21st June 2005, 12:43 PM
I have been putting off replying to this because of the time it will take. Firstly myself - i have been doing consultancy work since 1988 and running my own business since 1992. Before that I worked as a field/computer officer.
What do we mean by consultant - it is a much overused word. Do we mean people who write the DBA?, write specs, judges tender competitions, advise the client present evidence to enquiries? Are we including finds consultants, geophysics consultants or what?
Lets deal with the unpopular role -cutting down the costs of an excavation. It is true that many clients come to consultants thinking that they can wave a magic wand and remove the need for an excavation. Usually it is too late and all one can do is ensure that the work is or will proceed at the required level. This is particular so if the team are hired in on a day rate. In effect we are acting as a specialised ?cost consultant? which is a standard part of the building trade.
One key part of the job is ensuring that the job will be done to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authourity this may mean increasing budgets or rejecting very low bids.
Anybody can set up as a consultancy ? with or without the relevant skills. A knowledge of field archaeology is not enough ? a knowledge of the planning system is vital. Every contracting Unit say they advise the client.
Advising the client is the core task of the consultant.
This is easier said than done and is far more complex than people imagine. The image of the developer is somebody who does care about anything other than the profit. This is a very simplistic stereotype. PLCs have duties to share holders by law to maximise profits, (this is particularly so for pension funds), charities can only spend money on their charitable purpose, housing associations do not want to take risks. Time, risk, convenience, and cost have to be balanced not forgetting the archaeology.
The key message of PPG is co-operation not confrontation with developers. It is the consultants role to ensure that the developers adopt a none confrontational approach. It is us who explain to the developer what their liabilities are with regard to archaeology and how they can be managed. We are easy targets for criticism within the archaeological world because we dare to treat developers as human beings.
I make no apology for the fact that now as an archaeologist I can afford to eat, have my own home and run a reasonable car. I am invariably the lowest paid person on a project team. It is not a cushy job. In one week last year I drove from Oxfordshire to Woverhampton, Oxfordshire to Worcester ? Worcester to Cornwall ? back to Oxfordshire. Then Oxfordshire to Suffolk return.
I am sure that everybody can quote examples of consultants who have done things which we disagree with ? I dare say there are people on BAJR who will criticise some of the things I have done. I dare say people can quote examples of people doing consultancy without the right skills or experience.
It will soon be 15 years since PPG16 was introduced and with it a 100 million budget for archaeology. If developers have to pay for archaeology they will want archaeologists to act for them.
As for the notion of sending a new graduate on their own to deal with any project in its entirety ? it is just plain stupidity. I would be amazed if that is actually happening. The amounts of money involved are just too great. They would not know where to begin.
Consultancy has become a career route in its own right without the need for a strong background in field archaeology. The same is also true for curators. Recruiting new graduates is therefore a logical step. For the big environmental consultancy they view archaeology in the same way as they view other disciplines and recruit accordingly.
In some respects this is a worrying trend but is at last one part of archaeology that is well paid, with a career structure, with training and job stability. Perhaps what we should be discussing is how what has been gained in consultancy in terms of employment can be transferred to field archaeology.
Dr Peter Wardle
The Archaeological Consultancy
What do we mean by consultant - it is a much overused word. Do we mean people who write the DBA?, write specs, judges tender competitions, advise the client present evidence to enquiries? Are we including finds consultants, geophysics consultants or what?
Lets deal with the unpopular role -cutting down the costs of an excavation. It is true that many clients come to consultants thinking that they can wave a magic wand and remove the need for an excavation. Usually it is too late and all one can do is ensure that the work is or will proceed at the required level. This is particular so if the team are hired in on a day rate. In effect we are acting as a specialised ?cost consultant? which is a standard part of the building trade.
One key part of the job is ensuring that the job will be done to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authourity this may mean increasing budgets or rejecting very low bids.
Anybody can set up as a consultancy ? with or without the relevant skills. A knowledge of field archaeology is not enough ? a knowledge of the planning system is vital. Every contracting Unit say they advise the client.
Advising the client is the core task of the consultant.
This is easier said than done and is far more complex than people imagine. The image of the developer is somebody who does care about anything other than the profit. This is a very simplistic stereotype. PLCs have duties to share holders by law to maximise profits, (this is particularly so for pension funds), charities can only spend money on their charitable purpose, housing associations do not want to take risks. Time, risk, convenience, and cost have to be balanced not forgetting the archaeology.
The key message of PPG is co-operation not confrontation with developers. It is the consultants role to ensure that the developers adopt a none confrontational approach. It is us who explain to the developer what their liabilities are with regard to archaeology and how they can be managed. We are easy targets for criticism within the archaeological world because we dare to treat developers as human beings.
I make no apology for the fact that now as an archaeologist I can afford to eat, have my own home and run a reasonable car. I am invariably the lowest paid person on a project team. It is not a cushy job. In one week last year I drove from Oxfordshire to Woverhampton, Oxfordshire to Worcester ? Worcester to Cornwall ? back to Oxfordshire. Then Oxfordshire to Suffolk return.
I am sure that everybody can quote examples of consultants who have done things which we disagree with ? I dare say there are people on BAJR who will criticise some of the things I have done. I dare say people can quote examples of people doing consultancy without the right skills or experience.
It will soon be 15 years since PPG16 was introduced and with it a 100 million budget for archaeology. If developers have to pay for archaeology they will want archaeologists to act for them.
As for the notion of sending a new graduate on their own to deal with any project in its entirety ? it is just plain stupidity. I would be amazed if that is actually happening. The amounts of money involved are just too great. They would not know where to begin.
Consultancy has become a career route in its own right without the need for a strong background in field archaeology. The same is also true for curators. Recruiting new graduates is therefore a logical step. For the big environmental consultancy they view archaeology in the same way as they view other disciplines and recruit accordingly.
In some respects this is a worrying trend but is at last one part of archaeology that is well paid, with a career structure, with training and job stability. Perhaps what we should be discussing is how what has been gained in consultancy in terms of employment can be transferred to field archaeology.
Dr Peter Wardle
The Archaeological Consultancy