IFA RO only as approved contractors

[kevin wooldridge]

... I feel that some of the discussions, while not obviously relevent, still highlighted some issues. Namely the mentality that the IfA is only a managers club and only represents managers and that some people working in archaeology feel that they can not be and never will be managers (be it genetics, stubborness, lack of willingness or whatever) and so the IfA cannot ever represent them and therefore ROs only being allowed to do work is a bad thing. PDQ (is that the right expression? - no it's not it's QED, which probably still isn't right!)

I agree and I wonder if this sholuldn't become a separate thread. I think the 'management' issue (if there is actually an issue) is a 'lifestyle' issue rather than an archaeological one. It strikes me that Dinosaur for all of his or her bluff, is actually probably a pretty good archaeologist whom I would be happy to class as a 'manager' of the archaeological resource. He or she might balk at that phrase, but I think its one that could be fairly applied. Whether within his or her employing organisation there are managers managing managers is another matter and one that is slightly removed from the point. Which is...

...the point of the IfA striving for Chartered status or being seen as the 'licensor' of regulated organisations is because it takes a role of responsibility for management of the archaeological resource (along of course with the curators and the national bodies etc etc). In that sense I would accept that everyone who is a member of the IfA is also a manager, but in a pure conservation rather than in a business hierarchy sense. A more appropriate term might be to call us all 'conservators' or 'curators' or 'custodians', but that would be equally as confusing as all those terms already describe sectors of our profession and to hi-jack any of the terms would be as loaded with double-meaning and full of the difficulties that we seem to have with the term 'manager'.

So my question is, what would be an appropriate term to describe an archaeologist who manages the archaeological resource at any level of responsibility, but who doesn't want to be called a manager (and this is irrespective of any hierarchical distinction or title conferred by their employing organisation)...?