MetPlant conferences have focused on ensuring mining projects are well designed then optimised to operate safely and effectively at the top end of world's best practice to ensure shareholders are not just happy but delighted. This assumes the MetPlant was built right the first time. However, reality is, too often Plant Metallurgists (PlantMets) find after commissioning they are faced with the expensive task of correcting errors or modifying shortcomings to achieve product quality at name-plate capacity, i.e. get it right the second time. Why do companies spend good money to engineer an excellent feasibility study then allow wise men remote from the project team to impose cuts in budget and schedule, often under the guise of value engineering? Since mining is full of uncertainties, such actions can increase the risks of failure with the result that some MetPlants do not work well. Can PlantMets influence the remote wise men who often are also imposing the rules for lending and the required returns to appreciate the uncertainties of mining and their associated risks then let the project team get it right the first time? PlantMets can negotiate with the wise men from the outset of the project and bring them into an outer layer of the team where they can understand the risks then share responsibility and accountability to achieve the common goal of building a MetPlant which works well the first time and deliver the forecast profits. Since shareholders are not in the business to make losses they appoint a Board of Directors to deliver the best outcomes for the shareholders. Thus the Board should seek effective advice on the risk reward implications from the PlantMet before making their decisions.CITATION:Cameron, P, 2015. Do all metplants work well? PlantMets can ensure they do, in Proceedings MetPlant 2015, pp 2-9 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).