18th September 2010, 11:59 AM
I'm not sure that the 'mega-companies' are the problem. I've seen exemplary practice and poor practice in equal measure across the scale of unit sizes. Besides the regional office based structure of certain large companies where they have 'swallowed up' smaller units has actually retained local expertise that would otherwise potentially have been lost - see e.g. OA North / East , the proposed Cotswold / Wessex merger. These are not 'hostile' takeovers, staff have been retained and business has continued.
I've also witnessed in the region a lot of cooperation between 'rival' units, with staff being shared / sub-contracted. This has kept people in continuous employment potentially benefiting employee and employer and in some cases can provide that injection of local talent that benefits the archaeology too. In a lot of ways archaeology is hardly as cut throat or devalued as some would depict it.
I've also witnessed in the region a lot of cooperation between 'rival' units, with staff being shared / sub-contracted. This has kept people in continuous employment potentially benefiting employee and employer and in some cases can provide that injection of local talent that benefits the archaeology too. In a lot of ways archaeology is hardly as cut throat or devalued as some would depict it.