consultants and curators

[Troll]

Some time ago, we established that the only people that could be held accountable (legally/democratically) for their actions in archaeology are the Curators.We have also agreed (round one...) that Consultants work in their clients best interests.

1. What mechanisms are already in place whereby tax-paying voters can examine and criticise the actions of Curators?
2. What checks and balances are in place to mitigate against the imposition of the will of consultants over spineless Curators and unit Managers?


..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)

[drpeterwardle]

Troll said:

"that Consultants work in their clients best interests."

This is not strictly true by definition, in every circumstance, in court you are a witness to the court not for either side and definately not for archaeology.

Peter

[troll]

Good morning Dr Wardle. In practise, consultants work in their clients best interests.A court of law is a very different beastie altogether.My point is that whilst consultants work in the clients interests, who works in the interests of the archaeology? Curators?

..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)

[1man1desk]

Posted by Troll:

quote:We have also agreed (round one...) that Consultants work in their clients best interests.

True - but that does not imply any dilution of ethical standards (in fact, it is an ethical requirement in itself).

The same point is true of anyone working for a paying client - including all archaeological units.

Troll, as a person working for a unit, you are required to work in your unit's client's best interests. If you don't, you will be acting unethically and could (in theory) open your unit to legal action.

However, the client's best interests are not always represented solely by least cost or by cutting archaeological work to the irreducible minimum. Just as one example, doing evaluation work to a higher standard and/or larger sample may reduce the client's exposure to several types of risk later in the project. Clients who are risk-averse may be happy to pay more early to reduce risk later.
Part of the consultant's job, therefore, is to advise the client on risk and options for how to manage it, depending on their attitude to risk.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[troll]

Good day sir.Apologies for the swift and short response-am attempting to paint a bathroom at the same time (badly). I would have to disagree on one fundamental point:
I don`t work in any unit`s clients best interests unless I am assuming overall responsibility.I work to the standards and guidelines of the IFA.Something that sadly is not on the priority list of some consultancies

..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)

[drpeterwardle]

Interesting point Troll,

I seem to remember the IFA expecting site workers to act as micro-curators. How can this be compatible with acting in the best interests of the client.

Peter

[beamo]

Troll

As an MIFA I too am working to the standards and guidelines of the IFA. As a consultant I am working in the best interests of my client - that being to hold their hand through the legislative / guidance programme and advise them on risk (as expertly put by 1m1d). The two are not necessarily incompatible.


Beamo

[troll]

Beamo-accepted sir however- the roles (on the ground-in terms of real life) can be mutually exclusive

..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)

[1man1desk]

I have not found the two to conflict in my extensive experience.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[troll]

Good to hear sir.The count then currently stands as: one.

..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)