DPU Conference

Organizational Learning and Beyond

October 20th 2010
Copenhagen
Denmark

Organizational Professionalism: changes, challenges and

opportunities

Professor Julia Evetts

School of Sociology and Social Policy
University of Nottingham
University Park
Nottingham
Email: [email protected]

1
Organizational Professionalism: changes, challenges and
opportunities

For a long time, the sociologies of organizations and of professional groups have

developed separately and had their own research questions and agendas. This has

changed in the last 15 years as, increasingly, practitioners in Anglo-American

societies (as well as in European) now work in complex hierarchical organizations

(e.g. medicine and health) or, in law, in professional service firms (PSFs) and

sometimes in international locations. Most professional work now takes place in

organizations both publicly managed services or large private sector firms.

This change has been theorised in a number of different ways. One way has been to

demonstrate a convergence between the previously different Anglo-American and

European contexts for professional work. In 1990 Collins was able (p.98) to

distinguish ‘Anglo-Saxon’ and ‘Continental’ modes of professionalism. In

Continental modes the state was the main actor while in the Anglo-American model

self-employed practitioners had freedom to control work conditions. Processes of

convergence now render the Collins distinction somewhat obsolete, except in

historical accounts (Svensson and Evetts, ed, 2003; Evetts, ed, 2008a). Burrage and

Torstendahl (1990) identified four key ‘actors’ in the development of professions –

practitioners, users, states and universities – but it is now increasingly important, in

both Anglo-American and European societies, to add a fifth which is the role of the

employing organization.

2
An alternative way of theorizing this change is to focus on professionalism both as an

occupational value (Parsons 1939; Freidson 2001) and/or as a discourse (Fournier

1999; Evetts 2003). I have conceptualized this as a ‘new’ professionalism (though

there are continuities) or as ‘organizational’ professionalism (Evetts 2004;

Falconbridge and Muzio 2007) in contrast to ‘occupational’ professionalism (see

section 1). Organizational professionalism seems to involve a challenge to the

occupational control of the work which was Freidson’s defining characteristic of

Anglo-American forms of (occupational) professionalism. It seems that

professionalism is no longer a distinctive ‘third’ logic since the exercise of

professionalism is now organizationally defined and includes the logics of the

organization and the market, managerialism and commercialism.

So how is it best to theorize these organizational contexts for professionalism. One

possibility is to see professions as severely challenged and threatened by

organizations, professions as passive victims who are relatively powerless against

demands for regulation, increased bureaucracy, transparency and accountability. In

effect this might involve a return to notions of proletarianization or de-

professionalization (Reed 2007). This rather pessimistic interpretation has been

prominent in my own recent writing (2008b, 2009a) when I have characterized recent

changes as a threat to the third logic of professionalism and as challenges to

professionalism as an occupational value; and that expert judgement and professional

discretion is something worth protecting and preserving. This paper examines some of

these challenges.

3
The paper explains some of the organizational dimensions of professional work. The

first section explains professionalism as an occupational value, how professionalism

is changing and being changed and the consequences for practitioners and their

clients. A model is constructed which contrasts organizational professionalism with

occupational professionalism and enables an assessment to be made (in section 2) of

what has changed and which aspects continue. Then, in section 3, some of the

challenges to professionalism as a ‘third logic’ and an occupational value are

assessed. In section 4 some of the opportunities for professions and professional

workers in organizations are explored.

1. Professionalism as an occupational value : changes and continuities

The analysis of professionalism as an occupation value in sociology has a very long

history. In early analyses of professions, in both Britain and the USA, the key

concept was the occupational value of ‘professionalism’ and its importance for the

stability and civility of social systems (e.g. Tawney 1921; Carr-Saunders and Wilson

1933; Marshall 1950). Early American sociological theorists of professions

developed similar interpretations. The best known, though perhaps most frequently

mis-quoted, attempt to clarify the special characteristics of professionalism, its central

values and contribution to social order and stability, was that of Parsons (1939).

Parsons recognized and was one of the first theorists to show how the capitalist

economy, the rational-legal social order (of Weber) and the modern professions were

all interrelated and mutually balancing in the maintenance and stability of a fragile

normative social order. He demonstrated how the authority of the professions and of

bureaucratic hierarchical organizations both rested on the same principles (for

example of functional specificity, restriction of the power domain, application of

4
universalistic, impersonal standards). The professions, however, by means of their

collegial organization and shared identity demonstrated an alternative approach

(compared with the managerial hierarchy of bureaucratic organizations) towards the

shared normative end.

Professions, then, involve different ways and means of organizing work and workers,

different work relations, compared with organizations. Professional values emphasize

a shared identity based on competencies (produced by education, training and

apprenticeship socialization) and sometimes guaranteed by licensing. Professional

relations are characterized as collegial, cooperative and mutually supportive and

relations of trust characterize practitioner/client and practitioner/employer

interactions.

The work of Parsons has subsequently been subject to heavy criticism mainly because

of its links with functionalism (Dingwall and Lewis 1983). The differences between

professionalism and rational–legal, bureaucratic, hierarchical ways of organizing

work have been returned to, however, in Freidson’s (2001) recent analysis. Freidson

examines the logics of three different ways of organizing work in contemporary

societies (the market, organization and profession) and illustrates the respective

advantages and disadvantages of each for clients and practitioners. In this analysis he

demonstrates the continuing importance of maintaining professionalism (with some

modifications) as the main organizing principle for service sector work.

This interpretation represents what might be termed the optimistic view of

professionalism as an occupational value, and of what professionalism and the process

5
of professionalization of work entails. It is based on the principle that the work is of

special value either to the public or to the interests of the state or an elite (Freidson

2001: 214). According to Freidson, ‘the ideal typical position of professionalism is

founded on the official belief that the knowledge and skill of a particular

specialization requires a foundation in abstract concepts and formal learning’ (2001:

34/5). Education, training and experience are fundamental requirements but once

achieved (and sometimes licensed) then the exercise of discretion based on

competences is central and deserving of special status. The practitioners have special

knowledge and skill and (particularly if its practice is protected by licensing) there is a

need to trust professionals’ assessments, recommendations and intentions. As a

consequence externally imposed rules governing work are minimized and the exercise

of discretion and good judgement, often in highly complex situations and

circumstances, and based on recognized competences, are maximized.

There is a second more pessimistic interpretation of professionalism, however, which

grew out of the more critical literature on professions which was prominent in Anglo-

American analyses in the 1970s and 1980s. This second interpretation is critical of the

occupational values analysis and during this period professionalism came to be

dismissed as a successful ideology (Johnson 1972) and professionalization as a

process of market closure and monopoly control of work (Larson 1977) and

occupational dominance (Larkin 1983). Professionalization was intended to promote

professional practitioners own occupational self interests in terms of their salary,

status and power as well as the monopoly protection of an occupational jurisdiction

(Abbott 1988).This was seen to be a process largely initiated and controlled by the

6
practitioners themselves and mainly in their own interests although it could also be

argued to be in the public interest (Saks 1995).

A third and later development involved the analysis of professionalism as a discourse

of occupational change and control – this time in work organizations where the

discourse is increasingly applied and utilized by managers. This third interpretation

combines the previous two. The third interpretation returns to professionalism as an

occupational value but in this interpretation professionalism is ideological and used as

a means of practitioner/employee control. The discourse of professionalism is taken

over, reconstructed and used as an instrument of managerial control in organizations

where professionals are employed and in order to rationalize, re-organize, contain and

control the work and the practitioners. Fournier (1999) considers the appeal to

‘professionalism’ as a disciplinary mechanism in new occupational contexts. She

suggests how the use of the discourse of professionalism, in a large privatized service

company of managerial labour, works to inculcate ‘appropriate’ work identities,

conducts and practices. She considers this as ‘a disciplinary logic which inscribes

“autonomous” professional practice within a network of accountability and governs

professional conduct at a distance’ (1999: 280). It is also interesting and highly

relevant to link this notion of organizational professionalism with aspects of public

management – particularly in education and the NHS in the UK.

The analysis of professionalism as an occupational value has, then, involved different

interpretations – sometimes positive, sometimes negative and in the latest

interpretation combined – of what the professionalization of an occupational group

entails. The features of occupational professionalism (the traditional Anglo-American

7
form) which made it distinctive and different to organizational means of controlling

work and workers were somewhat idealistic (probably ideological) and based on a

model and image of historical relations probably in the medical and legal professions

in predominantly Anglo-American societies in the 19th century. The image was of the

doctor, lawyer and clergyman, who were independent gentlemen, and could be trusted

as a result of their competence and experience to provide altruistic advice within a

community of mutually dependent middle and upper class clients. The legacy of this

image, whether in fact or fiction, has provided a powerful incentive for many aspiring

occupational groups throughout the 20th century and helps to explain the appeal of

professionalism as a managerial tool.

The image or the ideology of professionalism as an occupational value that is so

appealing involves a number of different aspects. Some might never have been

operational; some might have been operational for short periods in a limited number

of occupational groups. Aspects include:

 control of the work systems, processes, procedures, priorities to be determined

primarily by the practitioner/s;

 professional institutions/associations as the main providers of codes of ethics,

constructors of the discourse of professionalism, providers of licensing and

admission procedures, controllers of competences and their acquisition and

maintenance, overseeing discipline, due investigation of complaints and

appropriate sanctions in cases of professional incompetence;

 collegial authority, legitimacy, mutual support and cooperation;

 common and lengthy (perhaps expensive) periods of shared education,

training, apprenticeship;

8
  development of strong occupational identities and work cultures;

 strong sense of purpose and of the importance, function, contribution and

significance of the work;

 discretionary judgment, assessment evaluation and decision-making, often in

highly complex cases, and of confidential advice-giving, treatment, and means

of taking forward;

 trust and confidence characterize the relations between practitioner/client,

practitioner/employer and fellow practitioners.

These aspects are not intended to be regarded as the defining characteristics of a

profession. Rather these are aspects of the image and the ideology of professionalism

which can account for the attraction and appeal of professionalism as an occupational

value and increasingly as a managerial tool in work organizations. In previous

publications I have referred to these aspects as ideal-types of occupational

professionalism and contrasted these with organizational aspects of professionalism

(Evetts 2006).

In contemporary societies we seem to be witnessing the development of two different

(and in many ways contrasting) forms of professionalism in knowledge-based,

service-sector work: organizational and occupational professionalism (see Table 1).

As an ideal-type organizational professionalism is a discourse of control used

increasingly by managers in work organizations. It incorporates rational-legal forms

of authority and hierarchical structures of responsibility and decision-making. It

involves the increased standardization of work procedures and practices and

managerialist controls. It relies on externalized forms of regulation and accountability

9
measures such as target-setting and performance review. In contrast, and again as an

ideal-type, occupational professionalism is a discourse constructed within

professional occupational groups and incorporates collegial authority. It involves

relations of practitioner trust from both employers and clients. It is based on

autonomy and discretionary judgment and assessment by practitioners in complex

cases. It depends on common and lengthy systems of education, vocational training

and socialization, and the development of strong occupational identities and work

cultures. Controls are operationalized by practitioners themselves who are guided by

codes of professional ethics which are monitored by professional institutes and

associations. In earlier work the links and connections between these two different

forms of professionalism and the classical interpretations of Weber and Durkheim

have been explored (Evetts 2004, 2005). These links will not be explained here but

can be illustrated by reference to Weber’s analysis of the increased prominence of the

efficiency of the rational-legal and Durkheim’s interpretation of organic solidarity and

occupations as moral communities and sources of identity.

10
TABLE 1
Two different forms of professionalism in knowledge-based work.

Organizational professionalism Occupational professionalism

 discourse of control used  discourse constructed within

increasingly by managers in work professional groups
organizations

 rational-legal forms of authority  collegial authority

 standardized procedures  discretion and occupational control

of the work

 hierarchical structures of authority  practitioner trust by both clients

and decision-making and employers

 managerialism  controls operationalized by

practitioners

 accountability and externalized  professional ethics monitored by

forms of regulation, target-setting institutions and associations
and performance review

 linked to Weberian models of  located in Durkheim’s model of

organization occupations as moral communities

11
2. A new professionalism? Changes and continuities

Professionalism is changing and being changed and these changes have been seen as a

tool of government intended to promote commercialized professionalism (Hanlon

1998) and organizational professionalism (Evetts 2006; 2009b). Organizational

principles, strategies and methods are deeply affecting most professional occupations

and expert groups, transforming their identities, structures and practices. Whether or

not there is a ‘new’ form of professionalism is debatable since there are elements of

continuity as well as of change. It is important, therefore, to clarify what exactly has

changed and what continues in order to be able to assess the relevance (or otherwise)

of analyses of professionalism as an occupational value.

In identifying what has changed, certainly there are elements of hierarchy,

bureaucracy, output and performance measures and even the standardization of work

practices affecting professionalism and which are more characteristic of

organizational forms of control of work and workers. When service sector

professionals have proved enduringly difficult to manage and resistant to change, then

an important part of the strategy became to recreate professionals as managers and to

manage by normative techniques. The discourse of enterprise becomes linked with

discourses of professionalism, quality, customer service and care. Professionals are

also tempted by the ideological components of empowerment, innovation, autonomy

and discretion. In fact, the measurement of and attempts to demonstrate

professionalism actually increase the demand for explicit accounting of professional

competences. The work organization’s management demands for quality control and

audit, target setting and performance review become reinterpreted as the promotion of

professionalism. This quest for professionalism and accountability is highly

competitive (Hoggett 1996) and individualistic (Broadbent et al., 1999) but it is also a

12
bureaucratic means of regaining control of a market-directed enterprise staffed by

professionals.

In addition there are other new and different elements and characteristics of

professionalism (particularly the professionalism developed in New Public

Management, NPM, in the UK and elsewhere) which would make it a distinctive and

new variant different to both organizational and occupational forms of

professionalism. The emphasis on governance and community controls, the

negotiations between complex numbers of agencies and interests, and the recreation

of professionals themselves as managers, make this new professionalism a variant on

organizational and occupational forms of control. The control of professionals in

public services is to be achieved by means of normative values and self-regulated

motivation. The discourse of enterprise is fitted alongside the language of quality and

customer care and the ideologies of empowerment, innovation, autonomy and

discretion. In addition, this is also a discourse of individualization and competition

where individual performance is linked to the success or failure of the organization.

These all constitute powerful mechanisms of worker/employee control in which the

occupational values of professionalism are used to promote the efficient management

of the organization.

In numerous ways centralizing, regulatory governments, intent on demonstrating

value from public service budgets seem to be redefining professionalism and

accountability as measurable. But before we acknowledge the decline (and possible

demise) of occupational forms of professionalism, it is necessary also to acknowledge

some of the ways in which occupational professionalism still continues to operate.

The occupational control of work is still important in some previously powerful

occupational groups such as law (though less so for medicine). It is also of increased
13
importance in some newly powerful professional groups such as international

accountancy. In addition, there are examples of attempts by some occupational

groups to reclaim professionalism. In these cases both national institutions and

European professional federations are involved in aspects of the regulation of the

occupational groups including the development of performance criteria, target setting

and continuing professional development (CPD). In assisting governments to define

and construct these regulatory systems, these national professional institutions and

European federations are continuing to operationalize the occupational control of the

work and constituting a form of moral community based on occupational

membership. In addition there are also examples of the sharing, modification and

adaptation of particular regulatory regimes between different professional institutions

and federations (Evetts 1994).

Other continuities characteristic of occupational professionalism remain and seem

resistant to change sometimes despite clear policies and incentives for change.

Gender, and gender differences in professional careers and occupational specialisms,

continue, although some interesting variants are emerging and situations are complex.

Women are entering established professions in larger numbers and proportions, and

men are entering female professions, and many are successfully progressing their

careers. Other professionalizing occupations (often where women are numerically

dominant) have utilized professionalism in order to secure new tasks, responsibilities

and recognition. Women are increasingly becoming managers, but management itself

is being changed and standardized such that it might be the case that men are leaving

this (less interesting and powerful) field and moving upwards where they can and

sideways (e.g. into consultancy or private practice) when they cannot.

14
Table 2 summarizes aspects of change and continuity in the interpretation of

professionalism as an occupational value in service professions. This is a

simplification of what is, in fact, a highly complex, variable and changing situation.

Professional occupations are different both within and between nation-states and

contexts are constantly changing as new nation-state and European policies emerge,

develop and are adapted and modified in practice and in local work places. Used with

care and due caution, these aspects might enable an assessment of the prominence of

organizational and occupational professionalism to be made in different occupations

and work places.

TABLE 2

Changes and Continuities in Professionalism as Occupational Value

Changes Continuities

Governance Authority

Management Legitimacy

External forms of regulation Prestige, status,

power, dominance
Audit and measurement Competence, knowledge

Targets and performance indicators Identity and work culture

Work standardization Discretion to deal with complex cases,

Financial control respect, trust

Competition, individualism, stratification Collegial relations and jurisdictional

competitions

Organizational control of the work Gender differences in careers and

priorities strategies

Possible range of solutions/procedures Procedures and solutions discussed and

defined by the organization agreed within specialist teams

These changes and continuities include both structural and relationship aspects and

characteristics although, importantly, the changes are more structural while the
15
continuities tend to focus on relations. The contexts for different occupations and

professions are also complex, diverse and variable both within and between different

nation-states in Europe and North America. In addition these changes and

continuities have been identified and illustrated at macro and mezo levels of analysis

but there might also be significant micro variations in different work places and local

organizational contexts (Liljegren 2007).

It might be the case that professional strategies are increasingly resistant, defensive or

conservative which seek to protect jurisdictions and privileges (Muzio forthcoming;

Abel 2003; Muzio and Ackroyd 2005; Reed 2007). It is also important, however, to

include the new strategies and tactics which are developing as professions adapt to

emerging challenges and opportunities. These opportunities for practitioners,

professions and professional institutes and associations are also considered.

3. Professions in Organizations : risks

For the most part the risks associated with professionals practicing in organizations

involve the challenges to professionalism as an occupational value, as a special means

of organizing work and controlling workers and with real advantages for both

practitioner-workers and their clients. Freidson (2001) emphasized the importance of

maintaining ‘professionalism’ as a distinctive and different mode of work and

practitioner control particularly in public sector service work.

The consequences of and challenges to professionalism as an occupational value, and

some of the unintended consequences, are being documented by researchers interested

in different occupational groups in Europe and North America (e.g. Schepers 2006;

Wrede 2008; Champy 2008; Dent et al. 2008; Boussard 2006; Bolton 2005;

Bourgeault and Benoit 2009) and research links with sociologists of organizations are
16
developing (Faulconbridge and Muzio 2007). There are also some early indications

of what might be a retreat from or a substantial redefinition of certain aspects of

managerialism and NPM by policy-makers in respect of some service work (e.g. Dahl

2008). There is, as yet, no established causal link between the organizational changes

and challenges to occupational professionalism and a deteriorization of professional

values so, as yet, any linkage remains speculative. Also there are several complicating

factors which make a causal link difficult to establish. Complicating context factors

(some general, some nation-specific) include the demystification of aspects of

professional knowledge and expertise; cases of practitioner malpractice and

‘unprofessional’ behaviour; media exaggeration and oversimplification, and political

interference; large fee and salary increases in particular professional sectors and

divisions between commercial (corporate clients) and social service (state-funded)

practitioners; trade union activities or threats including withdrawal of services or

actions short of a strike which can indicate self rather than the public interest.

It is also the case that powerful professionals have often been resistant to managerial

intervention and organizational controls. Many organizations in the public services

(e.g. hospitals and universities) are complex professional bureaucracies (Mintzberg

1983) characterized by the involvement of a number of different professional groups.

These groups have a history of relative autonomy over their working practices and

often have high status which gives them both power and authority. In addition, the

‘outputs’ of these organizations (and the professionals in them) are not easily

standardized and measurable. When the ability to define and standardize the nature of

the work process is limited and the definition of the outputs of the work (and what

constitutes success) is problematic then such service work would seem to be

unsuitable for both market and organizational controls. Yet controls such as

17
performance review and target-setting continue to be developed supposedly in the

interests of value, transparency and accountability.

A decline in occupational professionalism and the possible expansion of

organizational forms of professionalism is then one of a number of complicating

factors. It can be stated, however, that organizational techniques for controlling

employees have affected the work of practitioners in professional organizations. The

imposition of targets in teaching and medical work – and indeed for the police (see

Boussard 2006) - have had ‘unintended’ consequences on the prioritization and

ordering of work activities, and a focus on target achievement to the detriment or

neglect of other less-measurable tasks and responsibilities. Increased regulation and

form filling takes time which might arguably be devoted to clients and the

professional task. Performance indicators, linked to future salary increases, are

defined by the organization rather than the individual practitioner or professional

association. The standardization of work procedures, perhaps using software

programmes, is an important check on the underachieving practitioner but can be a

disincentive to the creative, innovative, and inspirational professional.

It is important to remember also that the way professionals regard their service work

and their working relationships are also being changed and this is an important

consequence of redefining the occupational value aspects of professionalism. An

emphasis on internal as well as external markets, on enterprise and economic

contracting, are changing professionalism. In tendering, accounting and audit

management, professionalism requires practitioners to codify their competence for

contracts and evaluations (du Gay and Salaman 1992; Lane 2000; Freidson 2001).

‘Professional work is defined as service products to be marketed, price-tagged and

individually evaluated and remunerated; it is, in that sense, commodified’ (Svensson

18
and Evetts 2003: 11). Professional service work organizations are converting into

enterprises in terms of identity, hierarchy and rationality. Possible solutions to client

problems and difficulties are defined by the organization (rather than the ethical codes

of the professional institution) and limited by financial constraints.

The commodification of professional service work entails changes in professional

work relations. When practitioners become organizational employees then the

traditional relationship of employer/professional trust is changed to one necessitating

supervision, assessment and audit. In turn, this affects the relations between fellow

practitioners in the organization. When individual performance (e.g. of pupils and

teachers, GPs and consultants) is linked to the success or failure of the organization,

then this amplifies the impact of any failure. The danger in this is that professional

cohesion and mutual cooperation are undermined and competition can threaten both

team working and collegial support.

Relationships between professionals and clients are also being converted into

customer relations through the establishment of quasi-markets, customer satisfaction

surveys and evaluations, quality measures and payment by results. The production,

publication and diffusion of quality and target measurements are critical indicators for

changing welfare services into a market (Considine 2001). The service itself is

focused, modelled on equivalents provided by other producers, shaped by the interests

of the consumers and standardized. The marketing of a service organization’s service

product connects professionals more to their work organization than to their

professional institutions and associations. Clients are converted into customers and

professional work competencies become primarily related to, defined and assessed by,

the work organization.

19
4. Professions in Organizations : opportunities

The challenges to professionalism as an occupational value seem numerous but are

there any opportunities associated with these changes which might improve both the

conduct and the practice of professional service work and be of benefit for professions

as service institutions, practitioners and clients? Might there be some advantages in

the combination of professional and organizational logics for controlling work and

workers? Certainly there are opportunities for practitioners which might prove to be

beneficial from the combination of the logics of professionalism and the organization.

One of these is the incorporation of Human Resource Management (HRM) from the

organization into professional employment practices, processes, procedures and

conduct of the work. Job contracts, job descriptions, formal interview and selection

procedures, employment rights and benefits, appeals procedures, sickness benefit and

cover, maternity, caring and other absences, are all examples which have benefited the

majority of professionals working in organizations and have for the most part replaced

less formalized social networking and informal recommendation procedures.

Standardization and formalization of selection, retention and career development

procedures have also increased the transparency of what were often hidden, even

‘mysterious’ arrangements in respect of promotion, career progress and departmental

relationships and links within the organization. Less formalized procedures benefitted

only a select few privileged practitioners and were perceived as unfair and inequitable

by the majority. Increased transparency can then result in more emphasis on career

choices, dependent on personal circumstances, rather than the sponsorship of the

privileged few. Career inequalities clearly continue (including in respect of gender

and ethnicity), as well as some reliance on networking, informal advice and

recommendations, but, in general, the incorporation of HRM procedures and

20
regulations from the organization into professional employment practices have been

an opportunity and of benefit for practitioners and their work.

Other opportunities would seem to be explained by the increased recognition that

organizational management and managerialism is not only complex but is also multi-

layered and multi-dimensional. Management is being used to control, and sometimes

limit, the work of practitioners in organizations but, in addition, management is being

used by practitioners and by professional associations themselves as a strategy both in

the career development of particular practitioners and in order to improve the status

and respect of a professional occupation and its standing.

As a micro-level strategy, there is some evidence, particularly from health

professionals such as nursing and midwifery (Carvahlo 2008; Bourgeault et al. 2004)

but also now from medical doctors (Kuhlmann 2008) and teachers (Gewirtz et al.

2009), of individual practitioners acquiring qualifications in management (e.g. the

MBA) with the clear intention of developing careers. In the case of health

professionals such as nurses and midwives this can also be interpreted as a strategy in

the competition with medical dominance but increasingly hospital management at

middle and senior levels is perceived as a career opening for those with appropriate

management credentials, experience and motivation.

As a mezo level strategy, it is also interesting to note the work of Langer (2008) in

respect of social work in Germany. Masters level programmes for social workers in

Germany are incorporating management training as a way of increasing the status,

standing, reputation and respect for social work as a professional occupation in the

field of social services work. Following the Bologna process and standardization of

higher education levels in Europe, in Germany there is a large development of masters

21
programmes which qualify (in this case) social workers to apply for leadership

positions in non-profit organizations and social services departments. These

developments can be interpreted, therefore, as both a micro and mezo level strategy in

respect of social work.

In addition, as Muzio and Kirkpatrick (forthcoming) have argued, organizations can

constitute sites for (and objects of) professional control and domination. Ackroyd

(1996: 600) describes this as a form of ‘dual closure’ where access to labour markets

(through registration and credentialism) is combined with informal control of access

to particular work tasks and divisions of labour within the employing organization.

Brint (1994: 73) explained how, in the corporate sector, ‘high value-added

applications within organizations can be more successful in enhancing status than

closure in the labour market’. Similarly, Faulconbridge and Muzio (2008) have

shown how managers and administrators benefit from their ability to control, devise

and construct the bureaucratic machinery as well as to resolve central problems of

their organizations.

Other processes also explained by Muzio and Kirkpatrick (forthcoming) refer to

jurisdictional disputes and negotiations – originally described by Abbott (1988) but

this time played out within organizations rather than in the wider arena of labour

markets and education systems. Within organizations, occupations seek to process

and control tasks and task divisions to suit their own occupational interests. The

medical profession – particularly doctors employed by the state – continue to use their

cultural authority and legitimacy to maintain dominance (Larkin1983; Freidson 2001;

Coburn 2006). Armstrong (1985) describes competition between professionals in

management (accountancy, engineering and personnel) in colonizing key positions,

roles and decision-making with large organizations. In these ways organizations

22
constitute arenas for inter-professional competitions as well as professional conquests.

Or, as Muzio and Kirkpatrick explain, organizations can ‘provide a means through

which traditional objectives of collective mobility, status advancement, financial

reward and service quality can be better served’.

In conclusion it is important to remember that the reconstruction of professionalism in

organizations and its links with management present opportunities and benefits for

professions, professional work and workers as well as important challenges. Perhaps

achieving a balance between change and continuity, challenges and opportunities, for

professionalism in organizations is one of the most important tasks for states and for

researchers in the sociology of professional groups over the next few years.

23
References

Abbott, A. (1988) The System of Professions: an essay on the division of expert

labour. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Abel, R. L. (2003) The Politics of Professionalism, Lawyers between Markets and

State, from the Green Papers to the Access of Justice Act. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Ackroyd, S. (1996) ‘Organisation contra organisation: Professions and organisational

change in the United Kingdom’. Organisations Studies 17:4: 599-621.

Armstrong, P. (1985) ‘Changing management control strategies: The role of

competition between accountancy and other organizational professions’.

Accounting, Organization and Society 10:2: 129-48.

Bolton, S.C. (2005) ‘“Making up” managers: the case of NHS nurses’. Work,

Employment and Society 19:1. March.

Bourgeault, I.L. and Benoit, C. (2009) (eds) Comparative Perspectives on the

Sociology of Professional Groups. Current Sociology, Monograph issue 57 (4).

Bourgeault, I.L., Benoit, C. and Davis-Floyd, R. (2004) Reconceiving Midwifery.

McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Boussard, V. (2006) ‘Performance measurement with French national police and

professional destablization’. Paper presented at ISA World Congress, RC 52,

session 1, Durban, South Africa.

Brint, S. (1994) In an Age of Experts: The Changing Role of Professionals in Politics

and Public Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Broadbent, J., Jacobs, K. and Laughlin, R. (1999) ‘Comparing schools in the UK and

New Zealand’. Management Accounting Research 10: 339-61.

24
Burrage, M. and Torstendahl, R. (eds) (1990) Professions in Theory and History:

Rethinking the Study of the Professions. London: Sage.

Carr-Saunders, A.M. and Wilson, P.A. (1933). The Professions. Oxford: Clarendon

Press.

Carvahlo, T. (2008) ‘Redefining professional frontiers in health: negotiations in the

field’. Paper presented at conference, Interim Meeting of ESA Research

Network on ‘Sociology of Professions’, Aarhus, Denmark, 5-7 June 2008.

Champy, F. (2008) ‘Where does the “power” go when professionals lose part of their

knowledge-based autonomy? French architects and “formal rationalization”’.

Paper presented at conference, Interim Meeting of ESA Research Network on

‘Sociology of Professions’, Aarhus, Denmark, 5-7 June 2008.

Coburn, D. (2006) Medical dominance then and now: critical reflections’. Health

Sociology Review 15:5: 432-443.

Collins, R. (1990) ‘Changing conceptions in the sociology of professions’, in R.

Torstendahl and M. Burrage, (eds) The Formation of Professions: knowledge,

state and strategy, London, Sage.

Considine, M. (2001) Enterprising States: the public management of welfare-to-work.

Cambridge University Press.

Dahl, H. M. (2008) ‘New Public Management and new professionalism: ambiguities

and struggles’. Paper presented at conference, Interim Meeting of ESA Research

Network on ‘Sociology of Professions’, Aarhus, Denmark, 5-7 June 2008.

25
Dent, M., Kirkpatrick, I., Kragh Jespersen, P. and Neo y, I. (2008) ‘Medicine and

management in a comparative perspective: Denmark and the UK’. Paper

presented at conference, Interim Meeting of ESA Research Network on

‘Sociology of Professions’, Aarhus, Denmark, 5-7 June 2008.

Dingwall, R. and Lewis, P. (eds.) (1983) The Sociology of the Professions: lawyers,

doctors and others. London: Macmillan.

du Gay, P. and Salaman, G. (1992) ‘The cult[ure] of the customer’. Journal of

Management Studies 29:5: 615-633 (September).

Evetts, J. (2009a) ‘New Professionalism and New Public Management: changes,

continuities and consequences’. Comparative Sociology 8: 247-266, Koninklijke

Brill NV: Leiden.

Evetts, J. (2009b) ‘The Management of Professionalism: a contemporary paradox’ in

S. Gewirtz, P. Mahony, I. Hextall and A. Cribb (eds) Changing Teacher

Professionalism: International Trends, Challenges and Ways Forward.

Routledge: London. Pp.19-30.

Evetts, J. (2008a) ‘Introduction’, in Julia Evetts (ed) Professional Work in Europe:

concepts, theories and methodologies. Special issue of European Societies. 10

(4): 525-44. September.

Evetts, J. (2008b) ‘The Management of Professionalism: a contemporary paradox’.

Zeitschrift für Sozialreform (Journal for Social Reform) ‘Management of

Professional Performance – Professionality Through Management?’. 54 Lucius

& Lucius: Stuttgart. Pp. 97-106. ISSN 0514-2776

Evetts, J. (2006) ‘Organizational and occupational professionalism: the challenge of

NPM’. Paper presented at XV1 ISA World Congress of Sociology, Durban,

South Africa, 23-29 July.

26
Evetts, J. (2005) ‘Organizational and Occupational Professionalism: the legacies of

Weber and Durkheim for knowledge society’. ISA Executive Committee

International Symposium – Cultural Change, Social Problems and Knowledge

Society. 7-11 March, Zaragoza, Spain.

Evetts, J. (2004) ‘Organizational or Occupational Professionalism: centralized

regulation or occupational trust’. Paper presented at ISA RC52 Interim

Conference, Versailles, France. 22-24 September.

Evetts, J. (2003) ‘The Sociological Analysis of Professionalism: occupational change

in the modern world’. International Sociology 18:2: 395-415.

Evetts, J. (1994) ‘Internationalization of professional regulation’. Paper presented at

CONGLASS Conference, Onati, July.

Faulconbridge, J.R. and Muzio, D. (2008) ‘Organizational professionalism in

globalizing law firms’. Work, Employment and Society 22:1: 7-25.

Fournier, V. (1999) ‘The appeal to “professionalism” as a disciplinary mechanism’.

Social Review 47: 2: 280-307.

Freidson, E. (2001) Professionalism: the third logic. London: Polity.

Gewirtz, S., Mahony, P., Hextall, I. and Cribb, A. (2009) (eds) Changing Teacher

Professionalism: International Trends, Challenges and Ways Forward.

Routledge: London.

Hanlon, G. (1998) ‘Professionalism as enterprise: service class politics and the

redefinition of professionalism’. Sociology 32: 43-64.

Hoggett, P. (1996) ‘New modes of control in the public services’. Public

Administration 74: 9-32.

Johnson, T. (1972) Professions and Power. London: Macmillan.

27
Kuhlmann, E. (2008) ‘Unsettling the power-knowledge nexus in professionalism:

multiple dynamics in healthcare’. Paper presented at conference, Interim

Meeting of ESA Research Network on ‘Sociology of Professions’, Aarhus,

Denmark, 5-7 June 2008.

Lane, J.E. (2000) New Public Management. London: Routledge & Kegan.

Langer, A. (2008) ‘Academic qualification programmes for professional management:

managerial expertise as one facet of a new professionalism’. Paper presented at

conference, Interim Meeting of ESA Research Network on ‘Sociology of

Professions’, Aarhus, Denmark, 5-7 June 2008.

Larkin, G. (1983) Occupational Monopoly and Modern Medicine. London: Tavistock.

Larson, M.S. (1977) The Rise of Professionalism. California: University of California

Press.

Liljegren, A. (2007) ‘Professionalisation in the face of institutional change in the

public sector: professional management, organisational networks and service

procedures’. Paper presented at ESA Conference, Professions Network,

Glasgow.

Marshall, T.H. (1950) Citizenship and Social Class and Other Essays. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Mintzberg, H. (1983) Structure in Fives: designing effective organizations.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Muzio, D. and Ackroyd, S. (2005) ‘On the consequences of defensive

professionalism: the transformation of the legal labour process’ . Journal of Law

and Society 32:4: 615-42.

Muzio, D. and Kirkpatrick, I (forthcoming) in ‘Reconnecting Professions and

Organizations’. Monograph Issue of Current Sociology.

Muzio, D. et al. (forthcoming) in ‘Reconnecting Professions and Organizations’.

Monograph Issue of Current Sociology.

28
Parsons, T. (1939) ‘The professions and social structure’. Social Forces. 17: 457-67.

Reed, M. (2007) Engineers of human souls, faceless technocrats or merchants of

morality? : changing professional forms and identities in the face of the neo-

liberal challenge in A Pinnington, R Macklin and T Campbell (eds), Human

Resource Management: Ethics and Employment. Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 171-189.

Saks, M. (1995) Professions and the Public Interest. London: Routledge.

Schepers, R. (2006) ‘Regulation and trust in action: the subtle balance between

doctors and management in two Belgian hospitals. Current Sociology 54:4:

637-648.

Svensson, L and Evetts, J. (2003) (eds) Conceptual and Comparative Studies of

Continental and Anglo-American Professions. Goteborg Studies in Sociology

No 129, Goteborg University.

Tawney, R.H. (1921) The Acquisitive Society. New York: Harcourt Bruce.

Wrede, S. (2008) ‘An erasure of professionalism in the caring occupations? The

organizational discourse of flexibility and the fragmentation of occupational

identities’. Paper presented at conference, Interim Meeting of ESA Research

Network on ‘Sociology of Professions’, Aarhus, Denmark, 5-7 June 2008.

Z: Copenhagen conference/Copenhagen DPU paper October 2010

29