15th March 2011, 07:28 PM
monty Wrote:[I]
[/I]
Loads of this happening all over...and they know who they are............:face-stir:
I've worked all over the country for a wide variety and range of companies and, if I'm honest, I don't know that many (if any I can think of) who don't mess it up from time to time for a variety of reasons, some systemic and others personality lead; some issues concreted into the company's structure and others not.
Is it wrong for larger companies to expand or move into new areas? The reality is that cock-ups often relate to decisions taken by individuals, not a company or its size, and thats a much more difficult ethical dilemma to deal with than slagging off big companies. I've known more than enough small and medium sized companies run by experienced, well meaning and competent individuals with good reputations (who've I respect and have loved working with) who've made exactly the same cock-ups within what would be accepted as their own patch and they've had little or no comeback because they don't have the profile and they have stronger personal relationships with the local archaeological community and their staff........and they appear more commercially friendly to the rest of us (I do it instinctively).
Is it that we don't really like the idea of working in a real commercial environment that makes it alright to be disparaging about large organisations in a way we wouldn't about some smaller ones? Don't get me wrong, I think some have got it wrong and their approach and strategy isn't appropriate - I've worked for a couple who I don't think should be in existence because of the way they treat staff and archaeology. But I also think some of the larger organisations have got it right and its as a result of their industry wide corperate profile, investment in certain areas and standardised 'reasonable' treatment of staff that some gains were made over the last couple of decades, although many of those seem to have been lost now. What I can say is that I know from experience, a lot of larger companies do not make any actual money from errors (often they loose it as a result) or from cutting corners in the way that some smaller companies do (something else I know from experience - I hasten to say some, not all).
Big companies in limited markets will put smaller companies under pressure. That's commerce! I hate the ethics and ultimate outcome of the capitalist model as it appears to be playing out in our society, but we are in it and archaeology as much as any other industry. I'm also not saying we should be accepting when companies make mistakes and cut corners which impact on archaeology (and definitely not when they repeat them), but its so easy to oppose and raise issues with big companies expanding and so easy to paint all big archaeology units with the same brush because of what they are. The big archaeology companies are not multinationals (in real terms), they're rarely that cynical and many don't have shareholders (those that do, don't have many - but that's something else). They're also answerable to boards of trustees when they're charities and a number of the larger organisations actively invest (when they can afford it) in research, innovation, publications and improving staff benefits.
What do you think..............:face-stir:}
