保护性职业还是连接性职业?有人脉的专业人士如何(仍然)发挥自主和权威专家的作用

IF 2 Q3 MANAGEMENT
M. Noordegraaf
{"title":"保护性职业还是连接性职业?有人脉的专业人士如何(仍然)发挥自主和权威专家的作用","authors":"M. Noordegraaf","doi":"10.1093/jpo/joaa011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Traditionally, professionals such as medical doctors, lawyers, and academics are protected. They work within well-defined jurisdictions, belong to specialized segments, have been granted autonomy, and have discretionary spaces. In this way, they can be socialized, trained, and supervised, case-related considerations and decisions can be substantive (instead of commercial), and decisions can be taken independently. Ideally, these decisions are authoritative and accepted, both by clients as well as society (stakeholders) who trust professional services. This ideal-typical but also ‘ideal’ imagery always had its flaws; nowadays, shortcomings are increasingly clear. ‘Protective professionalism’ is becoming outdated. Due to heterogeneity and fragmentation within professional fields, the interweaving of professional fields, and dependencies of professional actions on outside worlds, professionals can no longer isolate themselves from others and outsiders. At first sight, this leads to a ‘decline’, ‘withering away’, or ‘hollowing out’ of professionalism. Or it leads to attempts to ‘reinstall’, ‘reinvent’, or ‘return to’ professional values and spaces. In this article, we avoid such ‘all or nothing’ perspectives on changing professionalism and explore the ‘reconfiguration’ of professionalism. Professional identities and actions can be adapted and might become ‘hybrid’, ‘organized’, and ‘connected’. Professional and organizational logics might be interrelated; professionals might see organizational (or organizing) duties as belonging to their work; and professional fields might open up to outside worlds. We particularly explore connective professionalism, arguing that we need more fundamental reflections and redefinitions of what professionalism means and what professionals are. We focus on the question of how professional action can be related to others and outsiders and remain ‘knowledgeable’, ‘autonomous’, and ‘authoritative’ at the same time. This can no longer be a matter of expertise, autonomy, and authority as fixed and closed entities. These crucial dimensions of professional action become relational and processual. They have to be enacted on a continuous basis, backed by mechanisms that make professionalism knowledgeable, independent, and authoritative in the eyes of others.","PeriodicalId":45650,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Professions and Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/jpo/joaa011","citationCount":"53","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Protective or connective professionalism? How connected professionals can (still) act as autonomous and authoritative experts\",\"authors\":\"M. Noordegraaf\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jpo/joaa011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Traditionally, professionals such as medical doctors, lawyers, and academics are protected. They work within well-defined jurisdictions, belong to specialized segments, have been granted autonomy, and have discretionary spaces. In this way, they can be socialized, trained, and supervised, case-related considerations and decisions can be substantive (instead of commercial), and decisions can be taken independently. Ideally, these decisions are authoritative and accepted, both by clients as well as society (stakeholders) who trust professional services. This ideal-typical but also ‘ideal’ imagery always had its flaws; nowadays, shortcomings are increasingly clear. ‘Protective professionalism’ is becoming outdated. Due to heterogeneity and fragmentation within professional fields, the interweaving of professional fields, and dependencies of professional actions on outside worlds, professionals can no longer isolate themselves from others and outsiders. At first sight, this leads to a ‘decline’, ‘withering away’, or ‘hollowing out’ of professionalism. Or it leads to attempts to ‘reinstall’, ‘reinvent’, or ‘return to’ professional values and spaces. In this article, we avoid such ‘all or nothing’ perspectives on changing professionalism and explore the ‘reconfiguration’ of professionalism. Professional identities and actions can be adapted and might become ‘hybrid’, ‘organized’, and ‘connected’. Professional and organizational logics might be interrelated; professionals might see organizational (or organizing) duties as belonging to their work; and professional fields might open up to outside worlds. We particularly explore connective professionalism, arguing that we need more fundamental reflections and redefinitions of what professionalism means and what professionals are. We focus on the question of how professional action can be related to others and outsiders and remain ‘knowledgeable’, ‘autonomous’, and ‘authoritative’ at the same time. This can no longer be a matter of expertise, autonomy, and authority as fixed and closed entities. These crucial dimensions of professional action become relational and processual. They have to be enacted on a continuous basis, backed by mechanisms that make professionalism knowledgeable, independent, and authoritative in the eyes of others.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45650,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Professions and Organization\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/jpo/joaa011\",\"citationCount\":\"53\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Professions and Organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joaa011\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Professions and Organization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joaa011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 53

摘要

传统上,医生、律师和学者等专业人士受到保护。他们在定义明确的管辖范围内工作,属于专门部门,被授予自主权,并有自由裁量的空间。通过这种方式,他们可以被社会化、培训和监督,与案件相关的考虑和决策可以是实质性的(而不是商业性的),决策可以独立做出。理想情况下,这些决定是权威的,并被客户和信任专业服务的社会(利益相关者)所接受。这种理想的典型但又是“理想”的意象总是有缺陷的;如今,缺点越来越明显保护性的专业精神正在变得过时。由于专业领域内的异质性和碎片性,专业领域的交织,以及专业行为对外部世界的依赖性,专业人士无法再将自己与他人和外部隔绝。乍一看,这会导致职业精神的“衰退”、“枯萎”或“空心化”。或者,它导致了“重新安装”、“重塑”或“回归”职业价值观和空间的尝试。在这篇文章中,我们避免了这种“要么全有要么全无”的观点来改变专业精神,并探讨了专业精神的“重构”。职业身份和行为可以进行调整,并可能变得“混合”、“有组织”和“有联系”。专业逻辑和组织逻辑可能是相互关联的;专业人士可能认为组织(或组织)职责属于他们的工作;专业领域可能对外开放。我们特别探讨了连接专业性,认为我们需要对专业性的含义和专业人员进行更根本的反思和重新定义。我们关注的问题是,专业行动如何与他人和局外人联系在一起,同时保持“知识渊博”、“自主”和“权威”。这不再是作为固定和封闭实体的专业知识、自主权和权威问题。职业行为的这些关键方面变成了关系性的和过程性的。它们必须在持续的基础上制定,并有机制支持,使专业精神在他人眼中具有知识性、独立性和权威性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Protective or connective professionalism? How connected professionals can (still) act as autonomous and authoritative experts
Traditionally, professionals such as medical doctors, lawyers, and academics are protected. They work within well-defined jurisdictions, belong to specialized segments, have been granted autonomy, and have discretionary spaces. In this way, they can be socialized, trained, and supervised, case-related considerations and decisions can be substantive (instead of commercial), and decisions can be taken independently. Ideally, these decisions are authoritative and accepted, both by clients as well as society (stakeholders) who trust professional services. This ideal-typical but also ‘ideal’ imagery always had its flaws; nowadays, shortcomings are increasingly clear. ‘Protective professionalism’ is becoming outdated. Due to heterogeneity and fragmentation within professional fields, the interweaving of professional fields, and dependencies of professional actions on outside worlds, professionals can no longer isolate themselves from others and outsiders. At first sight, this leads to a ‘decline’, ‘withering away’, or ‘hollowing out’ of professionalism. Or it leads to attempts to ‘reinstall’, ‘reinvent’, or ‘return to’ professional values and spaces. In this article, we avoid such ‘all or nothing’ perspectives on changing professionalism and explore the ‘reconfiguration’ of professionalism. Professional identities and actions can be adapted and might become ‘hybrid’, ‘organized’, and ‘connected’. Professional and organizational logics might be interrelated; professionals might see organizational (or organizing) duties as belonging to their work; and professional fields might open up to outside worlds. We particularly explore connective professionalism, arguing that we need more fundamental reflections and redefinitions of what professionalism means and what professionals are. We focus on the question of how professional action can be related to others and outsiders and remain ‘knowledgeable’, ‘autonomous’, and ‘authoritative’ at the same time. This can no longer be a matter of expertise, autonomy, and authority as fixed and closed entities. These crucial dimensions of professional action become relational and processual. They have to be enacted on a continuous basis, backed by mechanisms that make professionalism knowledgeable, independent, and authoritative in the eyes of others.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
36.40%
发文量
14
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信