In this chapter, I shall explore major approaches towards the study of the professions. This chapter includes the following subtitles:
¨BRise of the Professions
¨BProblems with the Concept of ¡°the Professions¡±
¨B¡°Profession¡± ©¤ a confusing term
¨BTrait theory
¨BTheory of control
¨BA comparison
¨BSelf-employed and salaried professionals
Rise of the Professions
The last two centuries, according to Abbot (1988), have seen a considerable increase of professional endeavors due to social and technological changes. Parsons (1968, p. 545) refers to this phenomenon as ¡°the professional complex,¡± which he says, ¡°has already become the most important single component in the structure of modern societies.¡± In fact, the professional complex emerging on a large scale in modern times is, in his words, ¡°the crucial structural development in twentieth-century society.¡± Wilding (1982) and Goode (1960) hold the same view. Larson (1977, p. 5) observes that major professional associations emerged over a stretch of fifty years in Britain and the United States. According to the Census Bureau in the United States, approximately 4 percent of the labor force in the U. S. were professionals in 1900, and the percentage rose to about 13 percent in 1970, a more than three-fold increase in seventy years (Versey, 1988, p. 15). The fervor that various professional aspirants have demonstrated in this century can be better illustrated by the efforts made by many occupational groups to justify the claim that they have achieved professional status and that they have become full-fledged professions. To cite an example, Hughes (1965) makes a very keen observation:
Perhaps the way to understand what professions mean in our society is to note the ways in which occupations try to change themselves or their image, or both, in the course of a movement to become ¡®professionalized¡¯¡ Courses and seminars entitled Professions, Occupations, or Sociology of Work ¨C Which I have been holding for more than twenty-five years ¨C invariably attract many people from outside sociology. As often as not, they want to write a paper to prove that some occupation ¨C their own ¨C has become or is on the verge of becoming a true profession. (p. 4)
At this point, we should note that the history of occupational development along the line of the professions is unique to the Anglo-American world (Larson, 1977; Veysey, 1988; Hatch, 1988). Most of the academic papers about the professions are written by American and British scholars. The situation is clearly different in other countries. For example, Hatch (1988) points out that
¡ In Europe, where the state was much more active in organizing training and employment, occupations were less obliged to scramble competitively for a secure and privileged place in the economy. In Germany and France, status and security have derived less from a given occupation and more from attendance at a state-controlled, elite institution of higher education. (p. 3)
However, this does not mean that the professions do not exist in other countries. The historical development of the professions is unique to the U. S. and the U. K. because the concept of the professions is closely associated with laissez-faire capitalist industrialization and a decentralized political system (Larson, 1977). In other countries with a lower level of capital industrialization and stronger government control, the development of professions is less ¡°spontaneous¡± (Larson, 1977). It is for this reason that the United States is clearly a more typical example of professional development when compared with Britain. In the United States where the government is considered to be an enemy of free enterprise, ¡°professional status has largely replaced land, family or social status as the primary indicator of achievement¡± (Hatch, 1988, p. 11). In this paper, the context of theoretical arguments about professions and the cited examples are mostly American. In the case of the Republic of China, which is politically more centralized, the environment for professional development is less favorable than in the United States and Britain. Hence, the task ahead of an occupation seeking professional status in Taiwan is expected to be more difficult. Rapid changes, however, are taking place in the political and economic fronts in Taiwan. The country is moving towards liberalization and democratization. Also, the United States has long been an influential example to which Taiwan government pays great attention in policy making. Therefore, the occupations now have brighter prospects than ever to pursue professional development.
The earliest professions were medicine, law and ministry (Larson, 1977). Along with these well-established professions are occupations struggling to develop in the same direction. They are, in Hudson¡¯s words, ¡°semiprofessions¡±, including ¡°elementary and secondary schoolteachers, librarians, social workers and registered nurses¡± (1990, p. 278). Well-established professions, especially medicine, have long been the ¡°model¡¯ of professions carefully studied by sociologists or practitioners hoping to justify their professional claims. At this juncture, one may raise the question: ¡°What are the factors contributing to the rise of professionalism in modern times?¡± Larson (1977) holds that
¡ modern professionalization is connected with the same general historical circumstances: it coincides¡ with the rise of industrial capitalism¡ and, toward the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth, with the evolution of capitalism toward its corporate form. (p. 6)
In addition, Abbot (1988, pp. 144-5) observes that ¡°the rise of large-scale organizations¡± also contributes to the rise of professionalism because the increase in large organizations translates into an increase in the demand for professional services. In this connection, higher education also has an important role to play, as Hatch (1988, p. 3) observes ¡°the rapid expansion of institutions of higher education offered the promise of professional status to those who could never make that claim on the basis of social standing, family or wealth.¡± More and more people aspiring to achieve professional status also created a demand for universities a century ago (Hatch, 1988, p. 7). Furthermore, Braden (1985) points to other factors, including.
¡the increase of skilled to unskilled workers; educational inflation¡ and the desire for the middle class to preserve jobs for their own children leading to increased entry requirements, or professionalized occupations. (p. 10)
Why do occupations aspire to gain professional status? The answer is quite clear. The professions are clearly different from occupations in that the members of a professional group enjoy more prestigious positions with higher earnings than those of occupational practitioners (Carr-Saunders and Wilson, 1933). As many occupations are currently struggling for professional status, a nagging question that has to be answered in order to map out the strategies for professional development is: what is a profession? While the answer to this question seems simple and self-evident to many, including practitioners pursuing professionalism, it has stirred up considerable controversy within the sociology of professions. For our purpose, we do not need to become entangled in confusing and frustrating theoretical debates. The goal of this research is to identify the strategies successfully employed by established professions and indicate the direction in which interpreting in Taiwan can be professionally developed. However, we cannot simply bypass the theoretical controversies and develop our model or strategies naively, because no practical model or feasible strategies can be developed without understanding the nature of the professions. What we should do, instead, is stand aloof from the debate and evaluate objectively the contending theories, keeping in mind the practical end of this paper which is to explore possibilities for the professionalization of interpreting in Taiwan.
Problems with the Concept of ¡°the Professions¡±
Profession as a concept is a problematic area of research that has been open to heated debate and controversy among social scientists and scholars probing into the nature of occupational professionalization in modern societies. The lack of consensus among researchers over the concept has been indicated in considerable amount of criticism by social scientists (Freidson, 1986). According to Freidson (p. 30), some analysts even have a tendency to or overtly denounce any endeavor to define the term profession. He further suggests that in order to develop a good theory, one needs to know precisely what he is dealing with in theorizing. However, given the complicated nature of the concept ©¤ a point to which I shall return later ©¤ any attempt to arrive at a concise, brief and convincing definition in a few sentences would be ambitious and moreover, does not serve our purpose, because we are more concerned about how interpreting can be developed professionally than the definition itself.
Another approach about the definition is to avoid a straightforward definition and concentrate, instead, on the process by which an occupational group is elevated to professional status. The process is called professionalization (Hudson, 1990). The approach is criticized by Freidson (1986, p. 31) for not being able to define ¡°the direction of the process, to define the end state of professionalism toward which an occupation may be moving.¡± Freidson¡¯s criticism gives us a clue to the nature of the theoretical debate. Clearly, he criticizes the approach for failure to conform to a standard that cannot possibly be reached. By making that assertion, Freidson indirectly assumes that there is a prototype of the professions to warrant the identification of the ¡°end-state¡± of professionalization, which cannot be empirically justified. The sociology of professions, unfortunately, is not yet advanced enough to pinpoint the stage at which an occupational group can proclaim victory in the struggle for professionalization. Perhaps the ¡°end-state¡± does not exist at all. Occupational professionalization should be evaluated in a relative sense. For this research, we really do not have to worry about the theoretical flaws, because interpreting, in comparison, is a long way behind the medical and legal professions in its degree of professionalization. Let us now start our exploration of the professions.
¡°Profession¡± ©¤ a Confusing Term
A logical step to explore the nature of professions is to locate the semantic properties of profession and its application in a linguistic context. The world, as Freidson remarks, has ¡°a number of overlapping connotations and denotations¡± (1986, p. 21). He makes use of the Oxford English Dictionary to trace the usage of profession at different stages in history. Consulting the Oxford English Dictionary (1989, XII: 572-3), we find the following meanings of profession.
I. 1A. The declaration, promise, or vow made by one entering a religious order.
B. A solemn declaration, promise or vow.
2A. A particular order of monks, nuns, or other professed persons. (Obs.)
B. The order instituted by Christ; Christianity. (Obs.)
3. Special character, nature or kind. (Rare)
II. 4A. The action of declaring, acknowledging, or avowing an opinion, belief, intention, practice, etc.; declaration, avowal in later use often with implied contrast to practice or fact.
B. An act of professing; a declaration. (True or False)
5A. The profession of religion; the declaration of belief in and obedience to religion, or of acceptance of and conformity to the faith and principles of any religious community; hence, the faith or religion which one professes.
B. A religious system, communion, or body.
III. 6. The occupation which one professes to be skilled and to follow.
A. A vocation in which a professed knowledge of some department of learning or science is used in its application to the affairs of others or in the practice of an art founded upon it. Applied specifically to the three learned professions of divinity, law and medicine; also to the military profession.
B. In wider sense: any calling or occupation by which a person habitually earns his living.
C. The body of persons engaged in a calling.
D. Applied allusively and euphemism to prostitution.
7. The function or office of a professor in a university or college.
8. The Public registration of persons and property.
The diversity of meanings exhibited in the literal definitions above is perplexing. In the first category of meaning, Profession originally refers to a vow or promise in a religious sense. The word in that sense is evaluated positively. The definitions under the second category obviously are contradictory to those in the first. A sacred vow evolves to become a declaration with implied contrast to practice or fact. Thus the word is tarnished with a bad connotation implying the act of lying. It is the third category that researchers and scholars are interested in when studying the nature of profession. In this category, profession is closely associated with some scientific knowledge and its application in professional practice. Here we also witness the fact that the three learned professions, i.e. medicine, law, and ministry have long been registered in the dictionary as paradigms of professions.
However, profession in a wider sense also refers to any calling or occupation by which a person habitually earns his living. This definition clearly frustrates all attempts to make a distinction between profession and occupation. Unfortunately, it is still in use in daily conversation. It is perfectly all right to ask: ¡°What is your profession?¡± even though the addressee might be a taxi driver. Hence, we can conclude that the difficulty involved in the definition of profession lies not so much in the multitude of meanings as in the contrast and contradictions they exhibit in a variety of usages. Freidson (1986) makes the following observation:
¡ Indeed, it is not just the public that has been confused. Scholars and intellectuals have not been immune to the heavy and diverse semantic freight of the word: some of their controversies about professions and professionalization have stemmed as much from emphasis on different connotations and denotations as from issues of fact, logical inference, or analytical concern. (pp. 26-7)
The dictionary approach is apparently not adequate to bring out the real meaning of modern professions. While warning us of the complexity of the task of definition, dictionaries blur our focus; consequently people can be arguing with each other over the concept of the professions without knowing that they are talking about different things. Even though the definitions in the third category are closer to the research target, they really do not give us many clues about profession. Therefore, social scientists have long adopted different approaches to unearth the meaning of profession. The two camps in the theoretical debates over the nature of profession are the trait theory and the theory of control. Before we plunge into those theories, we must keep in mind that the interests of this paper are different from those of social scientists who conduct scholarly research to investigate the phenomena of profession, while we as interpreters naturally want to find out what we can do to achieve professionalism.
Trait Theory
The trait theory is, as Winter says, the view ¡°that a profession is an occupation with certain characteristics¡± (1988, p. 21). This is the earliest approach towards understanding the professions as a new social phenomenon. The approach is sometimes called the structural-functional approach, even though there are some subtle differences, which are not of our interest to distinguish. Theorists try to distinguish a profession from an occupation. They are generally concerned in the first place with the characteristics, or attributes a profession demonstrates that distinguish it clearly from an occupation. What are those attributes or characteristics, and where can we find them?
Medicine, law and ministry are considered the original professions (Carter and others, 1990; Larson, 1977; Hudson, 1990). Among them, the most outstanding profession that has captured the attention of social scientists for decades is perhaps the medical profession. By observing well-established professions, analysts were able to extract basic elements of a profession from the characteristics of the medical or legal professions. The method is inductive and observation-oriented in nature. For example, Millerson lists thirteen characteristics of professions from 21 writers on the professions (Joseph, 39) (Figure 1).
| Figure 1. _________________________________________________________________ Number of Traits mentions _________________________________________________________________ Professionals adhere to a professional code of ethics 13 Professionals are organized occupations 13 Professional skills are based on theoretical knowledge 12 A profession requires training and education 9 Competence is tested 8 Professions stress altruistic service 5 Skills are applied to the affairs of others 2 Professionals provide indispensable public services 2 Professions are licensed or registered 2 There is a definite professional-client relationship 2 The best impartial service is given 2 There is a definite fee 2 Professionals have strong loyalty to colleagues 1 ______________________________________________________________________________ C. Millerson (1964, p. 5) |
The list is by no means exhaustive. There are other characteristics proposed by analysts, such as professional commitment (Hatch, 1988; Hughes, 1965), professional autonomy (Greenwood, 1957; Hudson, 1990), professional culture (Greenwood, 1957), and authority or monopoly (Greenwood, 1957).
These traits are important for emerging professions, because, as Hudson says, ¡°the members of many other occupational specialties are self-consciously seeking to elevate the status of their occupations to a profession by taking on the characteristics of professionals.¡± Professionalization, he goes on to explain, is a ¡°process by which an occupational specialty seeks to more closely resemble a profession¡± (1990, p. 258). Carter and others (1990) make it even more explicit in describing things which the
AAHPERD1 could do to professionalize.
Professionalization is the term used to describe the process by which these attributes are acquired and professional identity is achieved¡ A step toward determining whether in the professionalization sequence the AAHPERD stands is to study progress made in the acquisition of attributes defining a profession. (p, 106)
In addition, the process of an occupation moving towards a profession is considered a continuum. At one end is the full-fledged profession and at the other the least eye-catching occupation with semiprofessions in between struggling towards the goal of becoming a profession (Greenwood, 1957; Carter and others, 1990; Hudson, 1990). Semiprofession, as Hudson elaborates, refers to ¡°an occupational group that has achieved some of the characteristics of a profession¡± but to a lesser degree (1990, p. 278).
For a professionalizing occupation at this point, what is really important is how this theory can help the members formulate strategies to professionalize. The strategy seems fairly simple: develop those professional traits. Carter and others (1990) draft a checklist (Table 1), with which a professionalizing occupational group can measure the progress made in the process by completing each professional attribute (p. 108).
Table 1.
| Progress Form for Professionalization | ||||
| Attributes of a Profession | Status of Development | |||
| Not yet initiated Target initiation | In Process of development Target completion | Explicitly developed | In use or operation | |
| 1. Theoretical knowledge. Mastery of profession¡¯s knowledge base | | | | |
| 2. Autonomy. Authority over service purposes, goals, and objectives | | | | |
| 3. Service mission. Statement of service purposes, goals and objectives | | | | |
| 4. Ethical Code. Penalty system for unethical practices | | | | |
| 5. Public Sanction. Consumer recognition and support of only AAHPERD- sanctioned services | | | | |
| 6. Professional association. Membership support and contribution to AAHPERD unctions | | | | |
| 7. Formal training. Pre- and in service instructional programs with prescribed curricula | | | | |
| 8. Credentialing. Recognition of competence in professional standards via certificate or license | | | | |
| 9. Sense of community. Symbol distinction of AAHPERD professionals with similar interests | | | | |
| 10. Singular occupation choice. Practitioner retention in role throughout career | | | | |
For decades, this approach has come under severe attack from sociologists who hold a drastically different view, for reasons I shall turn to later. Those researchers who oppose the theory believe that the theory of control is a far better approach in analyzing a profession.
Theory of Control
Social scientists who support the theory of as a tool in the study of the professions contend, instead, that a profession is different from an occupation because, as Freidson (1970, p. xvii) points out, a profession is ¡°an occupation which has assumed a dominant position in a division of labor, so that it gains control over the determination of the substance of work.¡± Johnson (1972, p. 45) makes a similar observation by saying that professionalism is a form of ¡°institutionalized control.¡± Professionalism, according to Wilding (1982, p. 5), is then redefined as ¡°a peculiar type of occupational control rather than an expression of the inherent nature of particular occupations, ¡± because professions are ¡°occupations which have come out on top in the struggle [for professional status].¡±
In that sense, society is viewed as an arena where occupational groups take action in a bid for professional development2 (Wilding, 1982). This approach is essentially power-oriented and is also known as the power approach. According to Hudson (1990, p. 258), professions are ¡°powerful occupations that are currently winning in the constant struggle among occupations to control certain types of work.¡± Therefore, he continues: ¡°the problem is not which occupations are recognized as professions but, rather, the process by which they gained their recognition.¡± Hence, professionalization is redefined in Parry¡¯s words as ¡°an occupational strategy of groups who aspire to collective upward social mobility into the solid middle class¡± (1974, p. 182). For Larson (1977, p. xvi), professionalization means a process by which ¡°the occupations that we call professions organized themselves to attain market control¡±. She continues: ¡°I see professionalization as the process by which producers of special services sought to constitute and control a market for their expertise.¡± Thus the ultimate goals of professionalization are autonomy and control of the terms of work (Wilding, 1982).
Professionalization can not be achieved individually, but it requires collective efforts which come into play in the form of professional associations or societies (Larson, 1977; Hudson, 1990). Professional associations are very important agencies for the control of the professions and the wielding professional power. Powerful professions are characterized by powerful associations. Therefore, social scientists often refer to professional associations as major indicators for the emergence of the professions (Larson, 1977).
What areas can an occupational group seek to control? There are two major types of control, which are internal control and external control (Abbot, 1988; Wilding, 1982; Larson, 1977) (Figure 2).
| Figure 2. Professional Control External Control ¡ª Market Control (Defining the Need of the Clients Working Conditions Direct Contact with the Clients) |
Internally, a profession exercises its control, first of all, over the expertise or specialized body of knowledge. On this, Hudson (1990) comments:
Knowledge is power, according to the power perspective¡ The most powerful professionals are likely to be those with the greatest control over the sources of knowledge. (pp., 266-7)
The sources of knowledge refer to the professional schools, including the training and research institutions that generate professional expertise (Larson, 1977). There are several aspects of the expertise a profession has to control. First of all, a profession has to define its own content of expertise. Take medicine for instance, Larson says it not only controls its own content of practice, but also controls ¡°the content of training for a host of allied and highly skilled occupations, such as nurses, anesthetists, therapists, laboratory technicians, radiologists, chiropractors, and the like¡± (p. 37). Conversely, those occupations whose content of knowledge is controlled by other occupations cannot fare very well in professionalization. Nursing in the United States is a very good example.
In addition to the content of work, an important area for a profession is the expertise itself, which must be standardized (Larson, 1977). For a professionalizing occupation, according to Larson, standardization is necessary step to differentiate the ¡°professional products¡± (i.e. the expertise) from the ¡°competing products¡± so that consumers can easily identify the professional services (p. 14). In addition, standardization of expertise helps to consolidate a profession, because if the members share the same knowledge, it is easier for them to have a sense of unity for the profession (Larson, 1977). Standardization is achieved through training and research. On the part of training, professional schools recognized or sanctioned by professional associations, which are mostly affiliated with universities, offer similar training programs for the professional candidates. Students undergoing the same training can therefore be expected to attain a certain level of the competence demanded for professional work. Also through professional inculcation, students go through professional socialization, at the end of which they learn not only the expertise necessary for professional practice but also the culture of the profession, including values, ethical codes, and jargon.
Another major area to control is the professional research institutions. Larson believes that change in the expertise is essential for a profession because it ¡°prevents excessive routinization and therefore maintains the relative inaccessibility of expertise¡± (1977, p. 32). The research has to be conducted based upon scientific principles. Larson further makes the distinction between ¡°pure scientific disciplines¡± and ¡°quasi-disciplines¡± (p. 33). For a profession, conformity with scientific standards in research methodology is indispensable for ¡°a scientific basis appears to offer the best potential for the unified and standardized production of professional producers¡± (p. 34). For highly-skilled occupations that do not conform to scientific standards, Larson (1977) offers very good advice.
The broad scientific moorings of the ¡®quasi-disciplines¡¯ require ¡ affiliation with the modern university¡ because of the university¡¯s apparent universalism and independence from lay demands and private interests, these educators are in the best position to defend the universalistic guarantees of professional competence and to legitimize the professionals¡¯ claim to autonomy and monopoly. (p. 34)
Once institutionalized control is maintained, applicants aspiring to membership of a specific profession have to go through formal training at institutions approved by the profession where they go through professional education and initiation.
Apart from institutionalized control, a profession can strengthen its control over the expertise through mystification. Professional expertise can not appear to be esoteric in the eye of the public if it sounds familiar or simple (Greenwood, 1957; Wilensky, 1964). Predictably, therefore, well-established professions like medicine and law have a sophisticated corpus of professional jargon that sounds ¡°professional¡±. Encroachers can not gain access to the jargon without formal training. Ultimately, with control of expertise successfully achieved, a profession is in a privileged position and can claim to have achieved what Larson terms ¡°a cognitive exclusiveness¡±, which she views as a strong asset for a profession to maximize its earning and prestige (1977, p. 30).
In addition to the control over the professional expertise, a profession also controls admission or entry into the profession. The control is exercised in two ways. First of all, professional training institutions for well-established professions like medicine or law are characterized by low admittance rates (Hughes, 1965). To be admitted, aspiring applicants have to prove their worth by passing the entrance examination. The control of admission to a profession is also made through accreditation or licensure. Although most professional societies do not possess the power to give licensing tests to applicants, powerful associations such as medicine in the United States, are capable of convincing the government to perform the task of accreditation using selection or examination criteria approved by the associations. (This capability will be explored in detail later.) Licensing is needed not only to protect the public from unqualified practitioners, but also, in Conklin¡¯s words (1984, p. 175), to give ¡°an occupation more prestige and enhance the standing of people in that occupation in the eyes of the public.¡± Licensing, as he goes on to say, can also ¡°lead to increased business¡± or can be used to justify better remuneration.
This type of control is necessary for a profession for three reasons. First of all, if the supply of professionals increases without control, the rewards or prestige awarded to a profession in general are bound to decline (Hughes, 1965). Therefore, it is an essential step if a profession seeks to maintain high financial rewards and social status. Secondly, a professional association has to maintain the reputation of the profession for its members by guaranteeing to the public and the government that the professionals can perform their service to a rather high standard. To afford the guarantee, the number of professionals performing the services should be controlled. Thus, this can be viewed as a type of quality control. Furthermore, the control of entry contributes to the reduction of competition3 among the professionals (Larson, 1977). The restriction on entry to a profession, in Conklin¡¯s words (1984, p. 175), ¡°reduces competition and is another way to maintain or increase the salaries of those already in the profession.¡± Mass production of professionals lead to the unfortunate reduction of the market share for the professionals and therefore should be controlled.
Among internal controls, including control over the expertise, and admission, professional associations also control their members by formulating a code of ethics. The professional codes of ethics can be considered as organizational tools in pursuit of professional autonomy and monopolization (Berlant, 1975; Wildding, 1982). Although the code may vary from profession to profession, there are common characteristics shared among all the professions. The ethical code advocates solidarity among the professionals, professional neutrality and a service orientation; bans competition by price-cutting, or advertising; and denounces any violation of professional secrecy by the members. Most professional associations have a special committee to oversee the professional conduct of members. In the pursuit for professional autonomy and monopoly, the observance of the code of ethics for an occupational group is crucial to its claims as a profession because as Wilding (1982) observes, ¡°no government could or would grant the professions the powers and freedoms they enjoy without guarantees about their use.¡±
The service orientation and professional neutrality, as stated in the professional code of ethics, is essential to earn public trust in the profession (Wilding, 1982). Therefore, he goes on to say:
¡ belief in the professions¡¯ disinterested concern is basic to trust, and trust is quite crucial to the client-professional relationship¡ Without trust, the personal service and social welfare professions ¨C law, medicine, social work, teaching and planning could not have developed. (p. 76)
For this reason, a profession can not afford to have its code of ethics breached by its members. The professional code of ethics is considered by Freidson (1970, p. 360) to be the ¡°prerequisite for being trusted to control the terms of work without taking advantage of such control.¡±
However, the associations can seldom control members conduct effectively (Freidson 1986). Because the ethical code cannot be enforced by the government nor by the lay public, due to the technical nature of the profession, control is exercised by the professionals themselves over each other under the belief that the professionals, out of a sense of commitment and duty, will not tolerate any breach of ethics by their colleagues. This is called colleague control or peer control. The British Medical Association, an example cited by Wilding (1982, p. 77) in his paper, is worth noting as I quote below.
The whole professional life and pattern of work of the doctor and dentist in the NHS hospital service is such as to maintain high standards and to expose him constantly in his work and results to the scrutiny of colleagues, from whom the truth cannot be concealed ¨C even if he at any time desired so to do. (HMSO, 1977, p. 61)
Apart from internal control, the professions also seek to assume external control over the market, including control over the job description, control over clients in independent practice and control over general working conditions, including remuneration, work environments and so forth. To achieve market control, an emerging profession has to control its clientele. Professionals first of all have to define the need of the clients (Freidson, 1986). However, it is not always easy and depends on the kind of clients at whom the services are directed. In the case of librarianship, clients go to librarians to seek professional advice on how to retrieve information about certain subjects. In this context, librarians are very often not in a position to advise them on what books they should read but rather, are usually asked to locate books for library users. Therefore, librarianship can hardly be considered a profession even though there are still considerable debates about this issue (Goode, 1960). A doctor, in contrast, can always impose his/her expertise upon the patient. Patients are often asked to believe that they are all right if they are told so. In this context, the element of expertise intervenes once again. The more a profession is recognized by the clients to possess an esoteric body of knowledge, the more they are convinced that the professionals really are experts who can always exercise their professional judgement to the client¡¯s benefit.
However, Freidson (1988) identifies some variations in the situation. For instance, the more organized and higher educated the clients, the more difficult are attempts to define their needs. Larson makes the same observation (1977). These clients tend to define their own problems and needs and anticipate the professionals to serve them. In fact, compliance with lay ideas is, as Freidson (1986, p. 218) observes, ¡°one of the elements leading them [the professionals] to deviate from the formal knowledge advanced by academics and researchers.¡±
In addition, an emerging profession must insist upon independence in performing the service. This means that professionals must always maintain direct contact with the clients. In a case study of engineering in the United States, Larson (1977, pp. 25-31) studies the reasons why engineering with its exclusive body of knowledge can not establish itself as a profession. Most engineers emerged as ¡°salaried professionals¡±. Since they were mostly employed by large organizations, their function was both economic and technical. On the one hand, they had to research and develop new products; on the other, they were asked to take into account the profitability of the products (i. e. the economic side of the services) or took part in promotional activities. They performed services for their employers, instead of their clients or users. In that case, the excellence and expert nature of the profession could not be observed or appreciated by the clients. Therefore, engineering could not control the market because the market was ¡°subordinate¡±. And the ¡°subordinating of a professional market minimizes the effect of cognitive exclusiveness¡±. This is also the reason, according to Freidson (1988), why engineers were not held responsible for the Three Mile Island disaster, but the government agency in charge of regulating the profession. In comparison, doctors can not escape public attention in health issues. The distinction between the two in terms of market control is apparent.
Another condition for determining the extent to which an emerging profession is able to control the market is the degree of ease for clients to supervise professionals when they perform their tasks (Larson, 1977; Wilding, 1982). This argument is not contradictory to the idea of direct contact with clients as we mentioned above. One the one hand, the clients must be able to witness the services performed for them and on the other, the less they understand what the professionals are doing the better the profession can control the market, because as Wilding (1982) points out,
Such a situation means that professionals must have freedom and discretion over the course of action they pursue. At the same time this increases their independence and their power. (p. 68)
It is for this reason that teachers have difficulty gaining professional status: most people receive education and they naturally feel that they understand what the teachers are doing. But the situation with the medical professions is clearly different. Although most people go to the doctors when they are sick, still, few of them understand even what their doctor fills in a prescription note. Therefore, powerful professions perform their services ¡°visibly¡±, as Wilding (1982) puts it, and yet they are ¡°invisible¡± in the sense of mystification, something beyond the grasp of clients.
Professions are indubitably powerful groups. But where does the power come from? Wilding (1982, pp. 59-60) identifies five major sources of professional power.
He says that first of all, the professions are powerful because of their ¡°alliance with the state¡±. Secondly, the service nature of the professions gives them power. Thirdly, the technical nature of the professional expertise is a source of professional power. In addition, self-regulation of the professions through observance of the code of ethics and colleague control contribute to justify this power. Finally, the importance of the professions to public welfare is essential to persuade the public to accept the way professionals wield their power.
Control and power are complimentary concepts for understanding the professions. On the one hand, the professions need power to exercise control, both internally and externally and on the other, they need to exercise control to gain power. Crucial to control and power are relations between the profession, the State and the public.
Why does the State grant privileges to a particular occupation? According to Wilding (1982, p. 10), the delegation of power or the granting of autonomy is the result of the feeling that ¡°political control of certain activities is undesirable, that such control should be separated from political authority and handed back to the experts.¡± Therefore,
¡ on the other hand, it may be that the state recognizes that political and administrative control would be impossible given the particular expert nature of the activity. Traditional methods of control would be both ineffective in providing protection for consumers and inhibiting for the professionals. State encouragement for the development of professional organization and the granting of powers and privileges to that end can then be regarded as the product of an attempt at securing the best protection for the public. (Wilding, p. 10)
Wilding points out the interdependence of the professions and the State. The State needs the professions to perform important ¡°social functions¡± and the professions need the State to administer accreditation and protection. Thus relations with the State are built on the basis of mutual need. Sometimes, the State performs accreditation for an occupational group not because it voluntarily wants to do so, but because it is under public pressure (Conklin, 1984). However, no government will grant such privileges and autonomy to any occupational group without guarantees that the privileges will not be abused against public interest. Again a professional code of ethics, in this context, serves to enlist government support for professional claims. It is, therefore, not only a tool for a profession to exercise internal control over members but also it is the foundation upon which the trust and faith of the public¡ª and consequently the government¡ª rest. Confidence and faith on the part of the government and the public are crucial to a profession in policy-making (Wilding, 1982). For example, the foundation of the medical profession¡¯s control over its work, though political in nature4 (Freidson, 1970), does involve considerable public trust, as the Yale Law Journal (1975) concludes,
the political strength of the AMA [American Medical Association] is to a large degree attributable to the status of the doctor in society ¡ [and that public trust] unchallenged in the realm of medical science, extends also into the economic and political aspects of health. (p. 94)
Therefore, to justify its professional claims, and to secure autonomy and privileges, an emerging profession ultimately has to prove its worth to both the public and the government. An emerging profession cannot possibly achieve these goals unless both internal and external control are successfully exercised.
A Comparison
Having discussed the two major approaches to the analysis of professions and understood the complexity of profession as a social phenomenon, we are now in a better position to define the term profession. According to the trait approach, profession can be defined as an occupational group that has achieved the characteristics of a profession, as we mentioned at the beginning. For profession, the control theory naturally would produce an occupational group capable of exercising the types of aforementioned control. Both definitions appear meaningless unless they are clarified in a more comprehensive theoretical context. To evaluate the two approaches, I shall use the following criteria:
1. Which one can better distinguish a profession from an occupation?
2. Which one can better help us formulate strategies for professional development?
These approaches are similar superficially, in that both identify characteristics of the professions. What really marks the distinction5 is the difference in their emphasis. The trait approach has long been criticized for several reasons. First of all, the professions are treated as a generic concept that can be defined and identified by its distinctive features (Freidson, 1986; Wilding, 1982; Winter, 1988). This approach, though easy to use and easy for the non-specialists to understand, is not very helpful except to dictionary editors in compiling the definition of profession.6 This assumption is criticized by Wilding (1982, p. 2) as treating the professions as if they existed in a ¡°vacuum¡±. It is for this reason that scholars holding this theory never pay attention to the history of the professions. Instead, their interest of study is as Wilding (1982, p. 2) says
the fit between its characteristics and the nature and needs of society, and that development is of a biological, evolutionary nature little affected by action on the part of the evolving occupational group.
Secondly, the theory is made with the underlying assumption that the process by which an occupation evolves towards a profession is peaceful. This assumption totally ignores the fact that the professions have considerable power over the welfare of the State and policy-making and that the process of professionalization often involves a power struggle.
Thirdly, the trait theory assumes that there is a true profession, which is as Wilding (1982, p. 2) comments,
¡ an archetypal, ideal type accepted by all students and commentators as exuding the very esse of professionalism and, that from it, the key professional traits can be deduced with general agreement. To decide whether or not an aspirant profession is fit and ready to enter the professional fold then becomes a simple task of scoring it on the agreed attributes. The assumption of one true, apostolic profession is, however, highly dubious.
Therefore, the task for an emerging profession is to acquire all the professional traits exhibited in the model professions; the attainment of these traits translates into the attainment of professional status.
Finally, the approach is criticized because it does not specify the relations among those traits and their relative importance. Scholars holding this theory disagree among themselves about which traits are more important than others. Figure 1 clearly demonstrates the diversity among the 21 writers.
For our purpose, the approach fails to meet the two aforementioned criteria. For the purpose of distinguishing a profession from an occupation, Greenwood¡¯s description of professional characteristics, in contradiction with his emphasis on the traits, explains why this theory is inadequate for that purpose.
Strictly speaking, these attributes are not the exclusive monopoly of the professions; non-professional occupations also possess them, but to a lesser degree. (1957, p. 45)
Such a statement is enough to frustrate any attempt of this approach to differentiate a profession from an occupation. It defeats the purpose of treating the attainment of the attributes as the attainment of professional status, because those traits are not unique to the professions. Hence, they do not serve as good markers between occupations and professions. Secondly, although the theory provides a quick and easy-to-understand definition of the professions, it does not shed much light on how an emerging profession can be professionalized. Carter¡¯s Progress Form for Professionalization, to which I have referred earlier, is a good example of how the trait theory can mislead a research attempt. Superficially, its emphasis on the professional traits does give one the impression that the theory is easy to follow and therefore can be conveniently used as a framework for research designs. However, its oversimplification blurs the focus of research, and in consequence, the efforts to justify the professional claim are distracted from gaining power for the profession to acquiring labels that are too vague to provide guidelines for the professional development. Therefore, the Progress Form for Professionalization devised by Carter (1990) (see Table 1) cannot actually evaluate the progress made by an emerging profession in its bid for professionalization. For one thing, even though some of the characteristics, such as Professional Association and Credentialing are relatively easy to evaluate, other characteristics listed in the form can hardly be evaluated in the degree of completion. For instance, how do we fill in the item under Autonomy? What about the Sense of Community?
However, at this point, we should note that the approach has its own merits. The theory is not useful for this paper not because the characteristics identified are not significant in the understanding of the professions but because the emphasis is wrong. It fails to account for the significance of the dynamics a profession exhibits and the conflicts and actions involved when an occupational group strives collectively to gain professional status.
The theory of control is, in comparison, a better approach for understanding a profession and the process in which the professional claim can be justified. The theory seems to meet the first criterion I mentioned earlier. For example, Wilding (1982, p. 6) observes that
[the control theory] is valuable in alerting us to what is clearly a central professional aspiration. It does seem, too, to discriminate effectively between occupations which would generally be accepted as professions¡ and those which merely aspire to such acceptance¡ but have not clearly arrived.
When we view the attributes of the professions, as proposed by both Schools, their significance and relations can be better understood as an organic whole. According to the control theory, the goals for an emerging profession are shifted from the acquisition of the professional attributes to the exercise of both internal and external control, as mentioned earlier. For an emerging profession, exercising control is something more substantial than mere acquisition of professional characteristics. Hence, the theory of control performs better than the trait theory in meeting the second criterion mentioned above.
However, we should note that the theory of control, though it has accurately pinpointed the dynamics of professionalization, does not provide any clearly formulated steps for an aspiring occupation to follow on the way to professionalization. Also, both theories are seriously inadequate in identifying the end-state of professionalization, whose existence I believe is dubious. Perhaps due to such inadequacy, empirical studies about the professions in sociology of the professions are few and far between. Most scholars seem to prefer verbal arguments to empirical studies. Nevertheless, this does not pose a serious problem for our study, because this paper does not attempt to justify interpreting as a profession in Taiwan. The purpose of this paper is to study the prospects for the professional development of interpreting, especially in the case of Taiwan. When interpreters have gained adequate understanding of the process of professionalization, interpreting is likely to be better developed.
Self-Employed and Salaried Professionals
When we study the phenomena of professionalization, an important distinction has to be made between self-employed and salaried professionals. Salaried professionals are practitioners permanently employed in large organizations, whereas ¡°self-employed¡± refers to freelancers who manage their career independently. For the study of professionalization, the distinction is very important because of the inherent conflict between bureaucracy and professionalism.
According to Freidson (1986), building and sustaining a practice for self-employed professionals is a significant source of pressure. In modern times, many professionals are employed by large organizations. This phenomenon has been a topic of investigation for many social scientists studying the professions, because a new element is brought into the discussion of professionalism, which is bureaucracy. Many scholars7 ascribe deprofessionalization8 to the affiliation of the professions to large organizations. For example, in the discussion about the failure of engineering to be professionalized as mentioned earlier, Larson (1977) explains that this failure was due to the subordination of engineering in the market. Also for administrators of large organizations, as Dawson (1986, p. 23) comments,
professionally trained people have a commitment to a subject matter, method of application and to their professional peers, not to an organization. Certainly they are potentially highly mobile and are consequently not easily controlled by non-specialist managers or administrators.
Large organizations have to maintain functions, many of which are incompatible with the professionalism of the employed professionals. Large organizations may be profit-oriented, while professionals stress their service orientation. Large organizations may resort to advertisements in order to promote sales or win business opportunities, and a professional in a subordinate position has to take the orders of his/her superior who may be purely a bureaucrat instead of a member of the profession. For instance, in observing the professional-organizational conflict within the Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs), Ritzer and Walczak (1988, pp. 10-11) make the following observation.
[The HMOs] are business organizations in which the objective is to work within budgetary constraints, or in some cases to turn a profit. As business organizations, HMOs are under tremendous pressure to rationalize operations in order to minimize costs and maximize income. Physicians, and their norm of autonomy, authority and altruism, are affected by these pressures whether they control these HMOs or are employed in them¡ in order to compete in today¡¯s more market-oriented medical system, physicians are going to be forced to emphasize business practices more with the result that professionalization may suffer. One result of this control by the market is the expansion of advertising by the various agencies involved in the medical business¡ While there are still strong negative sentiments among some physicians toward advertising, there is evidence to suggest that advertising is gaining acceptance in the medical profession.
The relations of the professions with large organizations and bureaucracy are complicated, and clearly lie outside the scope of this research. However, it is important to mention this issue because by professionals I mean self-employed professionals or free-lancers, rather than professionals employed by large organizations. For our purpose, it is better not to be entangled with bureaucracy in our research on occupational professionalization. By interpreters which I shall use throughout the paper, I really mean free-lancers or self-employed interpreters.
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
No comments:
Post a Comment