Advertisement

Professions Unbound

  • Edgar A BurnsEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This final chapter brings together arguments developed across the book that professions’ success in western societies was achieved through their double claims of expertise and goodness. Initial governmental ‘outsourcing’ within early modern patronage sits very differently today. Organisational and marketplace values are today being reconfigured, unbundling these built-together and mutually reinforced claims. The continuing belief that professions’ functional roles explain their significance in society misrecognises that professions’ core justifications are unbundling. The politics of expertise around new differentiation and specialisation creates new pressures to measure and manage performance. A contemporary typology of professional service delivery forms is advanced using socioeconomic and sociocultural logics from Terence Johnson’s original work and tracing the unbundling and rebundling processes in today’s societal changes through global, corporate and digital technological shifts.

References

  1. Baldwin, R. (2016). The great convergence: Information technology and the new globalization. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bourdieu, P. (1987). The force of law: Towards a sociology of the juridical field. Hastings Law Journal, 38(5), 814–853.Google Scholar
  3. Bourdieu, P. (1989). Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 14–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Brundage, M., et al. (2018). The malicious uses of artificial intelligence: Forecasting, prevention, and mitigation. https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/3d82daa4-97fe-4096-9c6b-376b92c619de/downloads/1c6q2kc4v_50335.pdf.
  6. Burawoy, M. (1991). Ethnography unbound: Power and resistance in the modern metropolis. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  7. Burns, E. A. (2007). Positioning a post-professional approach to studying professions. New Zealand Sociology, 22(1), 69–98.Google Scholar
  8. Callon, M., & Rabeharisoa, V. (2003). Research ‘in the wild’ and the shaping of new social identities. Technology in Society, 25(2), 193–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Camillus, J. C. (2008). Strategy as a wicked problem. Harvard Business Review, 86(5), 99–106.Google Scholar
  10. Corrigan, S. (2011). Secrets of high performing organisations. Edinburgh, Scotland: Vanguard.Google Scholar
  11. Corrigan, S. (2012). The need for change: Four trends endangering every organisation. Bridport, UK: Triarchy Press.Google Scholar
  12. Cruess, S. R., Johnston, S., & Cruess, R. (2004). ‘Profession’: A working definition for medical educators. Teaching & Learning in Medicine, 16(1), 74–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Daly, M., & Silver, H. (2008). Social exclusion and social capital: A comparison and critique. Theory & Society, 37(6), 537–566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-008-9062-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Deloitte. (2018, January 23). The fourth industrial revolution is here: Are you ready? (Research Reports). Deloitte Insights. http://apo.org.au/node/131001.
  15. Derrida, J. (1977). Of grammatology. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Derrida, J. (1990). The force of law: The mystical foundation of authority. Cardozo Law Review, 11(5–6), 919–1046.Google Scholar
  17. Dingwall, R. W. J. (2008). Essays on professions. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  18. Dingwall, R. W. J., & Fenn, P. (1987). ‘A respectable profession?’ Sociological and economic perspectives on the regulation of professional services. International Journal of Law & Economics, 7(1), 51–64.Google Scholar
  19. Ellul, J. (1964). The technological society. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  20. Esland, G. (1980). Professions and professionalism. In G. Esland & G. Salaman (Eds.), The politics of work and occupations (pp. 213–250). Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  21. Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile police, and punish the poor. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  22. Evetts, J. (1999). Professionalisation and professionalism: Issues for interprofessional care. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 13(2), 119–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Evetts, J. (2005). Different interpretations of professionalism. Knowledge, Work & Society, 3(2), 59–80.Google Scholar
  24. Faulconbridge, J., & Muzio, M. (2012). Professions in a globalizing world: Towards a transnational sociology of the professions. International Sociology, 27(1), 136–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fine, B. (2010). Theories of social capital: Researchers behaving badly. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  26. Foucault, M. (1981). Orders of discourse. In R. Young (Ed.), Untying the text (pp. 48–78). Boston, MA: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  27. Freidson, E. (1970). Professional dominance. New York: Atherton.Google Scholar
  28. Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism: The third logic. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  29. Hochschild, A. (1983). The managed heart. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  30. Johnson, N. F. (2007). Simply complexity: A clear guide to complexity theory. London: Oneworld.Google Scholar
  31. Johnson, T. J. (1972). Professions and power. London: Macmillan. Republished Routledge, 2016.Google Scholar
  32. Larson, M. S. (1977). The rise of professionalism: A sociological analysis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  33. May, C. (2007). The clinical encounter and the problem of context. Sociology, 41(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038507072282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Merton, R. K. (1957). Social theory and social structure. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  35. Millerson, G. (1964a). Dilemmas of professionalism. New Society, 4, 15–18.Google Scholar
  36. Millerson, G. (1964b). The qualifying associations: A study in professionalisation. London: Routledge. Republished 2003.Google Scholar
  37. Mitleton-Kelly, E. (2003). Ten principles of complexity and enabling infrastructures. In E. Mitleton-Kelly (Ed.), Complex systems and evolutionary perspectives of organisations: The application of complexity theory to organisations (pp. 1–31). Bradford, UK: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  38. Muzio, D., Brock, D., & Suddaby, R. (2013). Professions and institutional change: Towards an institutionalist sociology of the professions. Journal of Management Studies, 50(5), 699–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Negrine, R., Holtz-Bacha, C., Mancini, P., & Papathanassopoulos, S. (Eds.). (2006). The professionalisation of political communication in Europe. Bristol, UK: Intellect.Google Scholar
  40. Nelson, E. (2016). Brace yourself: The most disruptive phase of globalization is just beginning. Quartz. http://qz.com/854257/brace-yourself-the-most-disruptive-phase-of-globalization-is-just-beginning/.
  41. Noordegraaf, M. (2015). Hybrid professionalism and beyond: (New) forms of public professionalism in changing organizational and societal contexts. Journal of Professions & Organization, 2(2), 187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. O’Neill, O. (2002). A question of trust. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. O’Neill, K. (2017). Weapons of math destruction. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  44. Parsons, T. (1951). Social structure and dynamic process: The case of modern medical practice. In T. Parsons (Ed.), The social system (pp. 428–479). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  45. Parvin, A. (2013). Architecture for the people by the people. TedTalk/YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mlt6kaNjoeI&feature=youtu.be.
  46. Ramirez, C. (2010). Promoting transnational professionalism: Forays of the big firm accounting community into France. In M.-L. Djelic & S. Quack (Eds.), Transnational communities: Shaping global economic governance (pp. 271–302). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Reed, M. (1996). Expert power and control in late modernity: An empirical review and theoretical synthesis. Organization Studies, 17(4), 573–597. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069601700402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rippon, G. (2019). The gendered brain: The new neuroscience that shatters the myth of the female brain. London: The Bodley Head.Google Scholar
  49. Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rocheleau, M. (2017, March 7). Chart: The percentage of women and men in each profession. Boston Globe. https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/03/06/chart-the-percentage-women-and-men-each-profession/GBX22YsWl0XaeHghwXfE4H/story.html.
  51. Rose, N., & Miller, P. (2010). Political power beyond the state: Problematics of government. The British Journal of Sociology, 61(s1), 271–303.Google Scholar
  52. Rusbridger, A. (2013, April 20). The future according to Mr Google. The Guardian. http://Www.Theguardian.Com/Technology/2013/Apr/20/Eric-Schmidt-Google-Alan-Rusbridger.
  53. Schmidt, V. (2019). Eight theories of societalization: Toward a theoretically sustainable concept of society. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431019850069.
  54. Seddon, J. (2005). Freedom from command and control (2nd ed.). New York: Productivity Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Seddon, J. (2008). Systems thinking in the public sector. Axminster, UK: Triarchy Press.Google Scholar
  56. Seddon, J. (2014). The Whitehall effect. Axminster, UK: Triarchy Press.Google Scholar
  57. Stokes, J., & Clegg, S. (2002). Once upon a time in the bureaucracy: Power and public sector management. Organization, 9(2), 225–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/135050840292003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Susskind, R., & Susskind, D. (2015). The future of professions: How technology will transform the work of human experts. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Svensson, L. G. (1998a, September). Changing work conditions and attitudes among professional occupations: The case of Sweden. Paper presented to Work, Employment and Society Conference, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  60. Svensson, L. G. (1998b). From professional organisation to professionalism: Changing conditions for professionals in Sweden. In V. Olgiati, L. Orzack, & M. Saks (Eds.), Professions, identity, and order in comparative perspective. Oxford, UK: Onati Papers 4–5, International Institute for the Sociology of Law: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  61. Svensson, L. G. (2000a). Denationalisation and professional structures: Opinions among professional in Sweden on state intervention and internationalisation. Interim Conference of International Sociological Association, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
  62. Svensson, L. G. (2000b). Professions: States, markets and trust: New conditions for the sociology of professions. Jesi, Italy: European Sociological Association Network.Google Scholar
  63. Svensson, L. G. (2001, February 9–10). Studying professional performance in organizational contexts. Conference on Professional Performance, Zurich.Google Scholar
  64. Svensson, L. G. (2003a). Market, management and professionalism: Professional work and changing organisational contexts. In H. Mieg & M. Pfadenhauer (Eds.), Professionelles leistung—Professional performance. Konstanz, Germany: UVK.Google Scholar
  65. Svensson, L. G. (2003b). The quest for professionalism and the dialectic of individualism and collectivism in work organisations. Knowledge, Work & Society, 1(1), 107–129.Google Scholar
  66. Svensson, L. G. (2006). New professionalism, trust and competence: Some conceptual remarks and empirical data. Current Sociology, 54(4), 579–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sweet, A. (2012). Neofunctionalism and supranational governance (pp. 1–39). Law Faculty Scholarship Series, Paper 4628. New Haven, CT: Yale University. http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers.
  68. Tousijn, W. (2006). Beyond decline: Consumerism, managerialism and the need for a new medical professionalism. Health Sociology Review, 15(5), 469–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Vallas, S., & Christin, A. (2018). Work and identity in an era of precarious employment: How workers respond to ‘personal branding’ discourse. Work and Occupations, 45(1), 3–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888417735662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Veloso, L., Freire, J., Lopes, N., & Oliveira, L. (2015). Regulation, public interest and research in the professional field: The case of the health sector. Journal of Sociology, 51(4), 903–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wacquant, L. (2004). Following Pierre Bourdieu into the field. Ethnography, 5(4), 387–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/1466138104052259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wacquant, L. (2018). Bourdieu comes to town: Pertinence, principles, applications. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 42(1), 90–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Weber, M., Baehr, P., & Wells, G. (2002). The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism and other writings. London: Penguin Classics.Google Scholar
  74. Wilensky, H. L. (1964). The professionalization of everyone? American Journal of Sociology, 70(2), 137–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Witz, A. (1992). Professions and patriarchy. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zucker, B. (2016). What exactly did Einstein mean by ‘everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler’? Quora. https://www.quora.com/What-exactly-did-Einstein-mean-by-Everything-should-be-made-as-simple-as-possible-but-not-simpler.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Waikato UniversityNapierNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations