standards anyone?

[Wax]

So in reality the only archaeology actually monitored in Britain is that which is a direct result of development control? You would have thought that before we thought about internal standards we ought be thinking about a robust monitoring system for all archaeology. I had presumed that by agreeing to Valletta this country had signed up to international standards. it would be nice to think that part of the County Archaeologists role was to have the over view of all the archaeology that went on in his/her county it would also be common courtesy for academics and amateurs to at least keep the county archaeologist informed of what they're doing. Seems to me we need some joined up thinking across the board especially if as some people believe we are seeing the demise of development led archaeology.

[Kel]

Why does it have to cost? Cost free is possible if it is voluntary (as ITIL is) and the client will know what to expect from a company (of whatever industry) if the standard is accepted widely and used.

ITIL isn't free. You can only be ITIL-certified if you're trained. And that means taking the official training courses and sitting the official exams - which cost thousands of pounds per staff member.

[BAJR]

I am wondering about a certification for companies that sign up to the long awaited - diggers Charter. but this can then be linked to a raft of "Standards" in addition, the skills passport will take the next step and be seen as an industry wide recognised scheme. This will cost money.. the question is from where does it come. - I have made a rough estimate of circa 80- 100k per year

[deadlylampshade]

ITIL isn't free. You can only be ITIL-certified if you're trained. And that means taking the official training courses and sitting the official exams - which cost thousands of pounds per staff member.

My point is that you can use the standard - and use the benefits - without necessarily incurring all the costs.

[Marcus Brody]

Whilst this is true, one would assume that a 'Council archaeologist' visiting an excavation that falls outside of their employment brief, is doing so first and foremost as an archaeologist with an interest in the project and not as a individual frustrated that his or her sphere of influence is too limited to have a direct influence on the project strategy.

Yes, that would be my understanding too, and I don't think my post suggested anything else. I wasn't suggesting that a Council archaeologist visiting an excavation that falls outside their employment brief would be doing it because they were frustrated that it fell outside their 'sphere of influence', and I certainly wouldn't expect them to spend their time citicising excavation strategy or recording standards - that would be a pretty rude thing to do on a site where they were basically a guest! I was simply responding to the question in Wax's earlier post about who monitors that standards on community and academic excavations.

I'm not so sure that academics who don't inform someone they don't need to inform about an activity with which that person has no involvement necessarily makes the academic a 'bad' person ....

Again, I don't think my post says anything about academics who don't inform Council archaeologists of what they're working on being 'bad people', I was simply observing that this is something that happens sometimes. I know such a thing wouldn't be a requirement, so the academic wouldn't be doing anthing wrong as such, I just think it would be helpful if they did, both as a way of fostering closer links between the academic and commercial sectors, and of ensuring the information on the sites that they're excavatin is available in the HER for other people to use. After all, if I'm working on a site in a field, I'd like to know if a team of students from a university at the other end of the country have spent every summer for the past 5 years excavating a complex Roman settlement just across the road. I'm sure we've all experienced how long it can take academic excavations to reach the publication stage, and in the interim, it'd be useful for people working in the commercial sector to be able to at least find out that that a potentially relevant and significant piece of fieldwork has taken place.

by the time the excavation comes about the role of the 'Council archaeologist' has finished. I would suggest that the same applies in UK law. By the time an excavation or monitoring resulting from a planning condition comes about, any legal remedy resulting from such work is the responsibility of planning 'enforcement' and not planning advice....

I don't think that this is correct, however, at least in the UK (I don't know about Norway). As most planners wouldn't know a well-conducted excavation from a hole in the ground, the Council archaeologist does still have a role in monitoring excavations conducted as a condition of planning consent. At that stage, their role is to advise the planner whether the work has been conducted to a suitable standard, whether further work is required, and whether the condition can be discharged. Yes, the only legal remedy if a developer ignores a condition would be in the hands of the enforcement team, and it would probably need to be the planner who actually told them to do something about a breach, but the planner would only be aware that work had not been done to a sufficient standard because the Council archaeologist had advised them that this was the case. A planner visiting a site would be unlikely to say whether the archaeological work was of a suitable standard, and so would be reliant on his/her archaeological advisor, who would need to have visited the site in order to determine this.

[Kel]

My point is that you can use the standard - and use the benefits - without necessarily incurring all the costs.

Errm... not unless you want to be done for trademark and/or copyright infringement. ITIL is a proprietory methodology, with associated legal rights of intellectual ownership. It's not a public or open methodology. You can't claim to be ITIL-compliant unless you have their certification. It'd be like me submitting a DBA in the Wessex Arch house style and whacking their logo on the cover, then telling the client that I've done it like WA would have, only without being employed by them.

If you decide to use ITIL methodologies on the sly without getting certified, then you have to be VERY quiet and not tell anyone about, it or risk legal action. Which rather defeats the object.

Standards have to be visible and up front. Use of standards needs to be equally visible.

This will cost money.. the question is from where does it come

Blimey Hosty, there's a dreadful echo in here somewhere...

[P Prentice]

Probably the most informative page I've ever seen on any thread on this site, thanks guys! :face-approve::face-approve:

....and fascinating who's avatars haven't appeared on this page, clearly too sensible :face-thinks:

glad you are enjoying my thread - i had you in mind of course - although i am slightly alarmed that a man of your evident years still needs lessons in professional archaeology

[Wax]

No one is too old (or too young) to learn.

[Dirty Dave Lincoln]

No one is too old (or too young) to learn.

I'd say that's true-it's down to peoples willingness to learn

[Dinosaur]

glad you are enjoying my thread - i had you in mind of course - although i am slightly alarmed that a man of your evident years still needs lessons in professional archaeology

Good to know you're paranoid as well :face-approve: