Created by Wendy Ware.

Why better rock knowledge leads to more achievable plans — and how evolving data, shared understanding, and connected teams can close the gap between what is expected and what is delivered.

The cost of a mismatch

In mining, few things are more expensive than a plan that cannot be delivered.

It is a familiar story: production falls short of forecast, recovery underperforms, or blending goes sideways. Not because the team missed something—but because the rock didn’t behave the way the model said it would. And when that happens, the natural instinct is to fix it—reschedule, re-blend, re-target. But these reactive moves can compound the problem. Plans get stretched further, high-grade is brought forward, and safety or ESG trade-offs creep in. Before long, the deviation becomes systemic—not just a missed target, but a misaligned operation.

Often, the disconnect comes down to a gap between planning inputs and the underlying rock data they are based on. And that is not just a technical issue—it is a business one.

When data about the rock — its composition, texture, mineralogy, and process behaviour — are patchy, siloed, or outdated, the plan built from the data becomes vulnerable. The knock-on effects can ripple across tonnes, grades, schedules, budgets, and stakeholder confidence.

One of the most powerful ways to avoid this cascade is through better rock knowledge—not just more data, but decision-ready data that is trusted, scalable, and actionable.

To put this into perspective, consider a mid-sized copper operation in South America producing 200,000 tonnes of copper annually. A 1% uplift in recovery—just from closing the gap between what is planned and what is actually achieved—could yield an additional 2,000 tonnes of copper. At current prices, that is over USD 17 million per year in revenue. And when you factor in improved throughput, reduced rehandling, and better planning confidence, the total value uplift can easily exceed USD 35 million annually.

This is not just hypothetical — Datarock works with operations to help close this very gap. In one case, we supported a broader site initiative to align recovery expectations with how the rock was actually behaving in the circuit.

The operation had access to assayed copper (including sequential Cu), multi-element geochemistry, and flotation testwork. But like many sites, the datasets had been developed independently, using different spatial scales and sampling philosophies.

By helping integrate these inputs and improve domain resolution, we supported the development of a clearer, more predictive spatial model. This allowed the team to move toward recovery models that better reflected actual processing behaviour—spatially and temporally.

The outcome? More realistic short-term plans, fewer surprises, and greater alignment between what was forecast and what actually showed up in the plant.

While every site is different, the principle holds: when rock knowledge improves, so does recovery, throughput, and quality — and with it, risk is better managed and value is more consistently realised.

Planning in rock time: past, present, and future

One way to frame this is through the idea of “rock time” — how our understanding of the rock evolves across the lifecycle, and how that timing influences decisions.

In exploration, the focus is retrospective. We look back to understand how a deposit formed, identify patterns, and determine where to explore next. The aim is to build confidence over long timelines.

In operations, the focus shifts to the near and immediate future. It becomes about execution — knowing what is in the ground today, how it will behave, and how best to respond as conditions change.

This shift in horizon reflects a shift in mindset — from the open-ended, possibility-driven goals of discovery, to the delivery-driven priorities of operational teams. Yet these worlds often operate in isolation — fluent in different data, working to different cadences, and answering to different business outcomes.

The challenge is not just technical. It is temporal.

Across all horizons, plans work best when supported by data that evolves with them. That means collecting the minimum viable data to inform today’s decisions, while also anticipating what will be needed tomorrow—avoiding future bottlenecks. As new information emerges, models are refined and plans adapt in step.

This is where ideas like “value of information” come in: recognising that timely, targeted data adds disproportionate value when it prevents bad decisions—or enables good ones sooner.

It is a living, iterative process—almost Bayesian in nature—where our understanding of the rock improves with time, and so too does the confidence in what comes next.

These shifts are increasingly being recognised at a regulatory level. Proposed updates to the JORC Code place greater emphasis on early-stage project transparency and the importance of technical inputs in modifying factors—including geometallurgical data. The message is clear: decision-quality data needs to arrive earlier, and with more consistency, than ever before.

More than geomet

We are often asked whether this is geomet. And yes, in part — it is. But that is just one view.

Traditionally, geomet has focused on ore, recovery, and processing — often measured in financial terms. These are important, but they are not the whole story.

What is needed now is a broader, more inclusive approach to rock knowledge — one that supports technical confidence, cross-functional coordination, ESG foresight, and the agility to adapt. It is less about strict definitions, and more about building shared understanding for better decisions.

When there is a common, trusted view of how the rock behaves, everyone — from planners and geologists to metallurgists and operators — starts marching to the same beat. That kind of alignment strengthens integration, improves collaboration, enables more coordinated decisions across planning horizons, and unlocks considerable value for businesses.

Whether you call it geomet, OBK, or decision-ready rock knowledge, it is ultimately about creating clarity, consistency, and insight—right across the mining lifecycle.

Final word: do not let the rock surprise you

It is tempting to think the big wins come from flashy new tech, dramatic cost cuts, or silver-bullet solutions. But more often, they come from removing disconnects — between teams, datasets, and decisions — and from making better use of the data already at hand.

Smarter, more optimised use of existing rock data can unlock insights that improve planning, align teams, and reduce the surprises that cause plans to drift.

It helps us see the rocks not just as they were, but as they are — and as they will be.

That’s how better plans are made. That’s how value is delivered.

So, what does better rock knowledge mean for you? Is it about recovering more, reducing risk, strengthening plans — or something else entirely?

Either way, the opportunity starts by asking the right questions.

Let’s keep the conversation going.

Coming soon

This is the first in a series exploring how better rock knowledge supports more achievable decisions — across how we discover, define, operate, process, and rehabilitate in mining.

Next up: Is geomet still relevant? A look at the term everyone uses, but few define. We will unpack where the term came from, how it is used today, and why it continues to generate interest — and debate.