6.5 Common Practice Balances and Checks
75
specific questions to which factual answers can be provided as proof of conformance
with practice requirements.
Assessments and reviews differ from audits primarily to the extent that judgment,
based on relevant levels of experience and professional qualifications, including
quantitative analyses of some kind, is used to evaluate the effectiveness of designs or
practices in achieving desired outcomes. For the purposes of this present discussion
a review is defined as a formal examination of something with the objective of
verifying attainment of a required performance level and, if not so, identifying the
need for improvement. In this context, assessment is defined as the process of making
a judgment about something based on analyses. Assessment is primarily a tool to
judge or quantify progress or lack thereof against an objective although possibilities
for improvement can also be a valuable outcome. In this last case the assessment is
used as a tool for risk informed decision making.
While the terminology used to describe a company’s assurance activities needs
better clarity, the effectiveness of any one activity depends on the establishment
of a clear understanding of what is expected, what the main issues are and what
qualifications are needed from the audit, review or assessment team. Finally the
methodology used has to be proven effective and reliable in generating the required
support.
The judgment and experience of a team must be matched with the objectives
of the assurance activity. Judgment and experience levels will increase in inverse
proportion to the availability of detailed protocols. Judgment and experience levels
will be especially important when examining critical control procedures and practices
related to high consequence risks. The quality of any given verification activity will
always depend on the experience and judgment of the verifier and the quality of the
verification protocol and applied methodologies.
6.5.2 Assurance Activities
Mining companies vary considerably in their approach to assurance activities. Larger
companies have started to internalize some of their requirements for assurance
through the establishment of corporate internal audit functions that are described
as being independent. Such companies may also internalize technical and operating
expertise for the development of corporate standards, to provide support for individual operations and to provide support for and be involved in internal assurance
programs.
Smaller companies, which do not have the resources to establish a corporate
internal audit function or to provide technical and operating guidance, have to rely
on external providers to meet their policy requirements. For example, assurances
related to an ISO 14001 (2015) management system are available from professional
auditors and assurances related to technical design can be provided by geotechnical
engineers. MAC members benefit from the assurance protocols and providers as part
of their Towards Sustainable Mining (MAC TSM 2017) program.
75
specific questions to which factual answers can be provided as proof of conformance
with practice requirements.
Assessments and reviews differ from audits primarily to the extent that judgment,
based on relevant levels of experience and professional qualifications, including
quantitative analyses of some kind, is used to evaluate the effectiveness of designs or
practices in achieving desired outcomes. For the purposes of this present discussion
a review is defined as a formal examination of something with the objective of
verifying attainment of a required performance level and, if not so, identifying the
need for improvement. In this context, assessment is defined as the process of making
a judgment about something based on analyses. Assessment is primarily a tool to
judge or quantify progress or lack thereof against an objective although possibilities
for improvement can also be a valuable outcome. In this last case the assessment is
used as a tool for risk informed decision making.
While the terminology used to describe a company’s assurance activities needs
better clarity, the effectiveness of any one activity depends on the establishment
of a clear understanding of what is expected, what the main issues are and what
qualifications are needed from the audit, review or assessment team. Finally the
methodology used has to be proven effective and reliable in generating the required
support.
The judgment and experience of a team must be matched with the objectives
of the assurance activity. Judgment and experience levels will increase in inverse
proportion to the availability of detailed protocols. Judgment and experience levels
will be especially important when examining critical control procedures and practices
related to high consequence risks. The quality of any given verification activity will
always depend on the experience and judgment of the verifier and the quality of the
verification protocol and applied methodologies.
6.5.2 Assurance Activities
Mining companies vary considerably in their approach to assurance activities. Larger
companies have started to internalize some of their requirements for assurance
through the establishment of corporate internal audit functions that are described
as being independent. Such companies may also internalize technical and operating
expertise for the development of corporate standards, to provide support for individual operations and to provide support for and be involved in internal assurance
programs.
Smaller companies, which do not have the resources to establish a corporate
internal audit function or to provide technical and operating guidance, have to rely
on external providers to meet their policy requirements. For example, assurances
related to an ISO 14001 (2015) management system are available from professional
auditors and assurances related to technical design can be provided by geotechnical
engineers. MAC members benefit from the assurance protocols and providers as part
of their Towards Sustainable Mining (MAC TSM 2017) program.