30th March 2011, 01:58 PM
P Prentice Wrote:no. we are reliant on ourselves - the diverse strengths and multifarious skills we have. the future of the industry will be shaped by those who get their hands dirty (pun) and we need a concenus of people who can be bothered t try
I think I agree to some extent or another with both of the last couple of posts. We do have a certain dependency on the government's decision making, but it also comes down to how we all respond to any decisions (the question of whether we are to some extent unified or not, will make a difference).
However, on balance and experience, I wouldn't be inclined to start denigrating large swathes of the profession or specifically the management. I have seen appalling incompetence (often from very nice people) at management level. I've also seen excellent examples of management, both holistically and in relation to specific, individual competencies. The same goes for entry level archaeologists - some care, others don't; some are misguided and others actually took the time to figure out what skills they needed and what they were getting themselves into......and some can just wing it.
One thing I would note is that there is something of a failure in some areas of management that appears to correspond with the Peter Principle and seems to arise as a result of rewarding individuals for service, not merit. It also links in to that irritating managerial mantra that comes out a little to often amongst some individuals (as has already been mentioned) of, "I 'ad to go through it so I don't see why you should complain about it!" If it relates to a situation that would be consider acceptable in any analogous professional situation then its fair enough to not expect a member of staff to complain or take issue (to much). But if its something that wouldn't be acceptable elsewhere (allowing for just a few of the various unique qualities of some of the work we do, I guess), then its the manager who should, wherever possible, express the aspiration (at the very least) to improve the situation even when it isn't economically possible to actually impliment changes or improvements to circumstances. Perpetuating intollerable or unacceptable circumstances is wrong whether it is a direct result of manager's actions or as a result of ancilliary or secondary circumstances. It also relies on full communication to identify and resolve these issues in many instances.
In short, we should all be subject to a meritocracy. If an entry level member of fieldstaff can't do the job (subject to employment regs being implemented etc) then they shouldn't remain employed or should be subject to action to help them improve. Similarly, if a member of management can't do their job then they shouldn't be promoted to a point where they have the capabilities to impose their own incompetence on other employees (its common sense really, isn't it). One thing that should be implemented, however, is targetted training opportunities. Invest in your staff at all levels and they'll very often give back. And also ensure that staff at ALL levels work to their job description, not their perceived status! And beyond anything else, communicate! Everyday and in every way! :face-angel:
We really need everyone in this industry at all levels to start taking on and behaving in a way that can be considered personally and professionally responsible. That requires awareness and personal education and responsibility (it doesn't, however, mean we all have to start wearing suits and behaving like miniature careerist managers). And no offence intended to those people across all aspects of this profession that do already, and there are many. Ranting session over for the day!
!
Back to the point at hand - I agree that there is a lot that can be done and shaped by many of us being willing to get our hands dirty, regardless of the oncoming challenges that any future planning reform might take. I'm up to my elbows and I don't regret it......but could do with a hand to scratch my nose!:p