From 2006 In the year, the State Council issued the “Decision on Strengthening Geological Work” (Guofa [ 2006 ] 4 Since No. ), to 2010 The implementation of a new geological exploration mechanism—“public welfare first, fund projects as a bridge, commercial projects following up, integrated exploration for comprehensive implementation, and rapid breakthroughs”—and then to “ 3 Achieved major breakthroughs in geological exploration and mineral discovery this year, 5 Achieve a major breakthrough in mineral exploration this year, 8 To 10 “Re-shaping the landscape of mineral exploration and development” has led to an extensive discussion on reform and development in geological prospecting, as well as the ongoing transformation of the geological industry into enterprise-based entities. These changes—both ideological and institutional—have completely overhauled the previous management model for geological and mineral resource development, ushering geological prospecting into a brand-new paradigm that is better suited to the current evolving circumstances. The key manifestations of this shift include declining investment in geological exploration projects, intensifying competition, shrinking profits, and accelerating reform efforts. To achieve even better outcomes under these new conditions, the geological exploration industry must leverage its inherent strengths, integrate resources from various stakeholders, and implement exploration projects with the ultimate goal of achieving breakthroughs in mineral discovery. Project operations represent one of the critical factors for rapidly achieving such breakthroughs. However, once exploration work enters the commercial follow-up phase, the management structure of projects becomes increasingly diversified, making the original management model increasingly inadequate. Under these new circumstances, there is an urgent need to upgrade project management approaches. Based on the current operational status and existing challenges within the geological exploration industry, we will briefly discuss the new operational models for exploration projects under the current context and the key issues that need to be addressed.

　　I. Current Status of Geological Exploration Project Operations

　　Since the reform of localization for China’s geological exploration units, after years of enterprise-oriented management, these units have significantly enhanced their economic strength. Their industrial structures have been preliminarily established, their operational mechanisms have begun to take shape, and they have laid a certain foundation in terms of management. However, the overall institutional framework remains insufficiently flexible; various industries are small-scale and fragmented; and non-enterprise management models persist. These factors seriously hinder the sustainable and healthy development of geological exploration units. The operation of geological exploration projects—both public-interest and commercial—generally continues to follow the original management model: Upon receiving the project assignment and securing funding, a project team is formed to prepare the design, followed by fieldwork implementation, and finally the submission of a report. Under conditions of limited resources, project managers are tasked with overseeing and managing all aspects of the geological exploration project, which leaves the project unable to operate autonomously throughout its entire lifecycle—from decision-making to implementation. In some cases, managers fail to address issues that require attention while meddling in areas where they should not intervene, thereby slowing down the overall progress of the project.

　　II. Issues Existing in the Project’s Operation Process

　　( 1 ) Geological exploration units have a weak foundation and poor basic conditions. Having experienced a period of sluggishness in the geological sector, most such units suffer from a shortage of technical personnel and weak technical capabilities. At present, the financial situation of state-owned geological exploration units allows them only to sustain simple production activities, making it impossible for them to establish long-term, effective, and stable sources of revenue. Coupled with various historical debts and issues such as pension subsidies for employees, some geological exploration units have reached a point where their development is becoming unsustainable.

　　( 2 ) Geological exploration units suffer from a lack of coordinated reform and development, with inflexible mechanisms and project management that is predominantly reactive and defensive. Today, the geological exploration market is largely a seller’s market characterized by intense competition. To secure projects, geological exploration units continually lower their bid prices and, without adequately collecting and preparing the necessary original data, they hastily prepare tender documents or project initiation design plans. As a result, both the quality of project initiation designs and the final deliverables have significantly deteriorated.

　　( 3 ) Projects generally focus on technical management while neglecting other factors. In the past, geological exploration project management has primarily emphasized aspects such as work progress and technical standards, lacking effective control over factors like project risks, project information, and project communication. Moreover, various relevant project data have not been systematically managed and optimized along a single, unified managerial dimension, thus preventing the full utilization of this information to inform and guide future geological management efforts.

　　( 4 ) The project is divided into multiple project teams, leading to a situation of multi-headed management. Given the broad scope of tasks involved in geological exploration projects, collaboration among specialists from various disciplines—including surveying, geology, hydrology, drilling, and laboratory analysis—is essential for successful completion. Traditionally, large-scale projects have been primarily undertaken by geological technicians, with surveying, hydrological, and drilling teams all playing supporting roles. However, each team operates under its own administrative structure, resulting in independent management systems that easily give rise to multi-headed management. Particularly when different stages of a project involve technical disagreements, unclear lines of responsibility and authority further exacerbate the problem, often leading to finger-pointing and bureaucratic delays—without a single commanding authority or impartial arbiter to provide unified direction.

　　( 5 ) The information channels among project teams are singular, and resource allocation across various categories is suboptimal. A widespread condition in the geological exploration industry is the scarcity of experienced technical personnel with mature technical expertise. Due to the varying nature of work and site-specific construction conditions at different stages of each project, the shortage of technical staff is particularly pronounced. Geological exploration units continue to manage operations on a per-project-team basis, with each team having a fixed staffing configuration. This approach lacks horizontal management that would facilitate the sharing and mutual supplementation of resources among teams, thus preventing the realization of optimal and best possible resource allocation.

　　In summary, due to the inherent imperfections in their institutional framework, the lack of coordinated reforms and development, and the long-term influence of previous institutional models, geological exploration projects at this stage exhibit uneven technical expertise among personnel. Project management still predominantly relies on a passive, traditional, inefficient, and extensive management approach, neglecting the multi-objective nature of project management and sustainable development planning, and thus failing to fully meet the diverse interests and demands of all stakeholders.

　　III. Characteristics of the New Model

　　Under the new circumstances, geological exploration units should remain confident and break away from traditional concepts of geological work. By establishing new mechanisms for geological prospecting, these units can achieve sustainable development. As an important source of revenue for geological exploration units, exploration projects must continuously improve their management levels and boost productivity, while also respecting the market’s role in resource allocation. Only then can they generate greater economic benefits. At the same time, it is crucial to place greater emphasis on environmentally friendly project execution. The so-called “new model” involves overcoming the contradictions and problems inherent in the conventional operational models of geological exploration projects, using the most optimal management systems and the most efficient collaborative capabilities to complete each stage of the project, thereby maximizing customer satisfaction and creating economic value. The project operation cycle—depending on the sequence of business processes and the specific nature of the work involved—can be specifically divided into the following stages: the project initiation and feasibility study phase, the design and review phase, the field implementation phase, the report preparation and review phase, and finally, the project closure phase (see figure). 1 Flowchart of Geological Exploration Project Operations). The new operational model for the project varies in terms of the content and focus of work during different phases of the project cycle.