Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Roy Suddaby
University of Alberta
Daniel Muzio
University of Manchester
Introduction
The study of professions has a long and varied intellectual
history. Early theories, emanating primarily from the field of sociology,
sought to understand the essential elements of professions and to
explain their functional role in society. When these explanations proved
inadequate, alternative accounts emerged that theorized professions
based on the powerful position they occupied in both social and
economic fields. As researchers identified occupational groups that
lacked
power
but
were
nonetheless
professions,
theoretical
sequence.
characteristics
of
Early
studies
professional
sought
service
to
identify
the
unique
firms
and
explain
their
persistence. Later, researchers focused attention on the powerful gatekeeping role played by large professional organizations in business,
commerce
and
social
policy.
More
contemporary
theories
of
approach
to
studying
professions,
which
The
upon
the
smooth
functioning
of
the
professions.
structural-functional
explanations
of
the
professions,
to
determined
different
that
the
occupational
groups,
characteristics
were
however,
not
researchers
unique
to
elite
functional
accounts
were
based
assumptions
of
Instead
of
an
egalitarian
and
communal
culture
of
early
phase
professions,
such
as
medicine
and
law,
can
be
lost considerable
contexts
to
large
bureaucracies
encourages
the
While acknowledging
1987)
and,
therefore,
theories
of
professions
should
look
for
expertise
that
is,
for
Abbott
(1988)
the
defining
characteristic of professions.
Abbotts (1988) The System of the Professions, applied a version
of systems theory to the professions and encouraged studying them as
ongoing and dynamic processes of occupational conflict rather than as
empirical
evidence,
it
was
countermanded
by
an
1995).
However
questions
of
elitism,
power
and
by which professions
organizational
researchers
adopted
an
interest
in
within
the
confines
of
autonomous
professional
consistent
with
professional
values
of
autonomy
and
independence.
As bureaucratic organizations (i.e. corporations, government,
not-for-profits) grew in size and influence, however, they began to
employ
significant
numbers
of
professionals
(Montagna,
1968;
Buchanan, 1974; Larson, 1977), and even began to produce their own
types of professions (Baron, Dobbin and Jennings, 1986). Management
researchers steeped in the trait theories of professions assumed, quite
logically, that there would be an inherent contradiction between the
core values of professionalism and the controlling organizational
structures embedded in bureaucracies (Haug, 1973; Oppenheimer,
1973). A stream of subsequent research sought to elaborate the
assumed conflict that would naturally occur when professionals
worked in bureaucracies (Scott, 1965; 1992; Sorenson & Sorenson,
1974; Derber, 1983; Derber & Schwartz, 1991).
While
assumption
early
of
research
conflicting
seemed
to
values
and
confirm
the
sociological
commitments
between
scholars
attempted
to
elaborate
the
defining
This
research
extended
Mintzbergs
(1979)
management
&
Chapman,
(Empson,
2006;
2001),
Nordenflycht,
ownership
2007;
structure
Greenwood,
(Brock, 2006; Brock et al, 1997, 2006) each challenge the integrity of
the essential traits of the professional partnership and introduce a
variety of alternative configurations of traits, including the managed
professional
business,
the
global
professional
network,
the
Other
researchers
argue
that
the
essential
defining
service
firms
is
that
the
assumption
of
unique
are
adopting
characteristics
identities
within
of
professional
firms
(Starbuck, 1992).
Professional
professional
firms
are
often
and
independent
form
of
organizing,
this
theoretical
are
projects
intimately
of
other
connected
actors.
with
Projects
the
of
professionalization,
thus,
carry
within
them
projects
of
and
how
considerable
professional
subsequent
service
firms
research
are
often
has
key
charity
in
the
US
by
introducing
rationalized
techniques
of
of
affirmative
action
whilst,
more
recently,
question,
to
understand
the
role
that
processes
of
project
with
related
and
symbiotic
project
of
As
Abbott (2005: 247) observes, [n]ot only does a jurisdictional tactic like
licensing have to succeed in the system of professions, it also has to
succeed in the ecology of the state, for quite other reasons.
A more expansive conceptual model, therefore, is to view the
relationship between professions and other related institutions as an
institutional ecology in which professionalization projects, if they are to
succeed, must ally with a related institution or institutions. Moreover,
relationship
between
global
accounting
firms
and
professional
service
firms
opt
to
select
strategies
of
discussed
above,
i.e.
the
literature
on
organizational
References
Abbott, A. 1981. Status and Strain in the Professions. American
Journal of Sociology, 86(4): 819-835.
Abbott, A. 1988. The System of Professions: An Essay on the
Division of Expert Labor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Abbott, A. 2005. Linked ecologies: States and Universities as
environments for professions. Sociological Theory, 23(3): 245-274.
Ackroyd, S. (1996) Organization Contra Organizations:
Professions and Organizational Change in the United Kingdom.
Organization Studies 17 (4): 599-621.
Ackroyd, S. and Muzio, D. (2007) The reconstructed professional
firm explaining change in English legal practices. Organization Studies
48 (5): 1-19.
Alvesson, A. 1994. Talking in organizations: Managing identity
and impressions in an advertising agency. Organization Studies, 15(4):
535-563.
Alvesson, M. 2001. Knowledge Work: Ambiguity, image and
identity, Human Relations 54(7), 863-886.
Anderson-Gough, F., Grey, C., and Robson, K. 1999. Making Up
Accountants. Aldershot: Gower Ashgate.
Aranya, N. and K.R. Ferris. 1984 A re-examination of accountants
organizational professional conflict. Accounting Review, 59(1): 1-15.
Arnold, P. 2005. Disciplining domestic regulation: The World Trade
Organization and the market for professional services. Accounting,
Organization and Society 30(4): 299-330.
Auerbach, J.S. 1976. Unequal Justice: Lawyers and Social Change
in Modern America. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
Barber, B. 1963. Some problems in the sociology of the
professions. Daedalus Journal of the American Academy of Arts and
Sciences, 92(4); 669-688,
Baron, J., F. Dobbin and P.D. Jennings. 1986. War and Peace: The
Evolution of Modern Personnel Administration in U.S. Industry.
American Journal of Sociology, 92(2): 350383.
Becker, H. S., Geer, B., Hughes, E. C., & Strauss, A. L. 1961. Boys
in white: Student culture in medical school. Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press
Benson, J.K. 1975. The interorganizational network as a political
economy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20: 229-249.
Brint, S.G. 1994. In an Age of Experts: The Changing Role of
Professionals in Politics and Public Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Brock, D.M. 2006. The changing professional organization: A
review of competing archetypes. International Journal of Management
Reviews, 8(3): 157-174.
Brock, D., Powell, M. and Hinings, C.R. 1999. Restructuring the
Professional Organization. Accounting, Healthcare and Law. London
and New York: Routledge.
Brock, D. M., Powell, M., & Hinings, C. R. 2007. Archetypal change
and the professional service firm. Research in Organizational Change
and Development, 16, 221-251
Brock, D. M., Yaffe, T., & Dembovsky, M. 2006. International
diversification strategies and effectiveness: A study of global law firms.
Journal of International Management, 12(4): 473-489.
Buchanan, B. 1974. Building Organizational Commitment: The
socialization of managers in work organizations. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 19(4): 533-546.
Burrage, M. 1988. Revolution and the collective action of the
French, American and English legal professions. Law & Social Inquiry,
13(2): 225-277.
Burrage, M. and Torstendahl, R. (eds.). 1990. Professions in
Theory and History: Rethinking the Study of the Professions. London:
Sage.
Burris, B. H., (1993) Technocracy at Work. New York: State
University of New York Press.
Carr-Saunders, A.M. and Wilson, P.A. 1933. The Professions.
Oxford: Clarendon Press
and
bureaucratization.
Quack, S. 2007. Legal Professionals and Transnational LawMaking. A Case of Distributed Agency. Organization 14 (5):643-666
Reed, M.I. 1996. Expert power and control in late modernity: an
empirical review and theoretical synthesis. Organisation Studies 17(4):
573-597.
Reed, M.I. 2012. Masters of the universe: Power and elites in
organization studies. Organization Studies, 33(2): 203-221.
Rosenberg, D., C. Tonkins & P. Day. 1981. A work role perspective
on accountants in local government departments. Accounting,
Organizations and Society, 7(2): 123-137.
Ruschmeyer, D. 1973. Lawyers and their Society. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Scott, W.R. 1965. Reactions to supervision in a heteronomous
professional organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 10(1): 6581.
Scott, W.R. 2008. Lords of the dance: Professionals as institutional
agents. Organization Studies 29(2): 219-238.
Silberman, B. 1993. Cages of reason: The rise of the rational state
in France, Japan, the United States and Great Britain. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Skocpol, T. 1985. Bringing the state back in: Strategies of analysis
in current research. Pp. 3-37 in P. Evans, D. Ruschmeyer & T. Skocpol
(Eds.), Bringing the State Back In. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Skrowronek, S. 2002. Building a new American State: The
expansion of national administrative capacities. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Sommerlad, H. and Sanderson, P. 1998. Gender, Choice and
Commitment: Women Solicitors in England and Wales and the Struggle
for Equal Status. London: Ashgate
Sorenson, A.B. 2000. Employment Relations and Class Structure.
Pp. 1642 in Renewing Class Analysis, R. Crompton, F. Devine, M.
Savage, and J. Scott. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sorenson, J.E. and T.L. Sorenson. 1974. The conflict of professionals
in bureaucratic organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19(1):
98-106.