1st September 2006, 01:37 PM
From Paul Belford:
The curator/unit conflict of interest is real, and it undermines the credibility of the curatorial services amongst non-archaeologists (i.e. those who pay for the archaeology). No matter how well the 'chinese wall' is managed in some counties, it is poorly managed in others; the point here is not about individuals, but about the principles of the system.
The curator is supposed, amongst other things, to monitor the proper implementation by commercial units of agreed scopes of work. They often also insist on approving individuals appointed to particular roles on a project team. Their decisions can affect the commercial success of the units working in their area.
How can they do these things impartially if they have a management responsibility for the commercial success of one particular unit?
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Quote:quote:In principle I agree with CK and 1man, there is certainly the potential for a conflict of interest.
The curator/unit conflict of interest is real, and it undermines the credibility of the curatorial services amongst non-archaeologists (i.e. those who pay for the archaeology). No matter how well the 'chinese wall' is managed in some counties, it is poorly managed in others; the point here is not about individuals, but about the principles of the system.
The curator is supposed, amongst other things, to monitor the proper implementation by commercial units of agreed scopes of work. They often also insist on approving individuals appointed to particular roles on a project team. Their decisions can affect the commercial success of the units working in their area.
How can they do these things impartially if they have a management responsibility for the commercial success of one particular unit?
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished