I’ve been publishing on this blog about cultural resource management (CRM) archaeology since 2013 but I’m not sure you readers know I’m no longer a full-time CRM archaeologist. I landed a job teaching at the University of California, Berkeley in 2017 and just earned tenure this year (2023). So, I’m now a tenured professor at a R1 school who only does CRM contracts on the side. I draw upon my former CRM career to teach heritage conservation, CRM, historical artifact analysis, and African Diaspora archaeology at U.C. Berkeley. You should read my academic journal articles and recently published book to learn more about that.
As an associate professor, I understand it is my responsibility to prepare my students for careers in archaeology. This is why in all my classes everything my students ever do is oriented towards CRM and heritage conservation. This month I did a class activity that asked students to pretend they were CRMers and plan a hypothetical archaeological survey. The parameters were admittedly sketchy since this was a pivot from the planned activity that was cancelled due to wildfire smoke, but it turned out surprisingly well…..er, as well as Lord of the Flies did.
The project was a pedestrian survey of a hypothetical undeveloped 60-acre parcel. I told them it was known that there was a historical farm (about 100 years old) within the parcel somewhere that had to be recorded and evaluated under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). They were given a map of the “project area” and told they had landed a “Time-and-Materials” contract so they just had to come up with a budget for the fieldwork and it would be approved by the client.
In my hypothetical class activity, the project area was located about a day’s drive from the home office, so they would have to arrange transportation to the site, lodging, and calculate per diem. The project was in California, so they were told that workdays were eight hours long. They would have to calculate overtime if the crew went over eight hours in a day. The students were supposed to plan for two travel days, one day there and one day back, as well as one day of pedestrian survey. The crew was supposed to include four field techs and a crew chief. Project planning was to be done by a principal investigator. The crew chief was responsible for completing the project along with a skilled corps of field techs.
I asked the students to break into three groups and act like they had those positions in a hypothetical CRM firm. Here were their positions:
Archaeological Technician: These students were told they had a BA in Anthropology and 1-2 years of experience. There were 4 techs for this project as it was assumed a significant portion of the day would be spent recording at least 1 site. They knew it would be best if some of them were familiar with historical artifacts and Native American sites in the Bay Area, which was far from their home office.
Techs were initially budgeted to be paid $25.00/hr.
Crew Chief: I told these students they had a MA in Anthropology and about 3 years supervisory experience, so they fit the criteria of a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA). The crew chiefs were responsible for making lodging arrangements, briefing their crew, scheduling transportation, and learning as much as possible about the history and prehistory of the project area before they head out. They also had to mitigate any complications amongst the crew and motivate them to get the job done.
Crew chiefs were initially budgeted to be paid $35.00/hr.
Principal Investigator: Students acting as the PIs were responsible for calculating the project’s cost and relaying that to the client. PIs set the pay rates, made the level of effort calculations, and did what they could to make sure the crew was doing the job.
PIs were told their salaries came from the overhead. They didn’t get paid by the hour, just to get the job done. Regardless of whether or not the project made money, the PIs were going to get paid as long as they didn’t muck it up too badly. Also, that their success depended upon the crew getting the job done for the budgeted price.
PHASE I: Archaeology students act like true Americans.
For the first 15 minutes, I had the groups work together to perform their respective roles. They got into huddles and contemplated what they’d do if they had those positions in real life:
Principal Investigators: Initially, the PIs started working on a budget for their crews that included transportation, per diem, and lodging. But, within a few minutes they realized they could save a bunch of money if they just hired local folks. They also mulled over hiring local college students because they could be paid even less than techs but were concerned about the quality that inexperienced undergrads and high school graduates would produce. They didn’t want to do such poor-quality work that it prevented them from getting future contracts from this client.
Begrudgingly, the PIs decided to hire techs and a crew chief with college degrees but that they would recruit the whole crew from the local area. None of their current employees in SoCal, including the crew chief, was going to work on the project. It would all be local project hires.
Crew Chiefs: The crew chiefs were tasked with all the logistics and carrying out the plan of work. So, they were occupied finding a motel that was within the Federal lodging rates ($165/night) that was also near the project area. They also set to work planning where they’d start walking transects and checking Google Earth to see if they could see the extent of the site so they could calculate how long it would take to record the historical farm.
Field Techs: The techs’ biggest concerns revolved around pay, lodging, and transportation. How much were they going to get paid? Did they have to spend any of their money for this project? Where were they going to stay? What amenities did the motel have? Were there food options nearby? Did the rooms have minifridges? Did they have to drive their personal vehicles to the site? Was the per diem going to get distributed before the project started? Basically, the techs wanted to know what sort of comforts they could expect during the course of this project.
I found it remarkable that in Phase I, the students were bringing up the sorts of questions that PIs, crew chiefs, and techs ask in the real world. I think only one of these students has ever done CRM before. The rest of them haven’t. In fact, most of these undergrads hadn’t even taken a field school. This class was the first one they’d taken here at Berkeley that had any significant engagement with CRM at all and they were naturally acting like CRMers do in real life.
Phase II: The Curveball
About 15 minutes into the exercise, I asked all three groups to talk openly about the questions they had. The field techs asked the crew chef about lodging and amenities, about transportation to and from the project area. The crew chief wanted to know how much money the company had budgeted so they could make their plans. Both the crew chief and field tech groups were committed to the project, they just wanted some clarification.
However, the PIs had to break the news to them that they had no intention on even hiring any of their own employees. It was really interesting to watch the PIs tell their classmates that they were going to undercut them and hire locals. The PIs looked sheepish and somewhat embarrassed to say out loud that they were doing what they felt was necessary to bring down the project’s cost. The crew chiefs and techs were equally as shocked. They were like, “WTF??! So, they’re going to roll the dice on out-of-town randos to bring the costs down? Just to save on per diem and hotel costs? How’s that going to work?”
I let this simmer for a few seconds before intervening. But it only took the techs like 30 seconds to conclude, “Well fu¢k it. I quit.” The techs were already applying for new jobs, but the crew chiefs were like, “So do I even have a job here? I thought I was going to run this project.” All feelings and behaviors I’ve seen before in CRM.
To keep the exercise going, I had to step in. I told the PIs that they had to have employees because I wanted them to pretend like they wanted their company to last longer than 3 hours. I told them they would need field techs and crew chiefs if they wanted to have a company because they can’t get more projects without archaeologists to do the work (NOTE: This is not entirely true, but I needed something to keep the class going.) I told the PIs that they had to plan on using their own employees rather than scabbing the project out to local temp workers and college students. I told the techs that they were gonna get hired and the crew chief was going to manage the field effort.
But then I threw all three groups a curve ball in Phase II:
Principal Investigators: Just as they’d finished calculating the costs of the field effort, I told the PIs the client called them and said, “There’s another small parcel near the project area. It’s only five acres. Can you guys survey that while you’re already up there?” Yay! More archaeology!
I told them the client didn’t give them a map of this parcel, tell them where it’s at, or any other information. Just that they’d pay for their time if they could survey this property too.
Crew Chiefs: I told the crew chiefs that there was a new hire on the project who had just finished their PhD at an Ivy League university. The PhD only had about three months of CRM experience, this was their first job out of college, but they’d spent the entire time complaining about the way every project at this company was handled. They complained about the methods. They complained about the people they worked with. They complained about the company’s management.
To make matters worse, the PhD field tech consistently fu¢ked up everything they did in the field. Their measurements were always off. They couldn’t identify artifacts. And they never filled out their paperwork correctly. But, worst of all, the PhD didn’t think they should have to listen to the crew chiefs because they “only had a Master’s.”
I told the Crew Chiefs that the day before they were supposed to go out on this project, the PhD was complaining that they only made $38/hr. even though they had a PhD. This was more than the Crew Chief. I told them that they had to take the PhD tech out with them and do what they could to make the project a success even though they had this knowledge and knew the PhD stunk at CRM archaeology.
Field Techs: I told the field techs the same story about the poopy-pants PhD but told them that the crew chief and PIs expect them to train this person properly and that they’re responsible for fixing all their mistakes. I told them that some of the field techs were there when the PhD complained about their wages even though it was significantly more than the techs were getting paid. The techs were pissed about this.
Needless to say, things got interesting in Phase II of this exercise:
Crew Chiefs: I feel like the crew chiefs had an amazing response to the curve ball I threw them. They agreed that they needed to figure out how to make this project happen since it was going down the very next day, but they also needed to figure out a pathway towards getting the PhD rehabilitated (or, fired) so the crew could work more smoothly. The crew chiefs came up with the idea of drafting some community guidelines that all the folks on the crew had to agree to abide by. Things like being a good citizen and being supportive of the field effort. Not slandering co-workers and giving their all to improve their skills and help each other. They decided to tell the PIs about the problems the PhD was causing and that they believed this would help rebuild comradery and bring the team together to get this job done. Then, they told the techs about this plan and decided to get everyone on the crew to sign it before heading out to the field. The crew chiefs and techs said they’d wait for the PhD to poop their pants or mess something up in the field and use that as either a warning or grounds to get them removed from future projects.
Then the crew chiefs also said they were going to renegotiate their wages after this project. If the PIs didn’t pay up, they were going to find another job.
Field Techs: The field techs were about to mutiny. They said they weren’t going out on this project if they didn’t get a raise and if the PhD was on the crew. They said they wanted $35/hr. and for the PhD to be fired.
Principal Investigators: The PIs realized this was a “Time-and-Materials” contract and that they were gonna make even more money by billing the client a whole extra day of fieldwork for the additional 5 acres. But, they needed the crew to stay out there to get it done. The PIs were also pissed off when they heard about the PhD’s behavior and attitude.
So, the PIs just fired the PhD. “Fu¢k it. The PhD is gone. Now, field techs we’ll give you a $5 raise so you’re gonna be making $30/hr. How does that sound?” The PIs realized these were project hires on a Time and Materials contract anyway. There was no guarantee they’d be with the company after this project so why not let them eat cake this time?
At this point, the PIs also realized how valuable the crew chief was. They decided to give them a raise too as they were going to have to do this even larger project but were losing a crew member. They told the crew chief they were going to be making $40/hr. from now on but keep it quiet from the rest of the crew.
The PIs also realized they had been calculating how much the project was going to cost so that they didn’t lose money. Their calculations only allowed them a modest profit (I set overhead at 150% with a 10% profit). They saw the chance to jack up the rates even more now that they were gonna survey an additional five acres. They fired up their calculators.
In the end, the PIs calculated that the project was going to cost about $11,000 for 4 techs and a crew chief to do a 1-day survey of the larger parcel. Including the per diem, lodging, and additional salary, the project was only going to be a few thousand more with the additional five acres on a second field day. I encouraged them to jack up the rates to almost $20,000 to make sure they’d cover the spread. Just to see what happens. They could always lower their prices a little if the client balked at the cost of the fieldwork.
Crew Chiefs: With their raise in hand, the crew chiefs broke the news to the crew. The problematic PhD was no longer working at the company. They’d be out there for 2 field days rather than 1, and that they would be staying at a motel 10 minutes from the project area and across the street from a Chuck E. Cheese’s. Each person was getting their own room with a mini fridge, wi-fi, and the motel had free breakfast. But they’d have to do this whole thing with one less crewmember. Who cares when you can eat pizza and play arcade games every night, right?
The crew chief did not tell them about their raise. Best to not let them know about that.
The field techs were happy. The crew chief was happy. The PIs were seeing just how much they could make from this job, so they were happy too.
Phase III: Undercutters enter the scene.
The students were doing a great job so far. The PIs had calculated a new budget. The crew chiefs were using the project area map to mark out transects and figure out a new plan of action that only used 4 crew members. The field techs were looking at the food options by their motel and talking about how they were doing to save their per diem. All was well.
After the students had been working on this for almost 2 hours, I decided to throw them yet another curveball. I told them that, just as they’d made the reservations for the motel rooms, the client called the PI and told them that they were golfing with an acquaintance yesterday who told them that he was getting ripped off on this CRM thing. The client told them that this random golf buddy knew a dude in Louisiana who did cultural resources, and that the Louisiana guy only pays his employees $15/hr. The Gregarious Golfer said he could get the Louisiana CRM company to do this survey for much less, even including the gas for them to drive all the way from Baton Rouge to the San Francisco Bay Area. No per diem. No motel costs. No overhead. No travel days. Just the salary for five dudes from Louisiana in a truck to survey the 65 acres, identify any sites, send the client the GPS points, and go back home.
The PIs did the calculation and realized this would be much, much cheaper than what they were charging. For a few seconds, everyone thought this was the end.
But then they realized the Louisiana guys were highly likely to muck this up. They had no California experience. They didn’t know any of the local culture or geological history. They’d never been to the state before. I told them the Louisiana CRMers were used to surveying for pipelines and typically did shovel probes; we’ve discussed the differences between shovel probe and pedestrian surveys in class. I told them it wasn’t guaranteed that the Louisiana guys couldn’t do the job but that there were lots of benefits of going with a California company.
Most importantly, I reminded them that the Louisiana folks were not familiar with California regulations. The major benefit of going with people from California is that you all know how to make money despite the complex state and local historic preservation regs. Even though the NHPA was the hypothetical law they were working with, a California company would be more likely to know that the project would also have to be in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which is slightly different than the NHPA. Depending on what they found out there, there may also be tribal consultation regulations that their client would have to comply with. We knew there was a farm but we didn’t know the historical owners. It may have been owned by Hispanic, Asian American, or Native American farmers, all groups that the state has historic contexts for. Furthermore, it’s likely there would be additional regulations for Contra Costa County. California companies exist in a regulations-rich soil that a Louisiana company might not be familiar with the same way California companies wouldn’t necessarily know Louisiana regs.
The biggest benefit of going with a California company is the fact that there is a lower chance of project failure by going with a company that is more familiar with the regs, the archaeology, and what it takes to get through all this bureaucracy. The students agreed. They said they couldn’t compete on price. However, they did say they’d bring down their prices $2,000 off the fieldwork to sweeten the deal for the client (REMEMBER: They’d inflated the budget after the +5-acres agreement so they could afford to do this and still make money). The students said the client was more than willing to go with the absolute cheapest vendor, risking the viability of their project on a bet that these undercutters could get the job done properly.
If they want to roll the dice on the cheapest option, they were more than willing to do so. But the students let it be known that they were the better option to get the job done right the first time.
Epilogue: Is CRM this way by instinct?
I was amazed to see how quickly the undergraduates adopted prevailing CRM practices despite never having worked in the industry themselves. This 3-hour exercise in CRM business basics is a small sample of what I teach in my graduate seminar Ethical Issues in Cultural Resource Management. In that class, students spend the entire semester working on a response to a hypothetical Request for Proposals (RFP), complete with a budget that includes itemized overhead expenses (e.g. property depreciation, health benefits, employment taxes, insurance, ect.). To increase the realism in the grad class, I have real CRM PIs deliver guest lectures on hiring, budgeting, and project management in that class. The grad-level CRM class really introduces students for careers in CRM management and these skills have really served grad students well when it comes to grant writing, research design, and budgeting as well as getting jobs in CRM.
The exercise I described above was the first time I’ve introduced CRM concepts to undergraduates as an exercise. They dove right in and did a great job. I feel like simulations like this are what we need in higher ed if we want to cultivate the next generation of American archaeologists. I know from experience: If you can do CRM as a professional, you sure as hell can do academia. The exercise I did with my undergraduates was a routine type of assignment in my PhD classes at the University of Arizona. I wish it was part of curriculum at every level but definitely in graduate school I don’t think this is the kind of assignment you can drop on anyundergrad class, but I challenge professors reading this post to try it in one of their classes.
If you’ve been reading this blog, you already know how I feel about university training for archaeologists. It stinks because we’re not teaching things students need to build a career and we’re not teaching in a way that connects to students, or anyone else for that matter:
When archaeology field techs have to teach PhDs how to do archaeology
How to keep college classes from sucking, Part I
How to keep college classes from sucking, Part II
An education that prepares archaeologists for archaeology
I mean the landing page for this website says: College does not prepare you for a career in cultural resource management.” I published that landing page in 2013 and stand behind it 10 years later.
There are many reasons why this is true but the biggest one is that university professors don’t know how to teach CRM and have no motivation to learn how. I’m doing the best I can in a department where nobody hardly mentions CRM in class. Other universities have CRM programs but, where I work CRM is considered a failed career, “lesser” archaeology, or what the non-academicians do. Forget about the over $1.3 billion we’re likely to spend on CRM in the next decade or the thousands of job openings that will open in that time. Our employer rewards us for teaching random classes about stuff we’re interested in, giving boring talks about our “research,” perpetually serving on do-nothing committees, and advising students on the itsy-bitsy, narrow “research” we’ve been doing for decades. We also rarely recruit professors who have ever done CRM so there’s almost never anyone that understands it in the department. There’s no mechanism to get professors to teach cultural resource management archaeology, so they don’t. And there’s no motivation to hire CRMers to teach in universities.
Things will change in academia one day, but it is unlikely they will result in CRM archaeology programs unless graduate students push for it and CRM companies start putting their money where their mouths are. Companies need to tell deans and department heads that they will sponsor students, including undergraduate internships and covering grad student expenses which aren’t cheap, if the funded student works on CRM projects. This is the sort of public-private engagement that has long been a practice in medicine, tech, and business. Universities are like any other American business—feed them money and they’ll do what you want.
Students also have a unique position in this equation too because they can vote with their enrollments. Just don’t enroll in a program that doesn’t have a nexus with CRM. You can major in all sorts of “related fields” that feed into CRM. They’ll give you a shot as a field tech if you have a Bachelors and an archaeological field school if you have a diploma in history, sociology, geography, planning, pre-med, the list goes on. (NOTE: This is probably the only way we’re going to get BIPOC students in archaeology because they aren’t typically in ultra-white anthropology programs. We’re going to have to look outside anthro if we want to become inclusive.). And students who leave need to make sure the department head knows you left the program because they weren’t teaching CRM.
Maybe we’ll see cultural resource management archaeology become a normal part of university curriculum if students say they want it and companies start paying for it. We’ll just have to see…
Having trouble finding work in cultural resource management archaeology? Still blindly mailing out resumes and waiting for a response? Has your archaeology career plateaued and you don’t know what to do about it? Download a copy of the new book “Becoming an Archaeologist: Crafting a Career in Cultural Resource Management” Click here to learn more.
Check out Succinct Research’s contribution to Blogging Archaeology. Full of amazing information about how blogging is revolutionizing archaeology publishing. For a limited time you can GRAB A COPY FOR FREE!!!! Click Here
“Resume-Writing for Archaeologists” is now available on Amazon.com. Click Here and get detailed instructions on how you can land a job in CRM archaeology today!
Small Archaeology Project Management is now on the Kindle Store. Over 300 copies were sold in the first month! Click Here and see what the buzz is all about.
Join the Succinct Research email list and receive additional information on the CRM and heritage conservation field.
Get killer information about the CRM archaeology industry and historic preservation.