We build the vision from the operation up and from the strategy down, with a joint client and Stratalis team, and finish with a roadmap the business can fund.
A vision built only from the operation’s needs stays incremental. One built only from strategy or from technology trends does not survive contact with the mine. We work from up to four vantage points, and choose the mix to fit the vision required, the evidence available and how much time the client’s technical and operating teams can give.
An inside-out look at what is already under way across R&D, technology, innovation and operations. We review roadmaps, investments and projects and interview broadly across the business to build one picture of where the company is already heading. It sets a baseline for Horizons 1 and 2 and asks the least of the client’s teams.
An outside-in look at what is existing and emerging in the market, the visions of others and the technology clusters forming around mining. External technology scanning and worksessions test what this could mean for a specific asset, mainly in Horizons 2 and 3. This is where our Futurecasting® and deep technology foresight work comes in.
The most demanding work, and the most grounded. We typically build an end-to-end value-chain or operating-area map, work with operations and technical leads on their greatest pain points and ambitions, prioritize them by value, then look inside and outside the industry for solutions. We take the options back to operations, select them on feasibility, desirability and timing, and assemble them into roadmaps. This is what makes a vision defensible at the operating level.
Top-down, working from targets rather than technologies. It shows the CEO, Asset President or Board what the technology strategy is and how investment aligns with corporate strategy, quantitative metrics and required capabilities, so the vision is anchored in measurable value rather than technology for its own sake.
| Vantage point | The question it answers | Direction | Horizons fed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lived Reality | What are we already building toward? | Inside-out | Horizons 1 and 2 |
| Deep Future | What could mining be? | Outside-in | Horizons 2 and 3 |
| Technical and Operations Need-Based | What does the operation require to succeed? | Needs-based, bottom-up, technically and asset led | Horizons 1 to 3 |
| Strategic Outcomes-Based | What outcomes must the future deliver? | Top-down, from strategy | All horizons |
Source: Stratalis.
We do this work with a joint client and Stratalis team, through a steady cadence of inquiries, worksessions and facilitated workshops. The sequence is the same on every engagement. Where the effort goes is decided at scoping.
How the operation runs today, end to end, and where the bottlenecks sit.
The measurable outcomes the vision must deliver.
The ten-to-twenty-year view, framed as what would have to be true.
Options by horizon and value-chain segment, prioritized.
The executive story and the early implications for capabilities and work.
Source: Stratalis.
A kick-off aligns objectives, ways of working and expected outcomes. We then review what already exists: the current technology strategy and drivers of value, frameworks and roadmaps, pain-point hypotheses and draft metrics, known gaps and bottlenecks, enablers and dependencies, and the stakeholder landscape from operations to digital to partners. A focused data request follows, and we summarize the findings into themes that key stakeholders confirm before visioning begins.
We set the targets and strategic outcomes the vision has to deliver, so it rests on measurable value rather than technology. Where a strategy and targets exist, we confirm them and test what performance would have to be true of the asset. Where they do not, we facilitate agreement on goals, principles and, where possible, quantitative measures, combining site-level needs with corporate goals.
We develop the ten-to-twenty-year view across automation, people and roles, infrastructure, operational and information technology, and energy and sustainability. The joint team refines a draft future operating model in a vision-setting and design-thinking workshop, pushed past familiar solutions. Broad participation from operations, technology, digital and strategy keeps the vision shared and aligned with work already under way.
We assemble the enabling technologies, designs and capabilities by horizon and value-chain segment, drawing on internal knowledge and, where it adds value, an external scan sized to the question. Each option is described by what it is, when it will be mature and its directional cost and productivity impact, then prioritized on time, impact and risk. Quick wins sit alongside longer-horizon options, and the palette can be built as a live framework that moves technologies as assumptions change.
We bring the vision, the logic for value, the palette and the open uncertainties together in an executive presentation, with one-page technology profiles where useful. Our Backcast© method then works back from the vision to what has to change first in capabilities and work. We shape the storyline with the asset, the technology groups and other key parties.
The sequence stays the same. How much work goes into each part does not. We settle these questions with clients before we start, because they decide which kind of vision is needed, where the effort goes and how long it takes.
| Question | Lighter, faster | Deeper, more defensible |
|---|---|---|
| What is the primary output? | A narrative for the business. More weight on targets and the narrative, though a defensible story still needs technical and financial work. | A technically led vision and asset roadmap. More weight on the value-chain baseline and the technology palette, led by operating needs. Takes many months to do right. |
| Whole enterprise or one asset? | Enterprise-level themes. Faster and lighter, but thematic. | A single asset, pit to port. Concrete, defensible and the strongest value-chain baseline. |
| How much external scanning? | Built largely from internal knowledge. | Structured scanning inside and outside the industry, for breadth of options and confidence in priorities. |
| Who is the customer for the vision? | A corporate technology office taking a view to the business. | An Asset President and a single asset, or the business as a whole. |
| What must it connect to? | The narrative for investors and the workforce. | Corporate strategy and operating targets, or the needs and bottlenecks of operations. |
| Principles or a full vision? | Guiding principles for technology choices. Faster. | A true future-state vision translated into requirements. Heavier and more durable. |
Source: Stratalis.
If you are weighing these choices now, a short conversation with one of our partners usually settles them. Arrange a discussion
Select a case to read the challenge, approach and outcome in full.
Talk to one of our partners about what your operation could become and how to scope the work.
Technology alone doesn’t prevent ground control incidents. Drawing on work across multiple mining companies, this paper sets out an integrated approach to technology scanning, prioritization and needs-based site assessment that produces operating-level roadmaps to mitigate critical risks, and shows how to bring sites along on the journey.
Fewer graduates, tighter regulation, retirements and new monitoring technologies are squeezing the supply of specialist technical talent. This paper lays out a repeatable process for building a capabilities development program that any mining organization can apply.
