Lerisson, hello. The term post-professionalism started occurring in the literature in the 1970s when the Anglo-american model was being challenged. Anybody can say I'm ethical, I serve the community, I am skilled at what I do, I undertake training, and I'll hassle my kind of people who don't act well. Up to then the rhetoric of professions was that a cluster of these sort of commitments made a certain occupation a profession. Whereas these statements are the arguments for being made a profession - ie getting secured and special status. The occupational groups that most strongly claimed these virtues also had the strongest legal backing that stopped other people engaging in these domains. The economists would tell us that is the control of supply and demand. The I am good/ I am trained/ I am expert arguments are just that they are a point of view or claim.

What many sociologists, economists and others found that the actual ways that a professional group operated might fit those or some of those claims, but could also be seen as serving the needs, interests, and income of the practitioners of that group as much or more than their clientele. Larson (1977) said professions had two goals - they had a market project and a status project. Orientation has go little to do with it other than wider justification and acceptance.

We all know professionals in many different fields who are the epitome of what it is to be a teacher, journalist, doctor dentist etc. But we also know examples where such individuals are a disgrace to humanity - arrogant, self-serving, over-charging, forcing clients to fit with what they want. Professions and professionalism is a Janus faced social phenomenon- it faces two ways. It can be a good thing, but it can be a very self serving. Modern society generally assumes many sets of professionalism skills - journalism example being one instance.

Post-professionalism is a term that comes out of the loss of Anglo-american hegemonic professional claims for doing good through long educational training in elite occupations. The various challenges to this simple and uncritical view continue to be counter- challenged - that why the 'post' is there (Think of post-marxism, post-feminism, post-colonialism, etc, etc). That is the former phenomenon has not gone away, but there is a contested terrain now about the meaning, the worth, and the simple clarity and certainty of the previous phase.

In studying the small post-professionalism literature it is itself highly debated and different uses offered. Some treat it as another way of saying deprofessionalisation, some use it like Illich (1975, 1977) as a more liberated phase of society after the controlling aspects and self-serving aspects of professions have been somehow overcome. Some writers have seen post-professionalism as a kind of post-modernism, but with the passing of the high tide of post-modern/ post-structural theory that is evidently not the case. Most of the sues I've seen are quite partial in describing the complex realities of professions today. My take on it is that we might speak of a post-professional period when new forms and relations of professions have been and are emerging - globally between societies, and in relation to educational systems etc, The simple model of Wilensky (1964) or Goode (1957) are still contentions made for and by groups, but new realities include the advent of additional occupational groups and professions, greater involvement of professions within and in relation to organisations and bureaucracies than ever before, greater quality systems or expectations, the commodification of the idea of profession and professionalism.

Anyway, I'm running on way too long, so I'll quieten down. Cheers, Edgar

I would recommend Mike Martins book to have a clear difference.

For an understanding of social class, I point out readings in Karl Marx, and scientists who have written on the subject after Karl Marx. It is interesting to read Sociology of Organizations.

Most post structuralist sociology has no rigid taxonomy for concepts of 'group' and 'class' either Matthias so sociologists are in the same boat as socio-linguists. Of course you could adopt the classification systems of more structuralist approaches, for example is a 'labour process' model based, sometimes very loosely, on Marxism, if you find this useful. But generally, there are no categorical distinctions. Having said that, gender and age are more or less universals. Beyond this, I suggest you carefully define your own classification guided by what interests you and works for your analysis.

I learned (during my sociology study) that the structural-functionalist perspective on professional group is a structured and institutionalized education with a diploma (or similar, institutionally recognized, certificate) at the end. What was mentioned before, about the shared symbols, language, behavior etc., I'd reckon it's a more social-constructivist point of view taken. But I think both are valid. Better though to check in books, from the sociological point of view, on for example the medical profession, that has been extensively researched I think.

ask Max Weber :PPP

In the age of hyper reality profession is the superficial front stage manifestation of one's self under the heavy burden of rationality. Some times it terminates the actual self which is termed as prostitution of personality. If you want to understand profession and professional group it would be better to read C. Write Mills and Weber.

exactly, i am talking about what is called by Weber "calling" or mission or your life pathway or any term you like to use stating the internal motivation to do something in a best way you can do it :)))))

The term "calling" refers to the act based on reason for enhancing the glory of God. weber used this term to assign the significance of material world success for getting the internal peace but it must be under the self discipline. It must not be the conspicuous consumption.

I do love Marx, but in my opinion he is not rellevant for the global world as a conseptual framework, i would suggest the social network analisys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_networks

I do not see any contradiction between one and another! Akhilesh! Attracting attention is part of the game!

Can we at least explicitly name which paradigm we depart from when we talk about the concept of profession and its operationalisation(s)?

Each of the theoretical sociology frameworks can be used, and has been been by somebody, to illuminate professions. I have done some work on post-professionalism as a transitory move on from the self-certainty of mid-century especially Anglo-American professions. Not that professions research is getting any less, in fact much more, but the functionalist paradigm was much too limiting, though professions themselves always largely use it as kind of self-evident, but it alwasy begs the question of whose interst they serve etc. There is a sense in which you have to be a bit functionalist about a profession (or group) to which you belong, but that doesn't of itself make an adequate theory of professions in society (your own, or more generally).

Structural -functional explanations got way out of hand in mid 20th C - hence the sound of popping balloons when Friedson (1970) and particularly Johnson (1972) wrote, and the definitional anguish that followed over What is a profession'. Functionalist self-referential explanations keep on rearing their heads maskerading as adequate theory.

It is fascinating today to see very different takes on professions in western type societies compared to less well-off societies.

A profession is an occupation that has been institutionalized. You have to attend intitutions of higher education to earn a diploma that certifies you rexpertise.

Hi Edgar Burns. I'd like to ask you about post-professionalism. Seems interesting. i am working with the discourse of professionalism brazilian journalism. thanks

Lerisson, hello. The term post-professionalism started occurring in the literature in the 1970s when the Anglo-american model was being challenged. Anybody can say I'm ethical, I serve the community, I am skilled at what I do, I undertake training, and I'll hassle my kind of people who don't act well. Up to then the rhetoric of professions was that a cluster of these sort of commitments made a certain occupation a profession. Whereas these statements are the arguments for being made a profession - ie getting secured and special status. The occupational groups that most strongly claimed these virtues also had the strongest legal backing that stopped other people engaging in these domains. The economists would tell us that is the control of supply and demand. The I am good/ I am trained/ I am expert arguments are just that they are a point of view or claim.

What many sociologists, economists and others found that the actual ways that a professional group operated might fit those or some of those claims, but could also be seen as serving the needs, interests, and income of the practitioners of that group as much or more than their clientele. Larson (1977) said professions had two goals - they had a market project and a status project. Orientation has go little to do with it other than wider justification and acceptance.

We all know professionals in many different fields who are the epitome of what it is to be a teacher, journalist, doctor dentist etc. But we also know examples where such individuals are a disgrace to humanity - arrogant, self-serving, over-charging, forcing clients to fit with what they want. Professions and professionalism is a Janus faced social phenomenon- it faces two ways. It can be a good thing, but it can be a very self serving. Modern society generally assumes many sets of professionalism skills - journalism example being one instance.

Post-professionalism is a term that comes out of the loss of Anglo-american hegemonic professional claims for doing good through long educational training in elite occupations. The various challenges to this simple and uncritical view continue to be counter- challenged - that why the 'post' is there (Think of post-marxism, post-feminism, post-colonialism, etc, etc). That is the former phenomenon has not gone away, but there is a contested terrain now about the meaning, the worth, and the simple clarity and certainty of the previous phase.

In studying the small post-professionalism literature it is itself highly debated and different uses offered. Some treat it as another way of saying deprofessionalisation, some use it like Illich (1975, 1977) as a more liberated phase of society after the controlling aspects and self-serving aspects of professions have been somehow overcome. Some writers have seen post-professionalism as a kind of post-modernism, but with the passing of the high tide of post-modern/ post-structural theory that is evidently not the case. Most of the sues I've seen are quite partial in describing the complex realities of professions today. My take on it is that we might speak of a post-professional period when new forms and relations of professions have been and are emerging - globally between societies, and in relation to educational systems etc, The simple model of Wilensky (1964) or Goode (1957) are still contentions made for and by groups, but new realities include the advent of additional occupational groups and professions, greater involvement of professions within and in relation to organisations and bureaucracies than ever before, greater quality systems or expectations, the commodification of the idea of profession and professionalism.

Anyway, I'm running on way too long, so I'll quieten down. Cheers, Edgar

I think , "Profession" is nothing but a high professional term that is used by the people of modern society and it leads that people for introducing multidimensional sociological theory considering multichanging social situation or crisis for making a apposite environment for human being.

What about the craftsman then? Is it part of the profession or not?

Good deliberation indeed. The literature on Sociology of professions is very rich ..... i had an opportunity to read extensively .... for quite some time .... those of you who are curious may have a look at my papers ...... it is about librarians but ..... the issues are the same .... it is all about professions ... and professionalism .... here they are : follow the link ..... http://eprints.rclis.org/bitstream/10760/5826/1/pdf.pdf

best wishes .....

To explain in simple words : profession is an occupational category which is evolved over hundreds of year .... a profession is highly valued by people ... a profession has mysterious knowledge base ... its professionals are service oriented ... its professionals are members of a forum ... association. Professions cater to survival functions of the society. It is very risky for society to neglect professions .... that is why society pays respect, status mmmoney and what not ...... professionals command faith of his clients......

For further information .... read literature on "Sociology of Professions"

Best wishes

RajLibrarian

[email protected]

http://eprints.rclis.org/bitstream/10760/5826/1/pdf.pdf

Partiendo de algunos textos que se refieren en particular al carácter de "oficio u ocupación" que realiza un determinado profesional, por ejemplo el de Bourdieu que en los años 1960 habla del "oficio del sociólogo" o el de Zeichner que habla del "educador como profesional" y así otros más, podríamos afirmar que la "profesión" es un quehacer propio que le da identidad social e institucional a ese quehacer y que lo legitima en su accionar cuando es reconocido por los otros como alguien que efectivamente sabe y resuelve en el ámbito de ese quehacer requerido socialmente. Para avanzar en la discusión sería bueno fundamentarnos un poco más en la teoría de las profesiones.

Maybe I could offer a bit of a challenge to the idea that profession have evolved over 100s of years. Of course that's true. But a contrary perspective is to say that the modern professions are a feature of modernity, and so this view challenges the linear view that sees and ever-upward scientific evolution of skill and competence from ignorant earlier non-western countries. The first step int modernity in the UK was not a simple evolutionary link to Hippocrates and earlier physicians, other specialists and so on. It was a social-political arrangement between occupational groups who thought hey could pull it off with patron - royal patrons - to corner a bit of the market and gain prestige for their work. All the "royal college of veterinary surgeons.... and other groups" are not modern professions , nor are they some reified shift from ancient professions over 100s of years. They are quite specific occupational projects to gain status and wealth. Larson (1977) talks about professions having a dual project - a market project about money and monopoly and a status project about prestige and recognition. Millerson (1964) lists the dozens of Royal societies established in the half century from late 1700s to c1850 (although he is mostly talking about the next shift in modern professional development).

Larson, M. S. (1977). The Rise of Professionalism: A Sociological Analysis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Millerson, G. (1964). The Qualifying Associations: A Study in Professionalisation (Routledge republished 2003 ed.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

we can look at guilds for instance as a collective of a sorts ...what existed prior to 'guilds'?.. in defining 'self-definitions' of labor, They also of course limit entrance of others and so are self protecting. The 'specialization' of labor also suggests then a move away from an agrarian economic base, toward 'manufactures', however defined. Curiously as societies became more organized and complex, we can see the corresponding increase of 'specialization'.and hence "professions". There may have been masonry, architectural professions in early Egypt...perhaps among the Incas and others. if you're going to build edifices, it helps to know how, you know?..people became identified by what they "do' and moving away from 'industry', one can imagine 'professions' in the arts, science and medicine, if not religious, for instance and as well across countries, How were these defined and organized well before more western understanding and practice?

Professions tend towards middle class insofar as they emphasize education, often develop a steadier income than peripheral employment (though note professional precarious work today emerging as an issue). I've noticed in the past different class layers within a profession s- thus Boston lawyers may be more upscale , have higher earning than a Midwestern town set of lawyers. Also, professions social class position changes over time - up or down is possible, Nurses, for example rapidly professionalized in the last three decades of the 20th C in western type countries. But at the same time as young women from middle class families choose other professions (today, law, medicine and veterinary work are popular, as just a few examples) then nursing has to draw on a somewhat different cohort of recruits. BIll Martin describes the two middle class groups of manages and professionals as the most successful occupational 'projects' of the twentieth century in western countries. Like the linguistic enterprise in the question, occupational and professional reality is fluid. Definitions of professions have changed steadily for all of the modern era, not always in the same direction. Cheers with relating to the questions you have in linguistics.

I am surprised that no comment has yet been made about Everett C. Hughes, who was not always consistent but generally argued that professions are just occupations that have succeeded in making claims for autonomy. See E.C. Hughes (1970), The Humble and the Proud: The Comparative Study of Occupations, The Sociological Quarterly 11 (2). Reprinted in Lewis A. Coser (Ed.), Everett C. Hughes on Work, Race, and the Sociological Imagination. University of Chicago Press, 1994, pp. 67-78. Coser reprints many of Hughes' essays on occupation and profession.

The word “profession” means different things to different people. But at its core, it’s meant to be an indicator of trust and expertise.

Traditionally, a “professional” was someone who derived their income from their expertise or specific talents, as opposed to a hobbyist or amateur. This still carries through to fields today, such as sport.

But given today’s fast-changing environment of knowledge and expertise, it’s now generally understood that simply deriving an income from a particular task might make you an “expert” or “good at your job” – but if you’re a “professional”, this has a broader meaning.

There’s a long history of attempts to clarify this meaning, and to define the functions of professions. These attempts typically centralise around some sort of moral or ethical foundation within the practice of a specific and usually established expertise.

Profession is a practice for the working performance of the area concerning the development of the individual in his personal career performance.In this line profession to be viewed as it has quite different areas of the performance in the professional manner .

Professional cannot be identify in the individual manner it is the group of working process of the members joining in the career plan .With this professional can be measured in areas of Management ,Medical professional,Education activity & even in areas of drama ,fine Arts & Music .

If in the a fore said in the areas of performance ,if the member of similar line join together & also to carry out their activity under join consultation ,discussion ,this can  be match with the professional group .

This is my personal opinion  

I use the definition of Staub Bernasconi. The difference between a co-worker and a professional is that a professional has ethical aware wisdom and has the freedom and autonomy to refuse a task because he or she has ethical problems with it. A professional has the guts the be disobedient and has the the knowledge to explain why he or she doesn't accept the task or order. It is a professional who is International Human rights and codex centered.

The main problem sociologists have with professions is that there are people in society who consider themselves as members of a profession and have quite firm views on what they are and what a profession is. This is difficult to ignore but if we want to do sociology, we must not be overly impressed by what our subjects think about themselves. The sociology of professions has started overly impressed and tried to fit a definition of a profession to the professions that 'are really otu there' in society. This didn't go well. Attempts were criticised for falling for the ideology of professions and producing 'shopping list'-type definitions of professions (Ruschemeyer).

Now the question is: What concept of profession makes sense in the context of sociological theory? More specifically, I propose to ask: To what type of social order can 'profession' be subsumed? People have tried to identify profession as a distinct type alongside state and market but I think this overdoes it a bit. Given the fluid membership and the ordering by a shared identity, I think professions can be best understood as communities (taking this from Goode but not much more). A specific type of community to which they belong is the community of practice (a community whose collective identiy emerges from members' perception of sharing a practice). Not every community of practice is a profession, as becomes obvious from the book by Lave and Wenger. I would further specify the notion by defining professions as a community of practice that uses its control of a body of formalised knowledge for gaining and exercising authority over training, membership, labour markets, and quality standandards of professional work.

Defining professions as community does of course say that it is not a group because a group is a different type of social order.

 Dear Mathias,

Surely you already have excellent contributions , but allow me to suggest more authors.

- Evetts , J. (2003 ) . The Sociological Analysis of Professionalism : Occupational Change in the Modern World. Sociology International , June / 2003 , Vol 18 ( 2): . 395-415 . London : SAGE .

- Rodrigues, M. (2002 ) .Sociologia das Profissões, Oeiras : Publisher Celta

- Articles from M. Saks - 1983 , 2012 and 2015 also bring great contributions.

Best regards!