We will always have a plan
We will always have a plan
MOS Operations Trend Briefing – Q4 2025
The past three months have brought several shifts that will influence how operations run in 2026. Weather extremes, skills gaps, safety expectations and supply-chain pressures all saw notable movement this quarter. Our latest Operations Trend Briefing breaks down the developments that matter most for teams on the ground.
New data released in December shows that 2025 is virtually certain to be the world’s second- or third-hottest year on record. According to the EU’s Copernicus Climate Change Service, global temperatures this year have risen to around 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, based on the three-year average from 2023–2025.
For operations teams, this translates into real, measurable disruption. European construction sites recorded 12–18% drops in productivity during peak heat periods in 2025, and several mining operators reported heat-related stoppages on heavy plant that exceeded previous years’ totals. Storm intensity across Western Europe increased by roughly 40% compared with long-term averages, causing repeated access issues for civils work and open-pit operations. Cooling systems in manufacturing plants also experienced above-normal failure rates during July and August.
The cumulative effect is a shift from seasonal weather planning to day-to-day operational forecasting. Heat, rainfall and storm activity are no longer background risks; they are now frequent triggers for rescheduling, re-routing and re-planning work.
Across the UK, Australia and North America, operational roles remain chronically understaffed. The UK’s workforce data shows a 5.2% vacancy rate in industrial roles, the highest recorded by the Office for National Statistics since the metric was introduced. Australia’s Skills Priority List (October 2025) continues to classify key site-based roles – such as electrical trades, diesel fitters, mine supervisors and HSE advisors – as Priority 1 shortages, meaning demand far outstrips supply.
These shortages create visible operational pressure. Supervisors are frequently covering multiple crews, increasing fatigue risk and reducing oversight quality. Maintenance backlogs are growing because teams cannot secure adequate trade coverage. A Deloitte survey of operations leaders in late 2025 found that 68% reported increased overtime as the main consequence of staff shortages, with nearly half citing higher safety risk as a direct result.
With fewer people available and demand for output increasing, workflows must become simpler, communication clearer and planning more structured.
Regulators across the UK, EU, Australia and Canada introduced stricter requirements throughout 2025 after an observable rise in high-severity incidents. The UK Health and Safety Executive confirmed a 7% increase in fatal accidents in construction and extractives this year, driven by confined-space incidents, vehicle interactions and falls from height.
In response, regulators have strengthened requirements around fatigue management, contractor oversight, critical control verification and exposure to dust and diesel particulates. WorkSafe authorities in Australia have also increased unannounced inspections by more than 20% compared with 2024.
The practical effect for operations teams is a higher burden of proof. It’s no longer acceptable to rely on procedural statements or occasional checks. Supervisors must demonstrate that critical controls are in place continuously, and many organisations are being required to deliver faster, more detailed incident and near-miss reporting than before. Paper processes cannot meet these expectations at scale or speed.
Reliance on Chinese raw materials and components remains a central concern for European industry. Reporting in early December highlighted that the EU is actively considering measures to legally reduce industrial dependence on China for critical raw materials and strategic inputs.
While geopolitical in nature, the operational consequences are immediate. Lead times for electrical components, machinery spare parts, consumables and safety equipment have continued to fluctuate through Q4. Some operational teams report delays stretching from four weeks to more than three months, making planned maintenance windows harder to schedule and increasing the likelihood of unplanned downtime. Several mining and manufacturing firms have responded by increasing critical spares inventory levels, though this carries financial and storage costs.
With project timelines and maintenance planning now exposed to global supply-chain volatility, more robust forecasting and scenario planning are becoming essential.
Across heavy industry, new reporting frameworks introduced in 2025 require organisations to provide more granular and more frequent environmental data. These include tighter rules around Scope 1 and 2 emissions, fugitive gas measurement, energy usage and environmental incident reporting. Many jurisdictions now mandate near-real-time data submission rather than quarterly summaries.
This shift places responsibility firmly on operations teams, who control the equipment, processes and behaviours that drive environmental performance. Decisions around engine idling, equipment scheduling, power consumption, vehicle routing and dust control all now have direct reporting implications. For many organisations, environmental performance is moving closer to the core of production planning.
Throughout 2025, companies have expanded their use of AI tools for optimisation, predictive maintenance, scheduling and hazard identification via on-site cameras. Adoption rates have increased fastest in mining and manufacturing, where large datasets and repetitive processes provide strong foundations for automation. However, this shift is happening alongside growing employee concern. Deloitte’s Human Capital Trends research highlighted that 41% of workers report increased anxiety about how AI will affect their role.
Supervisors are now required to oversee hybrid workflows where human judgement and AI recommendations must coexist. Many teams report uncertainty about how decisions should be made when AI guidance conflicts with human experience. This creates a new layer of operational complexity and one that requires clearer rules, process design and communication.