523467

research-article2014

WES0010.1177/0950017014523467Work, Employment and SocietyAdams

Debates and controversies

Sociology of professions:
international divergences
and research directions

Work, employment and society

2015, Vol. 29(1) 154165
The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0950017014523467
wes.sagepub.com

Tracey L Adams

University of Western Ontario, Canada

Abstract
This article considers points of convergence and divergence in English-language publications in
the sociology of professions. While research on professions in the US, UK, Canada and Western
Europe shares many similarities, UK researchers have devoted more attention to professional
regulation, while their US counterparts focus instead on organizational challenges facing
professionals. Contrasting these empirical and theoretical approaches opens up new research
directions, and highlights the importance of socio-historical and cultural context to professions.
More international and comparative work is required to develop a better understanding of
professions and professional regulation.

Keywords
professional regulation, research trends, sociology of professions

Recently two American sociologists announced the death of the sociology of professions. In their 2011 article, Gorman and Sandefur declare that the field has been in major
decline since the 1960s, although the study of knowledge and expert work is alive and
well, and living under alternate names the sociology of occupations, sociology of
organizations and social inequality. According to Gorman and Sandefur (2011: 276
81) scholars began to find the field conceptually and theoretically moribund, so they
decided to take their research in new directions. While formerly researchers studied professional power and privilege, they now focus on organizational arrangements and
rationalization trends that threaten to deprofessionalize expert workers, as well as the
Corresponding author:
Tracey L Adams, Department of Sociology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada N6A
5C2.
Email: tladams@uwo.ca

Downloaded from wes.sagepub.com by guest on July 22, 2016

155

Adams

changing career paths of knowledge workers (Gorman and Sandefur, 2011). An empirical focus on institutional arrangements and the labour market characteristics and experiences of expert workers appears to be becoming dominant, while broader theoretical
frameworks have been abandoned (Gorman and Sandefur, 2011).
This present article questions this perspective, arguing that it is an inaccurate depiction of trends in the sociology of professions, and one that hangs on a narrow reading of
American research on professions. Even a cursory glance at the sociological literature
shows a thriving field characterized by both new empirical and theoretical developments,
and a renewed interest in issues that concerned sociologists generations ago: professional
development and organization; professional practice; stateprofession relations; and professions roles in social governance. Growth in the field is partly due to an expansion of
interest in professions in Europe research that Gorman and Sandefur give short shrift
but there is continued interest in professions from American scholars as well. This
article identifies dominant research interests over the last two decades, finding points of
convergence and divergence across nation. Notably, researchers in the UK, Western
Europe, Canada and Australia have identified significant changes in stateprofession
relations, and professional regulation. In contrast, US scholars are virtually silent on
regulatory issues, focusing instead on organizational challenges faced by professions.
Such divergences point to the need for international and comparative research on professions to improve theorizing and to develop a more accurate empirical picture of the
changing nature of professions in Western societies.

Empirical research trends

The sociology of professions is a burgeoning research field. A search of the literature
databases Sociological Abstracts and SocIndex for terms such as professions, sociology of professions and professions and professionalization shows generally steady
publication growth since the 1950s.1 As Figure 1 shows, the increase since the year 2000
is particularly notable. The increase identified may simply reflect a general increase in
the number of journals, published research, and the greater international reach of the
search engines. Nevertheless, there is little doubt that the field is thriving, with growing
English-language research contributions from scholars based in Australia, Canada, the
US, the United Kingdom and other European countries.
Literature searches reveal that the sociology of professions is a broad field, encompassing numerous empirical directions. A look at approximately 500 articles, books and
book chapters identified in a literature search for English-language publications on the
sociology of professions or professional employment since 1988 reveals several dominant research themes.2 The top 10 themes (articles and books typically have more than
one) are shown in rank order in Table 1. As others have noted, the study of professions
has long been characterized by at least two foci: (1) the study of professions as occupations, and a focus on professional work, labour markets, and inequalities; and (2) the
study of professions as a component of social order and social regulation (Sciulli, 2009).
Both of these major themes are well-represented in the literature reviewed here.
The most popular topic of articles on professions over the last 25 years has been inequalities in professional practice, and access to practice and rewards, by gender, race/

Downloaded from wes.sagepub.com by guest on July 22, 2016

156

Work, employment and society 29(1)

7000
6000
5000
4000

Soc. Abstracts

3000

SocIndex

2000
1000
0

Figure 1. Number of publications listing profession in the abstract in two databases.

Note: See endnote 2 for a description of the data used in this figure.

ethnicity, immigration status and to a lesser extent, socio-economic status (in 27% of all
articles identified). A large number of articles also document processes of professionalization and professional development, and/or provide case studies on the emergence of
professional groups (24%). Also quite popular are the following: studies of deprofessionalization, challenges faced by dominant professions, and declining autonomy; studies of professional regulation, stateprofession relations, and changing public policy
affecting professions; and studies of the characteristics and experiences of professional
workers, including accounts of labour turnover and job satisfaction. Rounding out the
top 10 are theoretical articles: those exploring professions in organizations or applying
organizational theory to professions; studies of interprofessional relations; and studies
focusing on professionalism and trust, and/or knowledge and expertise. Scholars
approach the field from many sociological traditions, including the sociology of work,
social inequality, medical sociology, the sociology of law and the sociology of organizations. Health care professions (especially medicine and nursing) appear to be the moststudied groups, but the legal profession(s), social work, teaching, accounting, architecture,
journalism and engineering are well-accounted for.

Empirical divergences across region and nation

A closer look at the themes and focus of English-language articles on professions reveals
evidence of national similarities and differences, as shown in Table 1. The third to sixth
columns rank themes by nation/region, where the latter reflects the institutional affiliation
of a works first author. Some themes are popular across country/region: most notably, the
focus on gender and other dimensions of inequality in professional practice. Some others
differ. For instance, research focusing on professional careers, job satisfaction and turnover
has tended to be more common in the US than in the UK or Europe, although research in
this field has expanded dramatically in the UK since 2005: only two articles turned up in

Downloaded from wes.sagepub.com by guest on July 22, 2016

157

Adams

Table 1. Ranked themes in publications in the sociology of professions after 1988 (by regional
location of primary author).
Theme

All

US

UK

Gender, race, ethnicity, immigration status

27
(137)

Professionalization, professional histories,

case studies

24
(119)

Challenges facing/undermining professions,

deprofessionalization, declining autonomy

16
(79)

Professional regulation, professions and

the state, public policy

15
(77)

Practice experiences, turnover,

satisfaction

14
(71)

Theoretical approaches

12
(59)

Professions in organizations, organizational

fields, institutional analyses

10
(49)

Interprofessional relations, jurisdictions,

conflict, teams

9
(46)

Professionalism, trust, ethics

10

8.5
(43)

10

10

10

10

6
(29)

Knowledge and expertise

Canada,
Australia,
New Zealand

Europe % of
articles
(N)

Total N = 501

the search prior to 2004, but 16 were published by UK scholars between 2005 and 2013.
The most dramatic difference can be seen in research on professional regulation. As a
research area regulation and policy is ranked third in the UK, second in Canada and
Australia and third in Europe, but ranks ninth in frequency in studies by US scholars. Most
of the studies by American-based researchers that fall into this area are actually on state
profession relations more broadly, not regulation per se; scholars in other regions tend to
discuss stateprofession relations and professional regulation together. A few other differences are also worth noting. Firstly, UK literature has explored professionalism, professional ethics and trust more often than have researchers based elsewhere (for example,
Evetts, 2011; Fournier, 1999; Thursfield, 2012). Secondly, while UK scholars have looked
at the impact of organizational change on professional workers, they have not embraced
organizational and institutional theory to the extent that their American counterparts have.
A closer look at these variations is revealing. In the UK, the third, fourth, fifth and
sixth most common themes actually blend together to reflect a prominent research
Downloaded from wes.sagepub.com by guest on July 22, 2016

158

Work, employment and society 29(1)

agenda over the last two decades. These themes include the following: regulation, policy,
and stateprofession relations; challenges to dominant professions; professionalism and
trust; and theorizing about professions. Research on UK professions has identified a
decrease in public trust in dominant professions (Dixon-Woods etal., 2011; Evetts,
2006), as well as regulatory and organizational changes that are combining to reduce
professional self-regulation, change the nature and content of professionals work, and
decrease professional autonomy (Allsop and Saks, 2003; Chamberlain, 2010; Collins
etal., 2009; Dixon-Woods etal., 2011; Evetts, 2002; Kuhlmann etal., 2009). In fact, UK
scholars have argued that self-regulation was perhaps never a common attribute of professions, and is now a relic of the past (Dixon-Woods etal., 2011; Evetts, 2002); however, dominant professions like medicine have been able to maintain their discretion, and
are characterized as having acquired regulation (Evetts, 2002).
Scholars from both the UK and Western Europe have also explored regulatory changes
that have resulted from efforts to harmonize professional entry across the European
Union, and reduce barriers to practise for the foreign-trained (Evetts, 1998; Johnson
etal., 1995; Le Bianic and Svensson, 2008).3 Further, researchers explore the impact of
these changes on professional workers and their work (Prowse and Prowse, 2008), interprofessional relations (Currie etal., 2009; Prowse and Prowse, 2008) and their professional projects (Collins etal., 2009; Timmons, 2011). Some have examined professionals
responses to these changes, and their efforts to evoke organizational change (Ackroyd
and Muzio, 2007), and shape policy and its implementation (Currie etal., 2009).
Researchers based in Australia, New Zealand and Canada have also explored the
changing nature of professional regulation since the 1990s. However, they do not identify an end to self-regulation for professions, but rather explore regulatory changes that
undermine traditional professional privileges, and redefine the regulatory contract for
prominent professional groups (Coburn, 1999; Suddaby etal., 2007; White, 2000).
Further, studies identify a shift towards enhancing consumer choice, opening markets
and removing restrictions on business and trade (see for example Coburn, 1999; Suddaby
etal., 2007; White, 2000). At the same time, scholars have shown that professionals still
have the ability to shape policy (Bourgeault, 2006; Lewis, 2006), and new professional
groups are emerging and having some success attaining status as self-regulating professions (see for example Bourgeault, 2006; Welsh etal., 2004). While scholars in the UK,
Canada and Australia have identified considerable regulatory change that has tended to
limited professional autonomy, trends identified appear to differ. Self-regulation appears
to be continuing in an altered form in Canada and Australia, but UK scholars argue that,
in essence, it has come to an end.
In contrast, US scholars hold that regulation is only of secondary importance to
professions (Brint, 1994: 24). Few scholars in the US have analysed professional regulation in recent decades. Those that have done so find some evidence of constraints and
restrictions on regulated professions, but also continued evidence of autonomy (Chiarello,
2011; Kronebusch etal., 2009). Policy change affecting professions was of some interest
to US scholars in the 1970s and 1980s (see for example Abel, 1986; Freidson, 1983), and
American scholars have explored stateprofession relations historically (Abbott, 2005;
Freidson, 2001; Halliday, 1987; Krause, 1996). However, in contemporary contexts
American researchers have largely ignored regulatory issues and instead focused

Downloaded from wes.sagepub.com by guest on July 22, 2016

159

Adams

attention on professionals work in organizations, using institutional theory and concepts

such as institutional logics and organizational fields to explore the changing landscape of
professions (Adler etal., 2008; DiMaggio, 1991; Goodrick and Reay, 2011; Leicht and
Fennell, 2001; Scott, 2008).
Many American scholars regard professions as important social entities, with a distinct institutional logic and organizational form that co-exists with, and may provide a
check to, competing capitalist and market logics (Adler etal., 2008; Freidson, 2001;
Scott, 2008). Researchers have begun to explore how professional fields are constructed,
and how they change over time, especially when faced with market pressures and the
expansion of global capitalism (Adler etal., 2008; DiMaggio, 1991). While some scholars hold that social change has recently undermined professional autonomy (Leicht and
Fennell, 2001), others argue that change has altered professions underlying institutional logics but professions themselves remain distinctly important (Adler etal., 2008;
Brint, 1994; Scott, 2008). Some scholars working from an institutional theory perspective see professionals as institutional agents with a role in social regulation, providing
normative, cultural and socio-legal regulation for social actors within their communities
(Scott, 2008).
It is not entirely clear whether the different focus of research across nation reflects key
differences in the organization and experience of professional work, or simply different
research agendas or theoretical influences. Some cross-cultural studies have revealed
differences in stateprofession relations and regulatory patterns cross-nationally (Adams,
2007; Krause, 1996), but these kinds of studies are few and far between. Limiting our
ability to understand cross-national differences is the tendency for researchers in both the
US and the UK to make bold theoretical statements based on limited empirical cases
for example on one profession in one nation and generalize across the field. Thus, as
we have seen, scholars declare professional regulation irrelevant (Brint, 1994), or selfregulation at an end (Evetts, 2002), but even the brief cross-cultural comparison provided here suggests that both these statements need to be qualified. Perhaps regulation
has been rarely studied in the US because for US professions it has been less important
although the large number of regulated professions in the US would lead one to question this conclusion or because there has been little regulatory change in recent years.
Nevertheless, regulation has clearly been important to professions in other nations. Once
we understand that trends identified for one profession, in one context, do not necessarily
hold in others, entirely new sets of research questions with significant theoretical implications emerge. Among these are the following: have regulatory trends differed in the US
than in other nations, and if so, why? Do professions play a different role in social regulation across nation? What role do welfare state practices play in shaping professional
regulation and professional practice?
Cross-cultural research will not only help to answer these questions, but also advance
our ability to theorize about professions.

Theoretical innovations
The sociology of professions is witnessing a resurgence of interest in the theoretical
contributions of prominent classical and contemporary social theorists. Research has

Downloaded from wes.sagepub.com by guest on July 22, 2016

160

Work, employment and society 29(1)

reminded us of seminal contributions from Max Weber (Ackroyd and Muzio, 2007;
Adams, 2010; Adler etal., 2008; Faulconbridge and Muzio, 2012; Macdonald, 1995;
Saks, 2010), Herbert Spencer (Evetts and Dingwall, 2002) and Talcott Parsons (Sciulli,
2009). At the same time, scholars have drawn on the work of Michel Foucault (Fournier,
1999; Johnson, 1993; Pickard, 2010) and Pierre Bourdieu (Schinkel and Noordegraaf,
2011; Suddaby etal., 2007) to understand professions and their organization. Institutional
and ecological theories have also been utilized (Abbott, 1988, 2005; Collins etal., 2009;
DiMaggio, 1991; Suddaby etal., 2007). Theoretically, this is an exciting time in the
sociology of professions, and further theoretical advance appears imminent. However,
the different foci of research in the UK and US have taken scholars in the two countries
in differing theoretical directions.
UK scholars have drawn on Spencer and Foucault to shed light on the changing nature
of stateprofession relations. Spencer (1898) saw professions as part of a decentralized
regulatory and state governance system, and held that professions could enhance the
legitimacy of nation-states in the modern era where traditional sources of legitimacy
(state violence, state-sanctioned religion) declined (Evetts and Dingwall, 2002). Scholars
drawing on a Foucauldian perspective have argued that professions are part of state governance structures, and experts play a role in defining, normalizing and regulating the
population, and legitimating governance and power structures (Johnson, 1993; Pickard,
2010). Other scholars find a Weberian approach more dynamic, arguing that it allows
researchers to acknowledge the important ties between professions and the state, and
explore their nature, without presuming exactly what the nature of the relationship is
(Macdonald, 1995; Saks, 2010). Further, a Weberian approach encourages exploration of
the social processes through which professionals acquire and maintain status and privileges, and how processes and outcomes can vary across social-historical context
(Ackroyd and Muzio, 2007; Adams, 2010; Macdonald, 1995; Saks, 2010).
Other theoretical perspectives have been drawn on by scholars from a variety of countries. Noteworthy is an apparent resurgence of interest in Andrew Abbotts (1988) ecological approach to professions and professional jurisdiction (Collins etal., 2009; Currie
etal., 2009), and Schinkel and Noordegraafs (2011) effort to apply Bourdieu (and
Abbott) to the study of professionalism as a form of symbolic capital that is sought and
contested by various social actors.
American scholars have been less influenced by Foucault and Spencer, but they have
been influenced by Weber, and to a lesser extent Bourdieu. Scholars who utilize institutional theory in particular draw on Weber. For example, Adler etal. (2008) build on
Webers typology of organizational forms to argue that professions possess a distinct
organizational form focused on community with its own logic (see also Freidson, 2001).
Institutional analyses of organizational fields sometimes draw on Bourdieus work on
fields to highlight the importance of power (Suddaby etal., 2007). More generally,
American scholars have drawn on a wide range of social theories to advance the sociology of professions, and have contributed much to our understanding of professional
development and challenges to professional dominance (Abbott, 1988; Freidson, 2001;
Krause, 1996; Larson, 2013).
Thus, while sociologists studying professions share many theoretical influences, there
is some evidence of divergence. These theoretical divergences may, in part, be driving

Downloaded from wes.sagepub.com by guest on July 22, 2016

161

Adams

the research differences identified above, although they may be a product of them as
well. There is much to be gained, however, by bringing these different theoretical influences together. Given the influence of Weber, Abbott and others in both literatures, there
is considerable common ground on which to build. Combining the insights of organizational theory and institutional analysis with the insights of theories of regulation and
professional development could generate new theoretical synergies.
For example, some organizational and institutional analyses downplay broader regulatory frameworks shaping organizational fields, and the role of the state, focusing on
professionals as organizational employees. At the same time, studies of regulation sometimes focus on stateprofession relations to the neglect of other dimensions of social
organization (Muzio and Kirkpatrick, 2011). Recently, European scholars are joining
their American counterparts in re-orienting the sociology of professions to incorporate a
focus on organizations (Muzio and Kirkpatrick, 2011; Suddaby and Viale, 2011). A fuller
exploration of the conditions and contexts in which professional work is situated may
emerge when the theoretical traditions shaping both research strands are brought together
to inform one another. For example, Suddaby etal. (2007) study regulation and governance in US accounting by drawing on the work of Bourdieu and institutional theory. In
doing so, the authors illuminate trends in the globalization of professions, the changing
nature of professional work and stateprofession relations. Weber also provides a useful
theoretical starting point for bringing together the literatures on regulation and organizations, since he is drawn on by researchers in both areas.
Perhaps underlying some of the US and European theoretical and empirical divergences are international differences in the organization of professional employment.
Many European studies focus on public sector employees. In these contexts, state institutions are also employers, and their impact on professional employment is fundamental.
In contrast, many professionals examined in the US literature are private sector employees whose work experiences are directly shaped by their employing organizations, even
if they are regulated by the state. Bringing European and American research together
may shed additional light on the importance of sector of employment (private vs. public)
to professional work and workers. Professionals employed in the public sector may have
different approaches to work and different experiences than those in the private sector
(Cohen etal., 2005), although these differences may be decreasing (Muzio and
Kirkpatrick, 2011). In a similar vein, the experiences of non-regulated professionals may
be quite different from those of regulated professionals (as Reed, 1996 implies). Bringing
these traditions together will further clarify the role of professions in society, and especially the interplay between professions and the changing nature (and structure) of the
welfare state. More international empirical work will further our theoretical understanding of professions and variations in professional work and professions role in society.

Conclusion
Narrow case studies of single professions in single locales have dominated the sociology
of professions and hindered our ability to theorize professions adequately. Although
research over the last 25 years has expanded the focus on interprofessional relations, and
cross-national settings (especially in Western Europe), advancement of the field has been

Downloaded from wes.sagepub.com by guest on July 22, 2016

162

Work, employment and society 29(1)

limited by researchers belief that trends occurring in one profession in one nation are
reflective of broader trends. Although there appear to be many similarities in the trends
affecting professionals in Western Europe and North America including challenges to
professional autonomy, a decline in public trust, an opening up of the markets for professional services, and organizational challenges regulation and stateprofession relations
appear to differ.
Does the dearth of research on professional regulation in the US signal that regulation
is unimportant in the US, that little has changed recently, or that researchers find other
issues more theoretically compelling? Cross-cultural research will not only help provide
answers to these questions, but also provide necessary context to research on professional regulation elsewhere. If self-regulating professions are truly at an end in the UK,
while they remain prominent if changed in Australia and Canada, and largely unchanged
in the US, why is this the case? What factors shape the structure of and trends in state
profession relations in Anglo-American contexts and what factors (cultural, structural
and societal, including changes in the welfare state) have driven these processes? To
move the field forward, we need more comparative research, and more context-sensitive
research that explores variations in regulatory structures, stateprofession relations and
institutional forms, as well as how these variations impact professional workers and their
work. We need to explore the impact of culture and context on the social construction of
professional status, and the changing nature (and context-dependency) of professional
legitimacy and employment. Such comparative work would benefit from drawing on a
variety of theoretical traditions.
Professions historically emerged in specific national and regional contexts, but the
trends that impact them are increasingly transnational (Faulconbridge and Muzio,
2012; Suddaby etal., 2007). In this context, comparative work, and work that takes
social context into account, is crucial if we are to advance the sociology of
professions.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Robert MacKenzie and the anonymous reviewers for their excellent advice
on earlier drafts of this article.

Funding
This article builds on research funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of
Canada.

Notes
1.

In searches both US and UK spellings of relevant terms were utilized (i.e. professionalization
and professionalisation).
2. A search was conducted in Sociological Abstracts for research published since 1988 in
English containing the sociology of professions, and/or professions and employment in
the abstract. The abstracts of the articles identified were perused to determine if the work
actually examined professions. Those that used the term only in passing were eliminated.
Dissertations and conference papers were omitted from the search. A list of approximately
500 publications (that should not be taken as exhaustive) was compiled, and data on the

Downloaded from wes.sagepub.com by guest on July 22, 2016

163

Adams

country of the affiliation of the first-named author, and the main themes discussed in the article compiled. This analysis compares the principal themes identified (each article might have
more than one theme) by authors country of affiliation.
3. European contributions more generally are not discussed here since English-language publications may not reflect the state of the sociology of professions in Europe, but rather the
topics that interest English-language scholars (and their journals).

References
Abbott A (1988) The System of Professions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Abbott A (2005) Linked ecologies: states and universities as environments for professions.
Sociological Theory 23(3): 24574.
Abel R (1986) The transformation of the American legal profession. Law and Society Review
20(1): 717.
Ackroyd S and Muzio D (2007) The reconstructed professional firm: explaining change in English
legal practices. Organization Studies 28(5): 72947.
Adams T (2007) Inter-professional relations and the emergence of a new profession: software
engineering in Canada, the US and the UK. The Sociological Quarterly 48(3): 50732.
Adams T (2010) Profession: a useful concept for sociological analysis? Canadian Review of
Sociology 47(1): 4970.
Adler P, Kwon S-W and Heckscher C (2008) Professional work: the emergence of collaborative
community. Organization Science 19(2): 35976.
Allsop J and Saks M (eds) (2003) Regulating the Health Professions. London: Sage Publications.
Bourgeault IL (2006) Push! The Struggle for Midwifery in Ontario. Montreal, QC, Canada and
Kingston, ON, Canada: McGill-Queens University Press.
Brint S (1994) In an Age of Experts: The Changing Role of Professionals in Politics and Public
Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Chamberlain J (2010) Regulating the medical profession: from club governance to stakeholder
regulation. Sociology Compass 4(12): 103542.
Chiarello E (2011) Challenging professional self-regulation: social movement influence on pharmacy rulemaking in Washington State. Work and Occupations 38(3): 30339.
Coburn D (1999) Professional autonomy and the problematic nature of self-regulation: medicine,
nursing and the state. Health and Canadian Society 5: 2553.
Cohen L, Wilkinson A, Arnold J and Finn R (2005) Remember Im the bloody architect!: architects, organizations, and discourses of profession. Work, Employment and Society 19(4):
77596.
Collins D, Dewing I and Russell P (2009) The actuary as fallen hero: on the reform of a profession.
Work, Employment and Society 23(2): 24966.
Currie G, Finn R and Martin G (2009) Professional competition and modernizing the clinical
workforce in the NHS. Work, Employment and Society 23(2): 26784.
DiMaggio PJ (1991) Constructing a professional field as a professional project: US art museums, 19201940. In: Powell WW and DiMaggio PJ (eds) The New Institutionalism in
Organizational Analysis. London: University of Chicago Press, 26792.
Dixon-Woods M, Yeung K and Bosk CL (2011) Why is UK medicine no longer a self-regulating
profession? The role of scandals involving bad apple doctors. Social Science & Medicine
73(10): 14529.
Evetts J (1998) Professionalism beyond the nation-state: international systems of professional
regulation in Europe. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 18(1112):
4764.

Downloaded from wes.sagepub.com by guest on July 22, 2016

164

Work, employment and society 29(1)

Evetts J (2002) New directions in state and international professional occupations: discretionary
decision-making and acquired regulation. Work, Employment and Society 16(2): 34153.
Evetts J (2006) Introduction: trust and professionalism: challenges and occupational changes.
Current Sociology 54(4): 51531.
Evetts J (2011) A new professionalism? Challenges and opportunities. Current Sociology 59(4):
40622.
Evetts J and Dingwall R (2002) Professional occupations in the UK and Europe: legitimation and
governmentality. International Review of Sociology 12: 15971.
Faulconbridge J and Muzio D (2012) Professions in a globalizing world: toward a transnational
sociology of professions. International Sociology 27(1): 13652.
Fournier V (1999) The appeal to professionalism as a disciplinary mechanism. Social Review
47(2): 280307.
Freidson E (1983) The reorganization of the professions by regulation. Law and Human Behavior
7(23): 27990.
Freidson E (2001) Professionalism: The Third Logic. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Goodrick E and Reay T (2011) Constellations of institutional logics: changes in the professional
work of pharmacists. Work and Occupations 38(3): 372416.
Gorman E and Sandefur R (2011) Golden Age, quiescence, and revival: how the sociology
of professions became the study of knowledge-based work. Work and Occupations 38(3):
275302.
Halliday T (1987) Beyond Monopoly: Lawyers, State Crises and Professional Empowerment.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Johnson T (1993) Expertise and the state. In: Gane M and Johnson T (eds) Foucaults New
Domains. London: Routledge, 13952.
Johnson T, Larkin G and Saks M (eds) (1995) Health Professions and the State in Europe. London:
Routledge.
Krause E (1996) Death of the Guilds: Professions, States and the Advance of Capitalism: 1930 to
the Present. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Kronebusch K, Schlesinger M and Thomas T (2009) Managed care regulation in the states: the
impact on physicians practices and clinical autonomy. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and
the Law 34(2): 21959.
Kuhlmann E, Allsop J and Saks M (2009) Professional governance and public control. Current
Sociology 57(4): 51128.
Larson MS (2013) The Rise of Professionalism: Monopolies of Competence and Sheltered Markets,
Revised Edition. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Le Bianic T and Svensson LG (2008) European regulation of professional education: a study of
documents focussing on architects and psychologists in the EU. European Societies 10(4):
56795.
Leicht K and Fennell M (2001) Professional Work. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Lewis J (2006) Being around and knowing the players: networks of influence in health policy.
Social Science & Medicine 62(9): 212536.
Macdonald K (1995) The Sociology of Professions. London: Sage Publications.
Muzio D and Kirkpatrick I (2011) Professions and organizations a conceptual framework.
Current Sociology 59(4): 389405.
Pickard S (2010) The role of governmentality in the establishment, maintenance and demise of
professional jurisdictions: the case of geriatric medicine. Sociology of Health & Illness 32(7):
107286.
Prowse J and Prowse P (2008) Role redesign in the National Health Service: the effects on midwives work and professional boundaries. Work, Employment and Society 22(4): 695712.

Downloaded from wes.sagepub.com by guest on July 22, 2016

165

Adams

Reed MI (1996) Expert power and control in late modernity: an empirical review and theoretical
synthesis. Organization Studies 17(4): 57397.
Saks M (2010) Analyzing the professions: the case for the Neo-Weberian approach. Comparative
Sociology 9: 887915.
Schinkel W and Noordegraaf M (2011) Professionalism as symbolic capital: materials for a
Bourdieusian theory of professionalism. Comparative Sociology 10: 6796.
Sciulli D (2009) Professions in Civil Society and the State: Invariant Foundations and
Consequences. Leiden: Brill.
Scott WR (2008) Lords of the dance: professionals as institutional agents. Organization Studies
29(2): 21938.
Spencer H (1898) Principles of Sociology, 3rd Edition. New York: D. Appleton & Co.
Suddaby D and Viale T (2011) Professionals and field-level change: institutional work and the
professional project. Current Sociology 59(4): 42342.
Suddaby R, Cooper DJ and Greenwood R (2007) Transnational regulation of professional services: governance dynamics of field level organizational change. Accounting, Organizations
and Society 32: 33362.
Thursfield D (2012) The social construction of professionalism among organizers and senior
organizers in a UK trade union. Work, Employment and Society 26(1): 12844.
Timmons S (2011) Professionalization and its discontents. Health 15(4): 33752.
Welsh S, Kelner M, Wellman B and Boon H (2004) Moving forward? Complementary and alternative practitioners seeking self-regulation. Sociology of Health & Illness 26(2): 21641.
White K (2000) The state, the market and general practice: the Australian case. International
Journal of Health Services 30(2): 285308.
Tracey L Adams is a Professor and Chair of the Department of Sociology at the University of
Western Ontario, Canada. Her research falls within the general areas of the sociology of professions, work and social inequality. She is currently researching trends in professional regulation and
stateprofession relations.

Date submitted July 2012

Date accepted January 2014

Downloaded from wes.sagepub.com by guest on July 22, 2016