Advisory services

Three authoritative services, one controlled sequence

Diagnose maturity, strengthen the evidence base, then close priority actions and reassess. Each service is scoped, evidence-led and bounded by clear exclusions - so you know exactly what you receive and what you do not.

S01 · Maturity baseline S03 · Evidence governance S05 · Action closure

How the services connect

A deliberate improvement pathway

Most clients start with a maturity baseline, then use the evidence and closure sprints to act on what it reveals. Each can also stand alone.

1

Diagnose

2

Prepare evidence

3

Close priority actions

4

Reassess

Full service scope

Every service, in detail

Each service below sets out the trigger, buyer, objective, activities, requested evidence, deliverables, decisions enabled and exclusions.

S01

Mine Maturity Baseline and 90-Day Improvement Roadmap

Typically 6-8 weeks

Common trigger

A new owner, board, lender or executive team needs one credible, evidence-backed view of how the mine is actually managed — and where to focus first.

Suitable buyer

Mine owner, general manager, board committee, or head of sustainability or risk.

Business problem

Management lacks a single evidence-backed view of operational and responsible-mining maturity and cannot confidently prioritise improvement.

Objective

Establish a bounded maturity baseline across the eight dimensions and convert findings into a prioritised, accountable 90-day roadmap.

Activities

  • Executive scoping and pathway selection
  • Controlled, indexed evidence request
  • Document review across the eight dimensions
  • Management interviews and a representative site walkthrough
  • Independent finding moderation
  • Action prioritisation and roadmap build

Requested evidence

  • Mine plans, permits and licence conditions
  • Risk registers and critical-control records
  • Incident, monitoring and performance data
  • Prior audit, review and action-tracking records

Deliverables

  • Executive maturity baseline
  • Eight-dimension scorecard with confidence and coverage
  • Evidence and control-gap register
  • Prioritised finding heatmap
  • 90-day improvement roadmap
  • Scope and limitations statement

Decisions enabled

  • Where to direct the next quarter of improvement effort
  • Which critical-control gaps require immediate attention
  • What to escalate to the board, lender or insurer
  • Whether specialist technical review is required

Indicative duration

Typically 6-8 weeks, depending on mine scale, access and evidence readiness.

Exclusions

  • Official rating or certification
  • Legal-compliance opinion
  • Engineering certification or design review
  • Statutory inspection
  • Guaranteed outcomes or regulator acceptance
S03

Evidence Governance and Assurance Readiness Sprint

Typically 4-6 weeks

Common trigger

Evidence is fragmented, inconsistently owned or hard to trace when the board, a lender, an insurer or an assurance provider comes to look.

Suitable buyer

Head of sustainability, risk or assurance; company secretary; or programme lead preparing for external scrutiny.

Business problem

Evidence is fragmented, inconsistently owned or difficult to trace for management and external review.

Objective

Build a controlled evidence architecture, clarify ownership and produce a readiness plan — without issuing a formal assurance opinion.

Activities

  • Evidence inventory across dimensions and controls
  • Requirement-to-evidence mapping
  • Owner workshops and accountability confirmation
  • Sample testing of evidence quality
  • Version, currency and retention review
  • Gap triage and readiness planning

Requested evidence

  • Existing evidence and document repositories
  • Requirement, obligation and commitment registers
  • Monitoring, verification and audit records
  • Data ownership and system-of-record information

Deliverables

  • Controlled evidence architecture
  • Evidence ownership matrix
  • Evidence-gap register with confidence ratings
  • Controlled evidence index
  • 60- or 90-day readiness plan

Decisions enabled

  • Whether the evidence base can withstand external scrutiny
  • Which evidence gaps must be closed before an audit or review
  • Who owns each critical body of evidence
  • How to structure evidence for repeatable reporting

Indicative duration

Typically 4-6 weeks, depending on repository scale and owner availability.

Exclusions

  • Assurance opinion
  • Public-report sign-off
  • Statutory compliance conclusion
  • Preparation of misleading or selective evidence
  • Software selection or implementation
S05

Priority Action Closure Sprint

Typically 8-12 weeks of cadence

Common trigger

High-priority actions keep slipping — overdue, weakly evidenced or repeatedly reopened — and leadership needs disciplined closure.

Suitable buyer

General manager, improvement or transformation lead, or risk owner accountable for action closure.

Business problem

High-priority actions remain overdue, weakly evidenced or repeatedly reopened.

Objective

Convert a stalled action list into a disciplined portfolio with clear ownership, dependencies and closure evidence that holds.

Activities

  • Action validation and de-duplication
  • Root-cause and dependency review
  • Owner workshops and commitment setting
  • Weekly closure cadence and blocker escalation
  • Closure-quality challenge and verification
  • Progress reporting to leadership

Requested evidence

  • Current action and corrective-action registers
  • Prior audit and review findings
  • Closure evidence and verification records
  • Dependency, resource and owner information

Deliverables

  • Validated action portfolio
  • Closure sprint plan
  • Decision and blocker log
  • Closure-evidence standard
  • Leadership progress dashboard

Decisions enabled

  • Which actions are genuinely closed and effective
  • Where blockers require leadership intervention
  • How to prevent repeat findings from reopening
  • What evidence standard closure must meet in future

Indicative duration

Typically 8-12 weeks of cadence, scaled to the size of the action portfolio.

Exclusions

  • Certifying statutory closure
  • Engineering remediation or design work
  • Assuming management accountability
  • Guaranteed regulator acceptance
  • Specialist technical sign-off

Common questions before we start

The questions these services answer

Where do we stand?

How reliably is the mine managed across all eight dimensions, and where are the real control weaknesses - not just the documented ones?

Can our evidence withstand scrutiny?

If a board, lender, insurer or assurance provider looked closely, would our evidence be traceable, owned and current?

Why do actions keep reopening?

Why do high-priority actions slip or close without proof, and how do we make closure stick?

How they relate

Sequenced, but not locked

S01 gives the whole-mine picture and priorities. S03 strengthens the evidence base so findings - and future reporting - hold up. S05 drives the highest-priority actions to verified closure. Reassessment then tests whether improvements are sustainably effective against a frozen baseline.

You can begin with any one of them, but the sequence exists because a baseline usually reveals exactly where evidence and closure discipline are weakest.

Next step

Not sure which service fits?

A discovery discussion is the quickest way to work out whether a baseline, an evidence sprint or an action-closure sprint is the right starting point for your mine.

Arrange a discovery discussion

Independent advisory work only. Conclusions are limited to the agreed scope, evidence and sampling, and may require specialist and jurisdiction-specific review. This is not an official rating, certification, legal-compliance opinion or guarantee of future performance.