Six Months After Go-Live: Why the Results Still Aren’t Showing

⚒️ Scenario for Mining Operations Leaders:

A mine invests significantly in a new operational system, process, or way of working.

✔️ Business case approved ✔️ Training completed ✔️ Rollout signed off

Six months later… Production is stable, but the intended improvements haven’t materialised.

🤔 In your experience, what was most likely missed?

Leadership alignment at site level?
Practical adoption across shifts and crews?
Change fatigue or competing priorities?
Contractor integration and accountability?
Feedback loops between site and head office?

I’m currently exploring this exact challenge with operations leaders and would genuinely value real-world perspectives from this group.

💬 What have you seen make — or break — execution on site?

In my experience on site, the element most likely missed is practical adoption across shifts and crews, specifically driven at the frontline supervisory level.

When a system stalls six months post-go-live, it usually comes down to three operational realities:

1. Treating Go-Live as the Finish Line: Project teams often celebrate rollout sign-off and training completion as the end of the journey, but operational integration is where the real work actually begins.

2. Shift-to-Shift Variance: Day shift might follow the new process strictly, but if night shifts or weekend crews default to legacy habits, overall performance gains average out to simple flatline "stability."

3. Supervisory Buy-in: If shift foremen view the new process as an added administrative burden rather than a tool that simplifies their shift, compliance becomes a passive box-checking exercise rather than active process optimization.

What breaks execution:

Measuring success only through lagging production figures (end-of-month tonnage/recovery) rather than daily process adherence.

What makes execution:

Embedding the new workflow directly into the daily shift handover routine.
Tracking leading behavioral KPIs on shift boards.
Empowering shift supervisors as the primary owners and coaches of the new process.

Great topic, Portia—it’s a bridge every operations team eventually has to cross .

You need to be a member of Mining Industry Professionals to add comments!

Join Mining Industry Professionals

Comments

Mwamba Chanda October 1, 2026 15:06
In my experience on site, the element most likely missed is practical adoption across shifts and crews, specifically driven at the frontline supervisory level.

When a system stalls six months post-go-live, it usually comes down to three operational realities:

1. Treating Go-Live as the Finish Line: Project teams often celebrate rollout sign-off and training completion as the end of the journey, but operational integration is where the real work actually begins.

2. Shift-to-Shift Variance: Day shift might follow the new process strictly, but if night shifts or weekend crews default to legacy habits, overall performance gains average out to simple flatline "stability."

3. Supervisory Buy-in: If shift foremen view the new process as an added administrative burden rather than a tool that simplifies their shift, compliance becomes a passive box-checking exercise rather than active process optimization.

What breaks execution:
- Measuring success only through lagging production figures (end-of-month tonnage/recovery) rather than daily process adherence.
What makes execution:
- Embedding the new workflow directly into the daily shift handover routine.
- Tracking leading behavioral KPIs on shift boards.
- Empowering shift supervisors as the primary owners and coaches of the new process.
Great topic, Portia—it’s a bridge every operations team eventually has to cross .

This reply was deleted.

Welcome to the Forum - posts for discussion