Newmont Data Cleansing Project Overview ECCMA International Cataloging Conference October 26, 2006

Newmont Data Standardization Overview Agenda Company & project overview Project approach Lessons learned Results & going forward

Company Overview 2005 Revenues: $4.4 billion 2005 Equity Production 6.4 mm Oz’s 2005 Equity Reserves 93.2 Oz’s mm Large company and extremely spread out globally Supply Chain intensive operations (equipment, housing, etc) Purchasing and Inventory operate under various environments (sourcing, taxations, infrastructure, et. al.) creates both needs for standardization, as well as presenting unique challenges Sites are very focused – as they should be – on digging for gold and Data standardization was initially a hard sell

Business Drivers for Standardization NEV NAL MYSRL NGGL PTNNT Site / Regional Purchasing Inventory Item identification Unique instances of ERP databases Newmont Corporate / Global Sourcing Leverage Component Standardization Opportunity Identification Apples to Apple Comparison Each site desired better data and improved business Corporate has business need Data infrastructure looks like this Data standardization was required to meet business goals – site level and corporate Site level…No single instance ERP Move to center-led Historically, de-centralized operations. Autonomy. Goals now required a consolidated “world view”

Goal and Guiding Principles All sites will catalogue the same items in the same fashion, including names, descriptions and associated classification links (catalog and associated data). Guiding Principles Adopt an open standard (eOTD) Based on NATO Schema – familiarity and system base Linked to UNSPSC for global spend analysis Design a system and process to lower the pain across the sites Level of effort – resources Cost Catalog the ‘right’ items Remove duplicates and obsolete (archive) Integrate eProcurement program to move items to Suppliers catalogs Key decision made to “link” with a global open standards for catalog (some external and some internal for other data). Someone has done the work Ellipse NATO based also, formatting and structure built around NATO End Users familiar with it Maintenance and accessibility Like UNSPSC due to spend analysis program using that Knew there would be overlapping items site to site Revisited philosophies about what items should be in our catalogs (although the definition of “right” items changed along the way) This is still going on—ultimately site driven

210,000 Items Globally - One Year to Cleanse Project Approach 210,000 Items Globally - One Year to Cleanse DEFINE Select catalog standard Define internal standards IMPLEMENT Cleanse catalog Update tables & associated records PERPETUATE Implement Business process/workflow Implement controls (Validation/Audits) Provide tools/training Some things are just obvious… We needed a standard before we could clean (DEFINE) Then we could IMPLEMENT We needed to keep the data clean to prevent ourselves from doing this all over again in the future (PERPETUATE)

Implement: Catalog Cleansing States Level I Item Names assigned Goal: 100% Level II Apply existing data Automation and manual Goal: 60% Level III Research to full attribution Goal: 40% Catalog cleansing is the real meat of the project Could clean each item all the way in one touch, or focus on each level individually. Good case to be made for either. Really more of a workflow for each item than project phases, as all three could be simultaneous Doneness: Need to asses desires in light of reality. Impact by quality of legacy data—some items cannot be identified even by holding in hand. All levels may be simultaneous at sites and globally

Implement: Global Team Structure Denver Nevada 1 – Program Mgr 1 – Project Mgr Ensure the project is going smoothly, resolve issues, find resources Total Team 1 Program Manager 1 Project Manager 4.5 Catalog Mgrs .5 Dictionary Owner 7 Catalogers 1 3rd Party/Vendor Additional outsourced cleansing .5 – Catalog Mgr .5 – Dictionary Owner Clean NEV Items, ensure dictionary grows correctly Peru Ghana 1 – Catalog Mgr 2 – Catalogers Clean MYSRL items, submit new Item Names Challenge: Although individual sites are very bought into the need to cleanse, they are also busy digging up gold and are used to operating autonomously COMMUNICATIONS Weekly meetings with vendor Biweekly meeting with Newmont team Portal (collaborative environment & general awareness) Brochures (company-wide awareness) … Indonesia Australia 1 – Catalog Mgr 1 – Catalogers Clean NGGL items, submit new Item Names 1 – Catalog Mgr 3 - Catalogers Clean PTNNT and NEV items, submit new Item Names 1 – Catalog Mgr 1 - Cataloger Clean NAL items, submit new Item Names

Implement: Architecture 1. All Items into Central Repository 2. SW Auto-match to NMD 3. SW Match to OEM (part #) 4. SW facilitates global cleansing 5. SW Match to Newmont part # NEV NAL Global Repository Level 1 Clean – Item Name MYSRL Level 2 - Partial Attribute NGGL Level 3 - Full PTNNT Newmont Catalog NMD OEM

New operational activity to support clean data… Perpetuate New operational activity to support clean data… CLEAN DATA Perpetuate has defined new operational needs… Business processes: New item name requests workflow Cataloging workflow Data audits Tools: CIR Globally standardized cataloging manual Roles: NMD Owner Data “manager” Biz Process Tools Roles

Other Deliverables In addition to data cleansing… Newmont Master Dictionary (“complete”) Cataloging Manual (complete) Catalog Item Request (planning) Enhanced supplier data (planning) Governance/maintenance

Lessons Learned LOE Spreadsheet cleansing Cleansing not “linear” Catalog = moving target Track and collaborate Catalog synchronization New roles/responsibilities Single instance ERP… Shorten each line Fully understand LOE Appreciate that cleansing is not as “linear” Accommodate your catalog being a moving target (scope and plan accordingly) Again, don’t forget the peripheral elements Set up an infrastructure to track and collaborate on standards and implementation Expect new business process, training Single instance ERP… For us, a lot of selling upfront. And then… 1. LOE Get data people involved in LOE and listen to them. Understand who is going to do this work and how much “free time” they really have. Strong project management structure for resource planning. Plan to get outside help for project management, automated cleansing, and hands on cleansing 2. Linear Easy stuff goes quickly, then cleansing gets more labor intensive the closer you are to the end, and progress slows Phases can/should be simultaneous 3. Lock down scope, but leave room to feed newly cataloged items into the project (we have very active cataloging) Accommodate project tracking/success without coming to the end of the project with a bucket of still to be cleaned items 4. Peripheral In our case, dictionary work (big!), standards group (QTAG), managing vendors, et. al. 5. Track/Collaborate A lot of data floating around in different states of doneness, discussion, approval, review processes, et. al. Newmont used vendor application, spreadsheets and portal for sharing/discussing

Benefits Realized To-Date Early results at our pilot site… 14,000 potential duplicates 25,000 archived items Enhanced improperly coded items (“tens of thousands”)

Meeting 2007 Goals Catalog Item Request: 2006/2007 Standards and workflow automation Standardized Manufacturer Mnemonics: 2007 Issue: How to maintain standard Enhanced Supplier Data: 2007 Implement requirements Catalog Synchronization: 2007 Issue: standard & external workflow Implement “Data Steward”