standards anyone?

[BAJR]

If anyone wants to add some more useful standards, that we all agree are of value - and I would include the IfA standards in this - then I will place them all in teh special section of the forum, Library of Everything

[Boxoffrogs]

Just "Do It" BAJR as the shoes say!

[monty]

Cut out the 'Consultants' and standards WILL rise dramatically ...................................

[vulpes]

really? How?

[Jack]

Cut out the 'Consultants' and standards WILL rise dramatically ...................................

Yes what a silly comment...........care to elucidate?

What consultants?

[Sith]

Cut out the 'Consultants' and standards WILL rise dramatically ...................................

Speaking as a consultant who has just watched two of his colleagues reject sub-contrator's reports for failing to meet the standards set out in the IfA guidelines and the specification against which the report was written, I fail to see your point.

[Dutch Mark]

As a consultant and member of IfA, ex-chairman of NVvA and dutchman I will probably be suspect. But here is my 2 cents.

Standards wil help put a bottom in your work but will not lead to quality or fun. Blaming each other as archaeologists in our different corners is not helpfull. Divided we and the heritage falls united we stand. Standards don't make your live more fun. Buraucracy will grow. You will start discussing if the minimum effort is done. Not, is it is great archaeology. The standards tell us that there is a minimum and there will be a tendency by customers, us, our employers and the public to do the minimum needed.

Ethics should be woven in to the standards but that is very difficult. When is something bad archaeological practice? Those of us that walk away when an archaeological accident happens can be free of blame and taints. Those that are prepared to take risks and make something good in what is in essence a bad situation are not praised but in many cases blamed. How could you.....?

I have been involved with some cases were people were accussed of malpractice or non ethical behaviour. It is very difficult to 'judge' these cases. And you need an organization with large pockets or (expensive) legal counsel and or insurance to make this work. Even putting people in front of an panel to hear a case can have major repurcussions for you, the accussed or the organisation that hosts the panel. You also need to remember that many of these cases are in essence not about ethics. Sadly it turns out that many of them are personal feuds or labor conflicts. Furthermore the organization that has a mandate to hear these cases need a strong and united basis. The King's justice is as strong as the King himself. So Archaeology is fun, sharing is good, but we only get the maximum profit from our endeavours if we work closely together.

[P Prentice]

ok so to have standards you loose a bit of fun and gain a lot of burocracy - but we are united in thinking that we need standards if not how they are policed and enforced

i would propose a tax on development to pay for an independent 'police' force and the only credible way to enforce is through the auspices of the ifa standards

oh and the local mounties should be the police

[Dinosaur]

There have been plenty of bl**dy awful county mounties in the past, and some current ones are definitely better than others! - maybe a regional committee of mounties to even things out?

Suspect at the end of the day the actual practice of good standards is down to personal conscience? :face-thinks:

I've always believed in going the extra mile in an effort to produce quality product even from c**p jobs, probably why I seem to spend 24/7 on the job without getting noticeably richer.... :face-crying:

[P Prentice]

yep - and the mounties should have been at the least project officers with at least 5 years under the belt at that level so that they know what they are talking about - for a change

we cant rely on St Dinosaur or good conscience in this commercial quagmire