The War For TOP Talent Is A Real Thing, IT IS A WAR

Filling the vacancy is the easier part. Getting the appointment right is what matters.

I recently wrote an article about the massive number of new mining projects coming online and how that would translate to a massive amount of competition for executives.

I received much feedback, some of it suggesting I didn’t know what I was talking about. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t know everything about running a mining company in 2026. But I did run them a few years back before starting MPI, a mining-focussed recruitment, executive search and labour hire business, some 31 years ago.

 

Filling the vacancy doesn’t guarantee you success

My point here is that for all those who reckon I don’t know what I’m talking about, I don’t agree..

Yes, you are right, for the doubters out there, every vacancy you have WILL be filled. But that is not the point.

The issue is, are the people you are filling all your vacancies with, “making” you money (the progressive creative builders), “saving” you money (the conservative steady state maintainers) or “costing” you money (because they are out of their depth despite what their resume says)?

The cost of getting an appointment wrong

The issue I and my executive team are seeing right now is that because the competition for the TOP talent is white hot, critical roles are getting filled, but in many cases, poor search processes are leading to less-than-optimal appointments.

The question today should not be one of; how can I save $10,000, $20,000, or even $100,000, finding the right person, but more so, if you get it wrong the cost could be $1,000,000, $10,000,000, $100,000,000, or even billions.

 

Your shareholders deserve more than a mate’s recommendation

The mining world has changed and the investments being made today are massive. Spending a fraction of that ensuring you select the right talent, let’s face it, in what will be a small number of mission critical roles, could make the difference between creating or destroying enormous sums of shareholder wealth.

I don’t apologise to those who disagreed with me when I said that appointing your best mate to a role without seeing who else might be a better fit, is a mistake.

It IS a mistake.

Your best mate “might” be the best choice, but you owe it to your shareholders to ensure that.

Obviously, I have a vested interest in motivating companies to use a firm like mine to help with this process, but I am also a long-term active investor in the resource sector and want to see more projects get off the ground and succeed. Certainly not create investor and public apathy because of a high project development failure rate.

Now, if I haven’t completely upset you and you feel you want a highly specialised firm like MPI to assist with a key appointment or whole project recruitment, please reach out to me directly and I will refer you to one of our discipline experts to share their market focussed intelligence.

 

 

---

Related articles

The FIFO Creature Comforts Many Employers Overlook

• Wellbeing
• FIFO
• Leadership
• Newsroom

Is Your Board or Management Team Conflicted?

• Leadership
• Mining People Matters