MIFA Madness

[trowelhead]

Ive been working with a guy (consultant) this week who is MIFA`ed. The lack of knowledge and experience was something to behold. How do people without the obvious ability to do the job end up being MIFA. Has anyone else had a similar experience?

Close enough for a country job!

[1man1desk]

Well, there is no such thing as an archaeologist who is qualified at MIFA level in every branch of the profession - so you can be perfectly validly qualified as a MIFA but still appear less competent than that to someone from a different branch.

However, since the abolition of the old 'Areas of Competence', there is no way of knowing an individual's particular area of expertise.

On the other hand, I believe that the Code of Practice prohibits any member (at any level) from taking on work that they are not competent for. So, if you have real grounds for thinking that the individual is not sufficiently experienced or knowledgeable for the role they are performing, you may have grounds for a complaint to the IFA.

Please note that disagreement with an individual about appropriate methodologies, approaches or interpretations does not mean that they are incompetent.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[Steve Walsh]

Plenty of it about - many can write a convincing DBA or input into an ES but when it comes to the nitty gritty of designing works and/or managing it they fall down - sad really but you see it happening all the time. I am ready to be shot down here but i reckon you can be a experienced field archaeologist without much knowledge of the Environmental Statements and planning process but you cannot work as a consultant without being experienced in the field unless your remit is so tight and your organisation is so big that it can afford to have people doing very narrow job descriptions ie just baseline gathering etc. I suspect in reality most archaeological consultants need to do a bit of everyting therefore they need a field background - and not just 3 months volunteering

On the MIFA front it is likely to have been awared due to management of a team or length of service etc - or the person you are dealing with was a fieldy but so long ago they cant remember the basics - and that does happen

A trowel is a thing to lust for!

[BAJR Host]

Whicg is another good reason for companies to be RAO rather than just 'oh, I'm a MIFA' RAOs are checked every two years... once your in though... your in as a MIFA.

This also leads to the new IFA idea where people have to show that theya re keeping up to date.

You could actually say to the IFA... this person is mince... it is affecting the quality of work...where the code of conduct is being breached.

I have to say I have met many non MIFAs who would have trouble working out which end of a trowel to hold.

That said trowelhead, you are right you should be competant for the job... and if people jsut take the MIFA as proof then they should sort the recruitment procedure.



Another day another WSI?

[1man1desk]

from Steve Walsh:

quote:I am ready to be shot down here but i reckon you can be a experienced field archaeologist without much knowledge of the Environmental Statements and planning process but you cannot work as a consultant without being experienced in the field unless your remit is so tight and your organisation is so big that it can afford to have people doing very narrow job descriptions ie just baseline gathering etc. I suspect in reality most archaeological consultants need to do a bit of everyting therefore they need a field background - and not just 3 months volunteering

Speaking as a consultant, I do agree with you, but with some reservations.

There is a lot that an archaeologist with limited field experience can do if they are in a subordinate role in a consultancy team - but they do need to get more field experience before they take a lead role on the archaeology.

My own view is that no archaeologist in any branch of the profession (curators included) should be put in a leadership role (by which I mean one in which they are the person principally responsible for making archaeological judgements in relation to a site or project) without first having a significant degree of field experience, including project planning and reporting.

At the same time, field experience is not the be-all and end-all. I have seen some spectacularly bad pieces of consultancy work done by people that I knew were good field archaeologists, but who had no idea about the basic principles of EIA or other wider consultancy work.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[gumbo]

I agree wholeheartedly 1m1d, but I have been having dealings with consultants recently and it has been patently obvious that the 'speil' is there but Mr experience has only paid a fleeting visit... It has even got to the point where the client has started coming to us as a first port of call putting me in avery awkward situation. What sort of quality control does your organisation have to prevent this happening? cos im in need of reassurance at the mo.

G

[1man1desk]

Well, there are good consultants and bad consultants - just as there are good and bad field archaeologists.

Quality control in our organisation happens at a number of levels:

1 - we usually only recruit experienced people. We do have one person (out of 11 archaeologists) that we took on as a new graduate, but his role is to assist the more experienced staff.

2 - we provide a lot of in-house training and coaching for all staff.

3 - no report, correspondence or anything else goes out of our organisation without checking and sign-off by a more senior/experienced member of staff than the originator.

4 - in addition to published guidelines, we have a range of internal methodological guidelines, check-lists etc.

5 - we operate a 3rd-party certified QA system.

We are an RAO and all our staff are IFA members at various levels, including 6 MIFA (I think), but we look at the experience and knowledge of the individual rather than the IFA grade, before we assign someone to a particular task.

1man1desk

to let, fully furnished

[troll]

MIFA clearly includes the term " field archaeologist".Unfortunately, the accolade has been given out like sweets at a carnival over the years.For me-I have extremely serious misgivings about the IFA validation system and as such will be applying to join at affiliate level.I do wholeheartedly agree with the guidelines/codes of practise etc and wish to sign up to them.Would be good if lots of us did too.1man1desk has hit the nail on the head-when witnessing muppetry at any IFA level-report it.Too often, the accolades are used as some sort of bizarre passport to doing as one pleases beyond reproach.

..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)