+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Ethics in a downturn (/showthread.php?tid=1443)
Ethics in a downturn - monty - 6th March 2009
...........minimum standards can be interpreted as almost anything !! we should all strive to best practice .....putting in a little more effort ............... in reply to Tom Wilson.... why isn't the current market in a position to contemplate best practice and high standards ?????
....... this should be a priority at all times and in all aspects .....whether it be fieldwork health and safety or PX...... no excuses !!!
Ethics in a downturn - Windbag - 6th March 2009
This all sounds like an exercise in semantics, to be honest. The way you ensure that all archaeological work is of a satisfactory level is to set a minimum standard, through the IfA and curators. I take most people are thinking that best practice is doing a job in an exemplary way- ie no cutting corners, satisfying all the requirements of the curators, keeping the client happy, appropriate levels of post-ex, decent reports, timely and organised deposition of archives- rather than producing a series of gold-plated monographs about watching briefs in which nothing is found.
The key is to get minimum standards enforceable and to be as close to "best practice" as possible.
?He who seeks vengeance must dig two graves: one for his enemy and one for himself?
Chinese Proverb
Ethics in a downturn - BAJR Host - 6th March 2009
Quote:quote:The key is to get minimum standards enforceable and to be as close to "best practice" as possible.
Absolutely... AND to create the environment where doing better than minimum is seen as a benefit, rather than an extra cost.. Value for Money
?When a sinister person means to be your enemy, they always start by trying to become your friend.?
William Blake
Ethics in a downturn - Sparky - 6th March 2009
Oxo,
'good enough' requires reference otherwise it is subjective. Minimum standards have reference, i.e. the standards. Personally, I'd go for a 'good standard'.
Ethics in a downturn - tom wilson - 6th March 2009
Quote:quote:Originally posted by monty
...........minimum standards can be interpreted as almost anything !! we should all strive to best practice .....putting in a little more effort ............... in reply to Tom Wilson.... why isn't the current market in a position to contemplate best practice and high standards ?????
....... this should be a priority at all times and in all aspects .....whether it be fieldwork health and safety or PX...... no excuses !!!
As pointed out by other posters, minimum standards are defined by various standards and guidance documents, and not interpretable as 'almost anything' at all. 'Best Practice', on the other hand, is a fine example of weasel words. Can't say I like 'good standard' either. Where is that defined, Sparky?
..and yes, 'good enough'is what we should be holding on to, by which I mean not letting the level of archaeological investigation fall below our minimum standards because planners etc. are desperate to see developments go ahead, for the good of the economy.
I can't help thinking we are looking at this from very different perspectives.
(edited for spelling and grammar)
freeburmarangers.org
Ethics in a downturn - Sparky - 6th March 2009
Tom,
The term 'good enough' lingers horribly in my ears from various regretable experiences where, frankly, the standard of work was not 'good enough' although the excavators declared it was (bye bye!). I would describe such poor efforts as the consequence of vague standards where your description of best practice as 'weasily' is particularly apt. So, we have standards and they are open to interpretation, good and bad. Therefore, when I refer to 'good standards', I would opt for the positive(+) end of the minimum standard scale.
Surely you are arguing that 'good enough' and 'minimum standards are one and the same?
Ethics in a downturn - tom wilson - 6th March 2009
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Sparky
Tom,
Surely you are arguing that 'good enough' and 'minimum standards are one and the same?
Yes.
freeburmarangers.org
Ethics in a downturn - teamonster - 6th March 2009
Heading back on topic....
I suppose it depends on what level of ethics you are considering.
Most people have probably left a slightly ambiguous statement on a CV or covering letter that allows the recruiter to think something was a bit more complex than it was. However as most people do it, recruiters are wise to it and know that any CV has been written to make you sound as good as possible. On the otherhand outright lies will normally mean you fall foul of the phrase in most contracts that says you can be dismissed for getting the job under false pretences.
When it comes to projects and clients competitive is fine, but again if you deliberately mislead them you'll only end up losing the business for good, or they'll refuse to pay for a shoddy job.
The need to appear and become professional, and be recognised as such, is a recurring theme on this forum. If we abandon ethics then we might as well accept things will never change.
Ethics in a downturn - YellowPete - 7th March 2009
What are ethics?
I know what we think it generally means, but what does it actually mean.
I think we may all be 'pleasantly', or possibly to even being 'unpleasantly' supprised.
txt is
Mike
Ethics in a downturn - YellowPete - 7th March 2009
personally i feel the grip in my heart and mouth.
txt is
Mike