Functional Model Health Assessment
A leadership read on how well Gold Fields understands, believes in and meets the four expectations of the Group operating model.
How to read the scores
The Health Score is the percentage of respondents who rated a statement 4 or 5 out of 5 — Agree or Strongly Agree. Like an NPS top-box, it counts conviction, not the midpoint of opinion.
A higher score means more of the leadership team believe an expectation is being met — a more conservative, action-oriented read than a simple average.
Three measures sit behind overall health: Understanding (do we grasp the expectations), Performance (will meeting them improve performance), and Alignment (do we meet them today, across the four expectations).
Executive Summary
The leadership team understands the operating model and believes in it — alignment to it across Group and operations is where the work sits.
Alignment across the four expectations
Each expectation is scored on the share of leaders who agree the team meets it today. The lowest-scoring expectations are where the gap-closure conversation should start.
Understanding & Alignment
"Leaders and teams understand and align to the intent and business objectives of the functional model."
The intent of the operating model is understood at the top of the house, but it thins out below the leadership layer and is read differently across Group functions and operations. Leaders want it translated into plain language tied to day-to-day decisions, with the "why" reinforced rather than re-explained. Regional interpretation varies enough that a shared, single articulation is the clear next step.
- Leaders understand the rationale, objectives, and intended benefits of the functional model.
- Functions and operations have a shared understanding of how the functional model is intended to operate.
- Leaders and teams can articulate business priorities and how their function or operation contributes to them.
- Leaders and teams understand the behaviours and ways of working required for the functional model to operate effectively.
Decision Making, Accountability & Working at Level
"Decision making, accountability, and authority at each organisational level support effective enterprise execution."
The lowest-scoring expectation. Decision rights between Group and operations are blurred, and too many decisions that sites could own are elevated. Leaders called for a refresh of the Delegation of Authority and explicit "decide at level" discipline, alongside removing duplication between the regional and Group layers. The underlying ask is trust — for the business to come to functions for support rather than work around them.
- Decision rights and accountabilities between functions and operations are defined, understood and accepted.
- Leaders operate at the level appropriate to their role and decisions are made at the right level rather than being unnecessarily elevated.
- Leaders and teams are empowered to act within their defined authority and feel confident doing so without seeking unnecessary approval.
- Enterprise priorities, risks, and trade-offs are addressed effectively through decision-making processes.
Coordination & Execution
"Functions and operations effectively coordinate to support enterprise execution."
The strongest of the four, and improving. Coordination works where interfaces and routines are made explicit — HSE and integrated planning were both cited as proof cases. It breaks down at the operations–Group handoff and when competing demands collide, where the team's fallback is to stand up a temporary routine until systems mature. Embedded, co-located function leads materially lift coordination wherever they are in place.
- Functions and operations view each other as responsive, effective and value-adding partners.
- Leadership routines support alignment, coordination, accountability, and execution across functions and operations.
- Cross-functional dependencies and interfaces are proactively identified and managed.
- Resources, capacity and priorities are managed collectively across functions to prevent bottlenecks and competing demands.
Leadership Behaviour & Culture
"Leadership behaviours, cultural norms, and reinforcement mechanisms support effective functional model ways of working."
Intent is positive and people connect well across the group, but habits don't yet match intent and senior leaders' shadows are felt widely. The team wants clearer agreement on the behaviours the model requires, more collective and less siloed problem-solving, visible accountability routines for the big issues, and ELT role-modelling — coaching leaders to solve at level rather than solving for them.
- Leaders consistently role model behaviours aligned to the functional model.
- Leaders have created an environment where people can raise concerns, flag issues, and escalate risks without fear.
- Performance conversations and recognition reinforce functional model behaviours.
- Leaders constructively challenge behaviours that undermine effective functional model ways of working.
Shared understanding and performance belief are in place. Alignment is the work.
The priority is to close the gap between performance belief and alignment — turning the lowest-scoring expectations, Decision Making and Leadership Behaviour, into the highest-value gap-closure actions for the operating model.
Definitions
Percentage of respondents who rated 4 or 5 of 5 — a conservative, action-oriented measure rather than a simple average.
How well leaders grasp the expectations and success factors that underpin the functional model.
Confidence that meeting these expectations will set the business up to deliver better performance.
How well the team believes the enterprise currently meets each of the four expectations. The core of the assessment.
Weighted average of the Understanding, Performance and Alignment health scores.
One of the four functional model success factors: Understanding & Alignment; Decision Making, Accountability & Working at Level; Coordination & Execution; Leadership Behaviour & Culture.
Actions register
| # | Action | Type | Priority | Owner | Status | Due |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Refresh the Group–Operations Delegation of Authority and publish "decide at level" guidance. | Action | High | Priya Iyer | Not Started | 31 Jul 2026 |
| 2 | Translate the operating model into plain-language "what it means for my site" briefs for the leadership layer. | Action | Medium | Priya Iyer | In Progress | — |
| 3 | Stand up a standing cross-functional interface routine for the operations–Group handoff. | Action | High | Priya Iyer | Not Started | 15 Aug 2026 |
| 4 | Agree the leadership behaviours that underpin the model and build them into performance conversations. | Action | Medium | Priya Iyer | Not Started | — |
| 5 | Map and de-risk the top cross-functional interfaces where execution stalls. | Action | Medium | Priya Iyer | Not Started | 31 Jul 2026 |
Participant priority actions
Verbatim responses — "What are the 2–3 highest priority actions that would improve the effectiveness of our operating model?"
- 01Land one clear articulation of the model and cascade the "why" — fewer slides, more conversations on site.
- 02Refresh the Delegation of Authority so decisions are made at level; stop elevating what operations can own.
- 03Define the Group-vs-operations accountabilities and remove the duplication between the two layers.
- 04Empower leaders to act — back them and only step in when it's genuinely needed.
- 05Agree the behaviours the model requires and have the ELT visibly role-model them.
- 06Make the cross-functional interfaces explicit — routines, owners and escalation for the handoffs that stall.
- 07Embed function leads into the operations so coordination is built in, not bolted on.
- 08Educate the broader workforce on what the model is, why it helps, and how to engage the functions.
- 09Solve the big issues collectively across silos, with visible accountability and a standing routine.