+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: Unethical ? (/showthread.php?tid=591)
Unethical ? - Gilraen - 20th June 2007
Yes, I think it is totally unethical.
Unethical ? - tom wilson - 20th June 2007
I asked a mate in the building trade and he recons it's fraud. This is because you can operate a cartel even if there's only one of you, i.e. if you have inside information on a tender, you are in breach of the law. What to do about it is another thing entirely. He suggested telling the client and suggesting that the job is re-tendered, but that there's not much point calling in the Old Bill as you have no proof. One might consider telling all the building/archaeological contractors in the region too though...
freeburmarangers.org
Unethical ? - Manuport - 20th June 2007
Tom is quite right: the original scenario from BAJR was of the attempt to source a comparable costing of specific job from a competitor at the time that both parties are quoting for the genuine project. This is clearly unethical and probably in breach of law but only proveable if unethical one puts information/request in writing (ie is an eijit).
The sourcing of guideline or indicative costings from competitors is only a wee bit sharper practice than collating that disparate information you often hear from clients/competitors as to how much others quoted (indeed some clients helpfully issue the list of tenders and prices quoted - though in alphabetical and ascending sequence respectively). I am aware of at least one company that has requested via a third party costings for a spurious evaluation. It is just information gathering on the sharper side of that which most companies will do - not unethical but to do with understanding your market position.
The Devil to pay and no pitch hot
Unethical ? - kevin wooldridge - 20th June 2007
How does the 'ethics committee' feel about the practice of some consultants seeking quotes from archaeological companies they know are expensive to make their 'preferred' contractors slightly lower bid look like good value to the client?
Compared with David's scenario, is it
a) equally unethical
b) good business practice
c) ethics, 'aint that near Herts!!
PS: I kind of feel that once we get onto business ethics and archaeology, we are beginning maybe to calculate angels and pinheads!!
Unethical ? - beamo - 20th June 2007
As a consultant I don't have 'preferred' contractors, nor do I make recommendations to clients about contractor appointments solely on the basis of cost.
Beamo
Unethical ? - drpeterwardle - 20th June 2007
In response to Kevin I would say as a consultant you get to know who will bid what quickly - does that mean you should stop asking the more expensive ones - say - to bid.
I also donot award contracts solely on price.
(I think this is against the IFA code of conduct)
Peter
Back to the tender competition.
Unethical ? - Galarch - 20th June 2007
In my experience the cheaper contractors are not always the most efficient so in the long run they may not be cost effective.
I suspect the majority of companies stay in business and attract new contracts because they provide a good service to their client. If sharp practices have to be adopted to get work that perhaps says something about the company concerned.
Unethical ? - 1man1desk - 21st June 2007
In common with other consultants posting on this thread, I do not award contracts solely on the basis of price, and the cheapest tender is not always successful.
If I am composing a tender list and I want to exclude a given unit that might be cheaper than others, I will only do so for good reasons. I will also tell the client what I am doing and why, and seek their agreement.
Reasons that have applied in the past include:
- previous experience of the unit (i.e. poor quality work);
- knowing that the unit's resources are already overstretched;
- a need for certain specialist expertise not available at that unit;
- advice from a curator that they did not consider the unit suitable for a particular job, for specific reasons.
If the client does insist on including a unit we don't want in the list, or on appointing the cheapest against our advice, we will comply - but we will also advise them of the risks associated with the decision, and what they need to do about those risks.
On a related topic, we recently rejected a cheap tender because it listed key team members that we knew to be fully committed elsewhere, and where we knew that they could not be redeployed. The unit was using a good CV to help win a job, knowing that they would get someone to actually do the work who did not meet our specified minimum qualifications. That is deliberate deception, and we would look carefully at future tenders from that organisation.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished