Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply. To register, click here. Registration is FREE!
T O P I C R E V I E W
trowelhead
Posted - 04/03/2009 : 16:03:50 In this current time of economic difficulty and the associated risk of unemployment and company collapse would any of us be tempted to be unethical in order to secure employment or to win "that job" or to keep a client. This is something I asked myself the other night after four or five cans of Old Rosey and is there a sliding scale of ethacasy in this job. The very fact I was thinking about it troubled me greatly but when you think of the family, mortgage and dole Lord Vader starts to become very attractive. Suffice to say my sabre has always been blue.
Close enough for a country job!
15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
the invisible man
Posted - 13/03/2009 : 19:40:14 The term "Best Practice" is not used in construction contracts - it is meaningless and does not constitute a contract. Wherever applicable a construction contract will refer to specific published codes and standards (EN, BS, CP and so on) that work or materials can be measured against. "Best practice" cannot be defined - whose best practice, and who decides?
drpeterwardle
Posted - 09/03/2009 : 16:24:44 I have always hated the phrase "best practice".
"Most excellant" practice "to greatest degree" practice is what is should mean.
However the phrase has come to mean something like a standard that is in common useage.
Wikipedia has this to say: "Best practice is an idea that asserts that there is a technique, method, process, activity, incentive or reward that is more effective at delivering a particular outcome than any other technique, method, process, etc. The idea is that with proper processes, checks, and testing, a desired outcome can be delivered with fewer problems and unforeseen complications. Best practices can also be defined as the most efficient (least amount of effort) and effective (best results) way of accomplishing a task, based on repeatable procedures that have proven themselves over time for large numbers of people. Despite the need to improve on processes as times change and things evolve, best-practice is considered by some as a business buzzword used to describe the process of developing and following a standard way of doing things that multiple organizations can use for management, policy, and especially software systems. As the term has become more popular, some organizations have begun using "best practices" to refer to what are in fact 'rules', causing a linguistic drift in which a new term such as "good ideas" is needed to refer to what would previously have been called "best practices."
I would say that achieving the best archaeological work by any measure ie perfection is not possible and is something that by definition not everybody can achieve. Best is a relative measure. In terms of quality of work if a standard is suitably defined why not simply say meeting the required standard - the term minimum implies that you should go beyond the accepted standard. This may or may not be desirable.
I have always taken best practice to mean the best that can be practically achieved in a given set of standards. The best that most practitioners achieve. I would say that this does not necessarily never means is that it is acceptable to go below published regulations or guidance. There may be standards that are impossible to achieve. It should do but it doesnt.
I would avoid it use in contracts for this very reason and in particular if the phrase was not specified at the time of the tender. If I was asked to define the phrase in the context of a contract dispute -I would look at the detail of what was at dispute rather than attempt a general definition.
For example somebody complains that a dba is sub standard and they are not paying for it because the maps in a map regression exercise are not all at the same scale I would say. Pay up. Normal practise is not to do this - it is not specified in a standard - I do it and charge accordingly.
This is a theme I touched on at the BAJR conference I said if half of the work I have produced is considered to be above average I would be happy ie the work I produce is on average the industry norm!
Peter Wardle (Now back to that boring job rescaling maps!)
1man1desk
Posted - 09/03/2009 : 14:26:29 Posted by Tom Wilson:
quote:'Best Practice', on the other hand, is a fine example of weasel words.
Actually, 'Best Practice' or 'Best Industry Practice' are common terms, which I believe are recognised by contract lawyers. What they generally mean is something along the lines of:
'In line with what is generally accepted as best practice in the industry, even if this means going beyond the actual minimum standard required by any published regulations or guidance'.
What it never means is that it is acceptable to go below published regulations or guidance.
Maybe someone in the know (DrPete?) may have a more authoritative definition.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
YellowPete
Posted - 07/03/2009 : 22:03:33 personally i feel the grip in my heart and mouth.
txt is Mike
YellowPete
Posted - 07/03/2009 : 22:00:22 What are ethics?
I know what we think it generally means, but what does it actually mean.
I think we may all be 'pleasantly', or possibly to even being 'unpleasantly' supprised.
txt is Mike
teamonster
Posted - 06/03/2009 : 20:12:49 Heading back on topic....
I suppose it depends on what level of ethics you are considering. Most people have probably left a slightly ambiguous statement on a CV or covering letter that allows the recruiter to think something was a bit more complex than it was. However as most people do it, recruiters are wise to it and know that any CV has been written to make you sound as good as possible. On the otherhand outright lies will normally mean you fall foul of the phrase in most contracts that says you can be dismissed for getting the job under false pretences.
When it comes to projects and clients competitive is fine, but again if you deliberately mislead them you'll only end up losing the business for good, or they'll refuse to pay for a shoddy job.
The need to appear and become professional, and be recognised as such, is a recurring theme on this forum. If we abandon ethics then we might as well accept things will never change.
tom wilson
Posted - 06/03/2009 : 15:45:10
quote:Originally posted by Sparky
Tom,
Surely you are arguing that 'good enough' and 'minimum standards are one and the same?
Yes.
freeburmarangers.org
Sparky
Posted - 06/03/2009 : 14:43:19 Tom,
The term 'good enough' lingers horribly in my ears from various regretable experiences where, frankly, the standard of work was not 'good enough' although the excavators declared it was (bye bye!). I would describe such poor efforts as the consequence of vague standards where your description of best practice as 'weasily' is particularly apt. So, we have standards and they are open to interpretation, good and bad. Therefore, when I refer to 'good standards', I would opt for the positive(+) end of the minimum standard scale.
Surely you are arguing that 'good enough' and 'minimum standards are one and the same?
tom wilson
Posted - 06/03/2009 : 13:49:03
quote:Originally posted by monty
...........minimum standards can be interpreted as almost anything !! we should all strive to best practice .....putting in a little more effort ............... in reply to Tom Wilson.... why isn't the current market in a position to contemplate best practice and high standards ????? ....... this should be a priority at all times and in all aspects .....whether it be fieldwork health and safety or PX...... no excuses !!!
As pointed out by other posters, minimum standards are defined by various standards and guidance documents, and not interpretable as 'almost anything' at all. 'Best Practice', on the other hand, is a fine example of weasel words. Can't say I like 'good standard' either. Where is that defined, Sparky?
..and yes, 'good enough'is what we should be holding on to, by which I mean not letting the level of archaeological investigation fall below our minimum standards because planners etc. are desperate to see developments go ahead, for the good of the economy.
I can't help thinking we are looking at this from very different perspectives.
(edited for spelling and grammar)
freeburmarangers.org
Sparky
Posted - 06/03/2009 : 13:26:32 Oxo, 'good enough' requires reference otherwise it is subjective. Minimum standards have reference, i.e. the standards. Personally, I'd go for a 'good standard'.
BAJR Host
Posted - 06/03/2009 : 12:25:48
quote:The key is to get minimum standards enforceable and to be as close to "best practice" as possible.
Absolutely... AND to create the environment where doing better than minimum is seen as a benefit, rather than an extra cost.. Value for Money
“When a sinister person means to be your enemy, they always start by trying to become your friend.” William Blake
Windbag
Posted - 06/03/2009 : 12:21:16 This all sounds like an exercise in semantics, to be honest. The way you ensure that all archaeological work is of a satisfactory level is to set a minimum standard, through the IfA and curators. I take most people are thinking that best practice is doing a job in an exemplary way- ie no cutting corners, satisfying all the requirements of the curators, keeping the client happy, appropriate levels of post-ex, decent reports, timely and organised deposition of archives- rather than producing a series of gold-plated monographs about watching briefs in which nothing is found. The key is to get minimum standards enforceable and to be as close to "best practice" as possible.
“He who seeks vengeance must dig two graves: one for his enemy and one for himself” Chinese Proverb
monty
Posted - 06/03/2009 : 11:50:05 ...........minimum standards can be interpreted as almost anything !! we should all strive to best practice .....putting in a little more effort ............... in reply to Tom Wilson.... why isn't the current market in a position to contemplate best practice and high standards ????? ....... this should be a priority at all times and in all aspects .....whether it be fieldwork health and safety or PX...... no excuses !!!
Oxbeast
Posted - 06/03/2009 : 11:40:25 "...which we should adhere to as a minimum". Isn't that substantially the same thing as 'good enough'? Its a subjective question in anyway, as standards may or may not quantify what is 'best practice' in any particular case.
Sparky
Posted - 06/03/2009 : 10:54:49 Disagree Tom. 'Good enough' seems very subjective whereas 'best practice' implies that there are standards (IfA, Eh H etc) which we should adhere to as a minimum.
One person's 'good enough' can mean embarrassment for the rest of us.
Suffice to say my sabre has always been blue.
