Are we getting enough ‘T’ into our geoscientists?

D Sims1, J Pocoe2 and L Puha3

1.FAusIMM(CP), MAIG. Director, DSC Geoscience, Bolwarra NSW 2320, dalesims@tpg.com.au

2.MAusIMM, Director, James Pocoe Consulting, Ascot QLD 4007,
james@jamespocoeconsulting.com.au
3.SAusIMM, University of Newcastle, Callaghan NSW 2308, Laidlaw.Puha@uon.edu.au

ABSTRACT
‘T-shaped’ people have both a deep understanding of their core profession / specialisation areas
and a broad appreciation of the lateral topics and issues that relate to the upstream and downstream
interactions of their roles and responsibilities. In geoscience ‘T-shaped’ people are professionals
who have understanding that spans lateral disciplines so their core expertise can be used to optimise
value chain outcomes from exploration to final market. Development of these professional skills is
important, particularly early career exposure to interdisciplinary interaction that has the potential to
be of significant benefit building the foundational understanding to underpin a productive career.
An on-line survey was conducted to investigate the interaction of geoscientists with lateral disciplines
during the first five years of their career experience. The 418 respondents to the survey spanned a
60-year window of professional experience with a high proportion of respondents for the last 45
years. The survey is considered to be a reasonably representative cross section of industry
geoscience professionals.
The data collected indicates that in general early career interdisciplinary interactions with lateral
professions in the mining value chain have not significantly increased over the decades spanned by
the survey. This is despite significantly increased participation in employer graduate programs over
those years.
Interactions continue to occur at around the same rates as over the last 25 years. This represents a
significant opportunity to the industry in professional development. Addressing it will require focussed
and sustained attention from the minerals sector at a high level, from early career professionals
themselves and from their supporting management.

INTRODUCTION
In general geoscientists undertake tertiary education around the core disciplines of geology,
geochemistry or geophysics, potentially with some exposure to lateral disciplines at university or
during vacation work before seeking entry to the workforce.
Optimising the mining value chain requires interaction between the ‘silos’ of professional disciplines.
Individuals can be expected to contribute more to the value when they possess an understanding of
the needs and opportunities at each stage along the chain. Interaction between disciplines can be
directed through a management or reporting structure, yet true appreciation and understanding is
usually only built when personal interaction occurs between professional disciplines and their
respective roles and activities. Appreciation between disciplinary areas of expertise is usual
developed informally through experience opportunities in the workplace over a long-term career, yet
these opportunities can be fast tracked through a deliberate approach to provide such exposure
early in a graduates’ career.
Within human resources and job recruitment activities the concept of the ‘T-shaped’ person is used
to describe the degree of core discipline and interdisciplinary competency a professional possesses.
The vertical bar of the ‘T’ represents the depth of skills and expertise in the core area of expertise
with the horizontal bar representing the ability to collaborate across disciplines and apply knowledge
in areas of expertise other than their own (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-shaped_skills). The ‘T-
shaped’ person metaphor is suggested to be a useful approach when considering the professional
development and competency of geoscientists including minerals industry professionals.

Mining Geology 2019 / Perth, WA, 25-26 November 2019 379

This paper seeks to investigate trends in interdisciplinary interaction for mining geoscientists over
time through an online survey by reviewing the degree of interdisciplinary interaction professionals
receive in their first five years of work in industry. By examining responses from professionals who
started their careers through different time periods over the last 60 years we test the hypothesis that
we are getting more ‘T’ into geoscientists through time.
We also review the public documentation from graduate geoscience employers to investigate which
companies recognise the benefits of such interdisciplinary exposure in early career geoscience
training and hence embed it in their graduate programs.

EARLY CAREER DEVELOPMENT

Previous investigation of training and development of early career geoscientists (Davis, Lonie and
Shepherd, 2011) considered that the boom and bust cycle of the mining industry over the prior 50
years had not led to a diminished standard of training, but rather an increase in the level of
responsibility allocated to early career geoscientists through this period, adding significant workload
to early career geoscience roles. Along with the workload increase there was a reduced level of
access to additional support with early career geoscientists often asked to perform tasks with little
or no training or being told how to undertake a task rather than why the process needed to be done
a certain way. There was a correlation of better training with larger companies (plus 100 employees)
and benefits evident in structured training programs.
Although this prior survey did not specifically investigate the interdisciplinary opportunities for
graduates, there was a clear focus on training being within each professional’s core discipline in the
study. To build on this work a specific interdisciplinary interaction investigation was needed.

SURVEY DESIGN
So how to test for trends in interdisciplinary interaction? Beyond anecdotal stories or personal
exposure to workplace interactions, gathering meaningful data requires a broader approach than
direct person to person contact. A survey into the professional geoscience pool was required and
contact was made with the 2011 paper’s authors to gain advice on the process and to leverage their
experience in design and analysis.
The survey was designed to investigate the following questions and raise opportunity for comment:
What year did you commence your industry experience, where, and in what commodity?
What were the roles you worked in for your first five years? Was that experience continuous?
What roles do you work in now?
Were you on a graduate program? For how long and was it of benefit?
What was the company type and size during that early career experience?
What was the frequency of interaction with other disciplines in that five-year period?
Was the value of such interaction to you or the business made clear to you at the time?
Did you undertake technical visits to other business areas or host visits to your area?
Were you seconded to a different role or department in your five-year graduate period?
With the benefit of hindsight how well did that first five years of experience establish skills for
your career through both interacting with other disciplines and developing your core
discipline? Looking back is there value in interdisciplinary interaction early in a career?
Do you have additional comments?
Answer options were structured to allow a five-level range of responses where appropriate. Some
questions also allowed open text commentary or ‘other’ text responses.
The online survey was released via the AIG website for public access and ran between 3-31st July
2019 with supporting advertising through the AusIMM and social media.

Mining Geology 2019 / Perth, WA, 25-26 November 2019 380

SURVEY PARTICIPANTS

Demographics
Responses were collected from 418 individuals with experience levels ranging up to 60 years.
Approximately 70 percent of respondents had commenced industry experience in the last 35 years
(Figure 1). The cyclicity of the industry was reflected in the dips and peaks of the respondent
numbers with dips in respondent numbers from the mid 1970’s, mid 1980’s, early 2000’s and mid
2010’s which reflects the relatively low geoscientist intakes during significant downturns in the
industry. This gives support to the dataset being a reasonable sub-sample of geoscientists
particularly from around 1980 onward. The survey respondents included some people who had left
the industry.
Around 10 percent of the respondents had experienced a significant career break during their history
with an average gap around 15 percent of their total career span. Almost 30 percent of respondents
had experienced an interruption within their first five years of experience, with most experiencing a
two year or shorter gap. However around seven percent of respondents had experienced a gap of
two to five years or longer. The survey failed to ask people how long it took them to enter industry
after graduation although comments recorded showed that it can be a matter of years in some
situations during severe downturns.

What year did you start working in geoscience?

18

16

14

12

10

0
1958
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016

Figure 1: Starting year with industry (numbers of respondents)

Nearly 80 percent of respondents had commenced employment in the minerals or metals sector,
with the remainder in the coal / coal seam gas, oil and gas or government / research sectors. Over
75 percent commenced work with a Bachelor/Honours degree, 14 percent with a Master’s degree,
six percent with a Doctorate, and with the remainder holding an alternative level of qualification.
Location of employment for the initial five years was in order of WA (34 percent), Overseas (19
percent), QLD (16 percent), NSW (13 percent) with the remainder in VIC, SA, ACT, NT and TAS in
diminishing amounts. The nearly 20 percent of overseas graduate experience was not expected by
the authors and reflects the evolving diversity of the Australian minerals industry workforce which
should have been anticipated and accommodated. Thankfully several comments were registered
pointing out this shortcoming and suggesting that the survey should have been less ‘Aussie-centric’
to better investigate aspects of overseas experience.

Mining Geology 2019 / Perth, WA, 25-26 November 2019 381

Respondents dominantly worked for the mine or lease owner in their early careers (80 percent) with
subordinate amounts working with consultants/contractors (10 percent) and the remainder within
government or academia. Over 60 percent worked for companies with over 100 employees.

Work Roles
Respondents’ first five years of experience (Figure 2) could be broadly grouped into value chain
sectors:
Exploration roles for 42 percent of responses (exploration, geophysics, research, data
science);
Mining roles for 48 percent of responses (open cut or underground mining, grade control,
modelling, resource development, geotechnical, hydrogeology, environmental, consulting);
and
Other supporting roles for 10 percent of responses (government, other)
Within this allocation, data management and field technicians / offsiders were proportioned equally
between exploration and mining.
Around 60 percent of respondents undertook site-based roles for greater than two years duration in
their five-year early career period with 25 percent of respondents spending less than one year on
site.
Respondents were able to nominate multiple work roles for their first five years but not required to
proportion the time in each role and so this distribution is interpreted to be indicative only. The
approximately equal spread between exploration and mining allows some comparisons between
these internal divisions. Overall, the respondent pool is interpreted as an adequately representative
cross section of industry geoscientists by background.

Areas of geoscience roles over the first five years

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0

Figure 2: Geoscience roles in the first five years – orange is exploration,

green is mining, blue is support and yellow shared.

Graduate scheme participation

Around 20 percent of respondents participated in formal graduate programs with their employers.
Program durations were dominantly two years in duration, ranging from six months to three years or
more.

Mining Geology 2019 / Perth, WA, 25-26 November 2019 382

When asked if the program provided opportunity for different professional experiences around 35
percent of graduate program participants felt they received a broad range of experiences, 45 percent
had some variation in experience with 20 percent gaining only a limited range of experience.
Around half of those with some or limited variation in graduate experience had joined the industry
since the mid-2000’s while two thirds of respondents with broad experience commenced in industry
pre-2000.
Participation in graduate schemes by respondents has been steadily increasing decade on decade
although the 2000’s saw a slowing of the rate of increase, likely reflecting the downturn mid 2000’s,
the global financial crisis and depletion of people who have departed the industry (Figure 3).

Graduate Scheme Participants

30

25

20
Respondents

15

10

0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Decade

Figure 3: Graduate scheme participants by decade

Over 85 percent of graduate scheme participants thought that variation in experience was of benefit
to their professional development during the early stage of their careers.

INTERDISCIPLINARY INTERACTION
The objective of the survey was to investigate the level of interdisciplinary interaction in early career
roles and to examine potential changes in interdisciplinary interaction through time as well as the
overall ‘state of play’.
Question 16 in the survey asked people to rate their frequency of interaction within their first five
years of experience between different lateral disciplines on a scale of daily, weekly, monthly,
annually, never or not applicable. A matrix examining the frequency of these responses was
developed to allow comparison of responses over the full timespan of the survey (Figure 4).
Not surprisingly the daily interactions of around 60 percent of respondents with exploration staff and
drilling, mining or assay contractors and the 20-30 percent of respondents having daily interactions
with production mining engineers and mine planners are reasonably expected. Similarly, weekly or
monthly interactions of 25-30 percent of respondents with process metallurgists, resource modellers,
geotechnical engineers, safety professionals, senior management and consultants are also as
reasonably expected.
Yet there is a broad spread of a sizable number of respondents (between 20-60 percent) who had
no interactions at all with mining engineers, metallurgists, geotechnical engineers and a wide range
of lateral disciplines such as hydrogeologists, environmental scientists, community or commercial
professionals. Comparing this to the number of respondents who consider such interactions may
have been ‘not applicable’ to their role we have some sizable gaps in certain areas of interaction.

Mining Geology 2019 / Perth, WA, 25-26 November 2019 383

 In your first 5 years of experience how often did you
professionally interact with:
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00% Daily
30.00% Weekly
20.00% Monthly
10.00% Annually
0.00% Never
N/A

Figure 4: Interdisciplinary interaction frequency entire timespan (percent of respondents)

Interaction value awareness

One comment from Davis, Lonie and Shepherd (2011) was that graduates were often told how to do
certain tasks rather than why the tasks are performed. Question 17 in the survey asked if participants
had the value of the interdisciplinary interactions made clear to them at the time of occurrence from
either the perspective of value to the business or value to their own professional development.
Figure 5 shows the responses received from 97 percent of survey participants where, although the
answer is dominantly yes there is still 30-50 percent of respondents answering no over a wide range
of disciplines. Being exposed to a task or interaction without understanding why it is undertaken
creates a lost opportunity for deeper learning in the developing professional.
On a potentially positive note around 50 percent of the respondents were given a change of role or
worked for another department over their first five years’ experience period. Around 20 percent of
respondents reported a role change for a period of one or more years.
Part of building interdisciplinary interaction is visiting the lateral professionals in their workplace to
review and discuss their issues and challenges. This helps to identify areas where small amounts of
added communication may be able to deliver substantial functional benefits in the mining value chain
through appreciation of others’ problems and recognising opportunities for improvement.
Respondents were asked to reflect on their visits to other work areas (Figure 6). The data shows
early career geoscientists are sucessful at technically visiting other work areas such as the assay
lab or processing plant. However we don’t often see reciprocation of the opportunity to the lateral
professionals such as assay laboratory or processing plant staff. Exploration and mining geoscience
professionals also interact frequently between each other.
Training on interdisciplinary benefit is indicated to be largely informal, echoing the findings of the
prior study on new starter training in general (Davis, Lonie and Shepherd, 2011). Visits to other sites
or attendance at conferences for core disciplines are well supported yet having an opportunity to
attend another discipline’s conference is rare. These observations no doubt reflect the graduates’
direct management support to ensure they obtain skills and development in core areas while lateral
discipline learning may be seen as a continuing but secondary opportunity.

Mining Geology 2019 / Perth, WA, 25-26 November 2019 384

 Was the value of these interactions made clear to you at the
time of occurrence?
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00% Yes
20.00% No
10.00%
0.00%

Figure 5: Interdisciplinary interaction value explained at occurrence?

Apart from getting/giving a local induction to these areas did

you undertake;
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
Yes
10.00%
No
0.00%
NA

Figure 6: Visits to other work areas

Mining Geology 2019 / Perth, WA, 25-26 November 2019 385

INTERDISCIPLINARY INTERACTION THROUGH TIME
Examination of interdisciplinary interaction through time required modification of the survey’s raw
data, which collected interaction frequency data in qualitative categories (daily, weekly, monthly,
annually, never, N/A). Categories were converted into a continuous variable that reflected the relative
frequency numerically. An Interaction Frequency Score was generated to represent the frequency
of interactions (Table 1).
Table 1: Interaction Frequency Score

Frequency Category Interaction Frequency

Score
Daily 260
Weekly 52
Monthly 12
Annually 1
Never / N/A 0

Data was converted and compiled by career starting year for all respondents with the interaction
frequency score normalised by the number of respondents in each year to get an average value that
was not biased by the number of respondents. Data trends were plotted to examine changes in
interaction frequency score through time by grouped or individual disciplines.
Initially two broad divisions were made to assess total interaction frequency for either exploration or
mining role groupings (Figure 2). Plotted data had a high degree of noise year to year, perhaps due
to small number of respondents in some years, and a moving average was applied to show
underlying trend.
Trends are subtle. Amongst professionals whose initial role was in exploration (Figure 7) there is a
slight upward trend over the 50 years of data with a near doubling in interaction frequency. The dip
around the early 2000’s downturn is clear. Amongst professionals whose initial role was in mining
(Figure 8) a weak positive trend exists, and the rate of interaction is essentially unchanged since the
1990’s.

Exploration role in first 5 years (Year weighted Interactions)

2000 50
1800 45
Interaction Frequency Score

Number of respondents

1600 40
1400 35
1200 30
1000 25
800 20
600 15
400 10
200 5
0 0
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016

Year started Geoscience career

Respondents Interaction Frequency Score 5 per. Mov. Avg. (Interaction Frequency Score)

Figure 7: Exploration Interaction Frequency Score

Mining Geology 2019 / Perth, WA, 25-26 November 2019 386

 Mining role in first 5 years (Year weighted Interactions)
2000 50
1800 45
Interaction Frequency Score

Number of respondents
1600 40
1400 35
1200 30
1000 25
800 20
600 15
400 10
200 5
0 0
1958
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
Year started Geoscience career
Respondents Interaction Frequency Score 5 per. Mov. Avg. (Interaction Frequency Score)

Figure 8: Mining Interaction Frequency Score

Given the increase in graduate scheme participation discussed above it appears that only minor
advances in interdisciplinary interaction are occurring through time within mining geoscience
although exploration is showing a slight positive trend.
If we examine specific discipline interactions through time (to Figure 14) the generally flat overall
trends from the above graphs are reinforced. The major areas of interaction increase since the early
1990’s has been with safety professionals, along with slight upswings in interaction frequency rates
with resource modellers and geotechnical engineers. Interestingly, interactions with what might be
considered ‘new’ disciplines such as geometallurgists and data scientists date back to the 1960s.

Figure 9: Interaction Frequency Rate - Exploration and Contractors (drilling, mining, assay)

Mining Geology 2019 / Perth, WA, 25-26 November 2019 387

 Figure 10: Interaction Frequency Rate - Production and Planning Engineers, Metallurgists

Figure 11: Interaction Frequency Rate - Resource Modellers, Geotechnical Engineers

and Environmental Scientists

Figure 12 Interaction Frequency Rate - Community professionals, Safety and Consultants

Mining Geology 2019 / Perth, WA, 25-26 November 2019 388

 Figure 13: Senior site and Corporate Management, Commercial

Figure 14: Geometallurgists, Hydrogeologists and data scientists

WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT

Respondents were asked to reflect, with the benefit of hindsight, on how well their first five years of
industry experience prepared them for their future career.
In dealing with other professional disciplines along the mining value chain around 70 percent found
that their early career experience prepared them adequately or better for their later experiences.
Around 20 percent thought they were somewhat inadequately prepared with about 10 percent
reflecting they were very inadequately prepared.
From the perspective of preparation for their own core career around 80 percent felt adequately
prepared or better, 14 percent somewhat inadequately prepared and 6 percent very inadequately
prepared.
With nearly one fifth of respondents feeling somewhat unprepared for their ongoing career in dealing
with other disciplines there is still significant opportunity to improve our support for early career
professional development in these areas.
When asked if there is value in early career professions having experience outside their specific field
through interdisciplinary interaction, 95 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed.

CURRENT GRADUATE PROGRAMS

A desktop review was undertaken of 16 major and mid-tier mining and resources companies
operating in Australasia to investigate the stated extent of interdisciplinary interaction as part of their
graduate programs. Websites and promotional materials were investigated to gather insight into

Mining Geology 2019 / Perth, WA, 25-26 November 2019 389

graduate program design. Although specific reference to interdisciplinary interaction is generally
absent given the focus on attracting people to work in their core discipline as graduates, there are
clear opportunities where graduates can leverage networking and workplace exposure opportunity
to build such interdisciplinary understanding.
Events and opportunities such as centralised corporate company inductions, provision of a personal
mentor, the ability to work at multiple sites and time allocation to working in other departments are
all positives for developing exposure to other disciplines.
In general, only around one third of the companies reviewed have clearly useful information listed
regarding the above aspects of their graduate programs. Another third has little or no data about
their graduate programs although refer to them in media releases or job listings. Data can be
considered vague, difficult to find or non-existent for most companies and hence conclusions can
only be considered indicative.
Of the 16 companies surveyed around 60 percent offered a corporate level induction and or a
personal mentor from within the company. Around 70 percent included opportunities for working at
multiple sites during the program and approximately the same proportion flagged opportunities to
work in other departments.

CONCLUSIONS
‘T-shaped’ people have deep core discipline expertise as well as broad interdisciplinary
understanding. This knowledge assists them in recognising how their activities and outputs can
optimise value chain outcomes.
In this paper we have approached the question on whether we are getting enough ‘T’ into our industry
geoscientists by collecting and examining survey data specifically looking at the first five years of
industry experience.
The survey data indicates that there has been no significant increase in early career geoscientist
exposure to lateral disciplines over the last 40 years despite a steady increase in graduate scheme
participation, and clear recognition amongst professionals that interdisciplinary interactions are of
value.
Through the nearly 8,000 words of comment left by respondents some recurring messages emerge;
Professionals are responsible for their own development – you are the person to make it
happen so don’t rely on management or systems which may or may not have your best
interests at heart. Changing your role is important to gain interdisciplinary exposure.
Interdisciplinary interaction happens all through your career. The first five years is important
but not critical. Focus on your core discipline as a priority but always strive to understand your
suppliers and customers better – even in those daily or weekly meetings.
Seek out experience however you can find it – old hands and people who have been there
before are of great assistance. No one has all the answers so absorb and filter for yourself.
Help those coming in as well.
Company size and market conditions make experience opportunities vary significantly. There
are no strict rules to optimise opportunity, but good managers make a difference.
Being an early career geoscientist is generally intensely hard work. Some people find it
rewarding while others feel that have been taken advantage of. Some people think things are
getting better, some think they are getting worse. But remember we are all scientists - so focus
on quality and be driven by data, understanding and communication.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Our thanks are extended to all the respondents who completed the survey. We acknowledge the
inevitable shortcomings of the survey which attempted to cater for the full range of geoscience
experience in the global marketplace. Thanks to the respondents for the many comments pointing
out gaps in the survey related to people’s specific experience. The survey was intended to be
dominantly industry focussed so it is understandable some people felt excluded or alienated by the

Mining Geology 2019 / Perth, WA, 25-26 November 2019 390

orientation of aspects of content. No offence or exclusivity was intended but the scope and effort
were obviously finite.
Additionally we would like to thank Monica Davis and Sal Lonie for assisting us in survey design and
general advice, Fiona Czuczman and Wency Luong from MR Graphics for helping to set up the
online survey and to Andrew Waltho (current AIG President) for his support and both AIG for hosting
the survey on its website and advertising it, and the AusIMM for assisting to distribute links to the
survey. Reviewer’s comments are appreciated.

REFERENCES
Davis, M, Lonie, S and Shepherd, H, 2011. Training our New Starters - Between a Rock and a Hard Place, in Proceedings
8th International Mining Geology Conference, pp 83-86 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy:
Melbourne).

Mining Geology 2019 / Perth, WA, 25-26 November 2019 391