Australians
on the whole are not overly innovative and regularly fall below average in
measures of innovativeness across countries around the world. There is
little doubt that this contributes to poor equipment performance. I noted
a little while back where Dr Peter Lilley of CSIRO was lamenting the lack of
“transformational” R&D. I was staggered (although maybe I shouldn’t
have been) that the Minerals Down Under group has a budget of $100+ million per
year for R&D. Think about that for a minute. Over $100 million
per year and they can’t come up with some workable transformational
ideas? You have got to be kidding.
A
project which my company undertook was one of the outstanding engineering
projects which won Engineers Australia State awards and competed for National
Awards in Canberra recently. What a privilege to be amongst some truly
transformational engineering. Our project – Optidrag, had a budget of
$276,000 (thank-you to ACARP). Now Optidrag really is transformational
and is being embraced by a number of the major mining companies.
I
am sure this industry suffers a serious case of Myopia when it comes to
innovation. Here you have a project which is one of the outstanding
engineering projects in Australia in 2009, as judged by Engineers Australia,
and the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy rejected it as being
unsuitable for one of their Mining Conferences. Quite apart from the fact
that it is my project and I was prepared to fly across the country to present
it in Perth, how can a project recognised by the pre-eminent professional
engineers association in Australia as one of the outstanding engineering
outcomes in 2009 be not recognised by my esteemed colleagues in the mining
industry?
Sour
grapes? You are joking. I got to sit in Parliament House in
Canberra with the engineers who were recognised as having the most outstanding
projects in Australia in 2009. I happily saved my money and did not
attend the conference in Perth but I am distressed for the industry I work
in. I side with Dr Peter Lilley in so far as believing this industry
needs transformational change. However, I believe it is needed in
R&D, technology and attitudes.
The
biggest problem with research and development in Australia is they are too
focussed on the process rather than the outcome. Tick the boxes, get your
government money and if it costs more than budget or you don’t get an outcome
then so be it. Move on to the next project. Compare that with the
private sector. We are currently developing a new product. Exciting
and terrifying at the same time. We went to Westpac, cap in hand and
asked them to finance a shoestring budget. They took mortgages over our
properties, a fixed and floating charge over the business, personal guarantees
by the owners of the company (my wife and I) and security on our souls in case
we decide to depart this world (watch out - banks have contacts in high and low
places, although not too many above). If we can’t produce a product when
the money runs out we are screwed. If the product fails to sell we are
screwed. Despite our patent protection, if a big company steals the idea,
I can’t afford to fight it for 10 years in the courts – we are screwed.
If a Rio or BHP fund it they will rightly tie it up so not only does nobody
else get it, we also can’t do any further work on it. The research
organisations haven’t delivered and small people have incentive not to be
innovative.
Transformational
changes in technology don’t come along too often. You can think about
draglines, hydraulic shovels, etc as being major advances but they are few and
far between. The thing which concerns me is that sometimes ideas are not
advanced for the wrong reasons. Politics in our large mining companies
and our research institutions ensure some truly transformational ideas will
never see the light of day. Consider the following. After
presenting Rio Tinto's automation work to the Austmine conference in Brisbane
last May, Rio Tinto's head of Innovation, John McGagh, was asked how we, as
small, dynamic innovators could get our products in front of Rio Tinto.
His response was distressing. "Rio have people and resources working in
this area. If you have something of value to us, we will find
you." I really don't know where to go with that. I suppose it
is the golden rule; He who has the gold makes the rules.
I
have said much in recent weeks about transformational changes in attitudes
towards productivity. Productivity is largely about attitude. I
fear for Rio's investment in automation for this very reason. Attitude is
the key input into the differences between best practice operations and the
other 90%. Some have given up and accept mediocrity or pay contractors to
be mediocre or make huge investments in technology. Some mines and
contractors have grabbed the opportunity and have moved to fill the gap between
average and best practice performance. They are the companies you really
want to work for and with.
Graham Lumley
BE(Min)Hons, MBA, DBA, FAUSIMM(CP), MMICA, MAICD, RPEQ
No comments:
Post a Comment