part of
the total surplus (measured profit) created. These repre-
sent three detriments whose costs are not accounted for as
true measured costs and hence the actual profit is much
smaller, this can be referred to as the ‘just profit’ (as illus-
trated in Figure 6 (a)). But besides the financial revenue the
total value enabled by mining corporations is greater than
appears in the fiscal record! Mineral and mining engineers
have devised and invested in innovations that have ben-
efited communities beyond their domain both in terms of
social improvements and environmental improvements. So,
beyond the formal accounts there is undoubtedly a need to
add a ‘just profit increment’ to express more accurately the
total value brought about by corporations. Taken overall,
part of the action of corporations has been in ‘producing
problems’ (shown as negative in Figure 6) and part has been
in ‘solving problems for society.’
Standing back, the fact is that minerals engineers need
to articulate more clearly the concept that (hopefully) they
and their employers adopt the principles of ‘Corporate
Purpose’ (Figure 6 (b)). The underpinning realities are that
the corporations will not profit unjustly from producing
problems and they will be recognized and acknowledged
for producing new profitable solutions that are energizing a
future new economy. Characteristics of Corporate Purpose
is that its purpose is not to be a marketing campaign but a
genuinely held belief throughout the corporation, by every
employee, that the existence of the company is to achieve
its Corporate Purpose. Mayer (2024) cited core characteris-
tics of this being: a simple alignment to the strategy of the
Figure 6. Accounting for true costs and total value in mining operations in terms of a ‘just profit
increment’ as part of behaving as an organization with Corporate Purpose (after Mayer, 2024)