This paper analyzes use of the term "professionalism" in public administration by language usage analysis—an interpretive methodology. It begins by arguing against static interpretation of professionalism implied by the sociological model. It then explores various meanings of professionalism by using a series of antinomies: professional-laity, professional-amateur, achievement-ascription, and professionals as a new class in opposition to other classes. Each antinomy reveals meanings of professionalism that public administrators should avoid or embrace in their quest to make public administration a widely recognized profession. Concluding remarks suggest a particular definition of professionalism appropriate to public administration.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams, G. B.
, Bowerman, P. V., Dolbeare, K. M., & Stivers, C. (1990). Joining purpose to practice: A democratic identity for the public service. In H. D. Kass & B. L. Catron, Images and identities in public administration, pp. 219-140. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2.
Baum, H. S.
(1983). Planners and public expectations. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman.
3.
Benveniste, G.
(1987). Professionalizing the organization: Reducing bureaucracy to enhance effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4.
Bok, S.
(1978). Lying: Moral choice in public and private life. New York: Pantheon.
5.
Braverman, H.
(1974). Labor and monopoly capital: The degradation of work in the twentieth century. New York: Monthly Review Press.
6.
Brown, N. O.
(1959). Life against death. Middletown, CT: Western University Press.
7.
Catron, B. L.
, & Harmon, M. M. (1981). Action theory in practice: Toward theory without conspiracy. Public Administration Review, 41, 535-541.
8.
Cigler, B. A.
(1990). Public administration and the paradox of professionalization. Public Administration Review, 50, 637-653.
9.
Cooper, T. L.
(1987). Hierarchy, virtue, and the practice of public administration: A perspective for normative ethics. Public Administration Review, 47, 320-328.
10.
Daniels, M. R.
, & Johansen, E. (1985). Role of accreditation in the development of public administration as a profession: A theoretical and empirical assessment. Public Administration Quarterly, 8(4), 419-441.
11.
Edwards, R.
(1979). Contested terrain: The transformation of the workplace in the twentieth century. New York: Basic Books.
12.
Ehrenreich, B.
(1989). Fear of falling: The inner life of the middle class. New York: Pantheon.
13.
Finer, H.
(1941). Administrative responsibility in democratic government. Public Administration Review, 1, 335-350.
14.
Finkle, A. L.
(1985). CPM—professionalizing professionalism. Public Administration Quarterly, 9(1), 47-54.
15.
Fischer, F
, & Zinke, R. C. (1989). Public administration and the code of ethics: Administrative reform or professional ideology. International Journal of Public Administration, 12(6), 841-854.
16.
Friedrich, C. J.
(1940). Public policy and the nature of administrative responsibility. In Friedrich & E.S. Mason (Eds.), Public Policy, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17.
Golembiewski, R. T.
(1989). Perspectives on `rebuilding the public service': Critique of an inadequate managerial orientation. Dialogue, 11(4) 9-50.
18.
Greenwood, E.
(1972). Attributes of a profession. In R. M. Pavalko (Ed.), Sociological perspectives on occupations. Ithaca, IL: F E. Peakock.
19.
Harmon, M. M.
, & Mayer, R. T. (1986). Organization theory for public administration. Boston: Little Brown.
20.
Hart, D. K.
(1974). Social equity, justice, and the equitable administrator. Public Administration Review, 34, 3-11.
21.
Hirsh, A.
(1981). The French new left: An intellectual history from Sartre to Gorz. Boston: South End Press.
22.
Hodges, D. G.
, & Durant, R. F. (1989). The professional state revisited: Twixt Scylla and Charybdis. Public Administration Review, 49, 474-485.
23.
Hummel, R. P.
(1987). The bureaucratic experience. (3rd. Ed.). New York: St Martin's.
24.
Illich, I.
(1977). Disabling professions. In I. Illich (Ed.), Disabling Professions (pp. 11-40). London: Marion Boyars Publishers.
25.
Kearney, R. C.
, & Sinha, C. (1988). Professionalism and bureaucratic responsiveness: Conflict or comparability. Public Administration Review, 48, 571-579.
26.
Knott, J. H.
, & Miller, G. J. (1987). Reforming bureaucracy: The politics of institutional choice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
27.
Kretzmann, N.
(1967). History of semantics. In Paul Edwards (Ed.), The encyclopedia of philosophy (pp. 358-406). Vol 7. New York: Macmillan.
28.
Larson, M. S.
(1977). The rise of professionalism: A sociological analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.
29.
Macintyre, A.
(1984). After virtue (2nd. ed.) Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
30.
Malcolm, N.
(1967). Wittgenstein, Ludwig Josef Johann. In Paul Edwards (Ed.), The encyclopedia of philosophy Vol 8. (pp. 327-340). New York: Macmillan.
31.
Mallet, S.
(1975). Essays on the new working class. St. Louis: Telos Press.
32.
Marcuse, H.
(1964). One dimensional man. Boston: Beacon Press.
33.
Mosher, F. C.
(1982). Democracy and the public service (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
34.
Mouzelis, N. P.
(1967). Organization and bureaucracyChicago: Aldine.
35.
Nalbandian, J.
(1990). Tenets of contemporary professionalism in local government. Public Administration Review, 50, 654-662.
36.
Olufs, D. F.
(1985). The limits of professionalism. Public Administration Quarterly, 9(1), 26-46.
37.
Pitkin, H. F.
(1967). The concept of representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
38.
Price, D. K.
(1965). The scientific estate. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
39.
Pugh, D. H.
(1989). Professionalism in public administration: Problems, perspectives and the role of the ASPA. Public Administration Review, 49, 1-8.
40.
Rosenberg, H.
(1966). Bureaucracy aristocracy and autocracy: The Prussian experience 1660-1815. Boston: Beacon Press.
41.
Russell, B.
(1959). Logical Atomism. In A. J. Ayer (Ed.), Logical Positivism. New York: The Free Press.
42.
Schott, R. L.
(1976). Public administration as a profession: Problems and prospects. Public Administration Review, 36, 253-259.
43.
Scott, W. G.
, & Hart, D. K. (1979). Organizational America. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
44.
Steinfels,-P.
(1979). Neoconservatives: The men who are changing America's politics. New York: Simon and Schuster.
45.
Stewart, D.
(1985). Professionalism vs. democracy: Friedrich vs. Finer revisited. Public Administration Quarterly, 9(1), 13-25.
46.
Stillman, R. J. II
(1991). Preface to public administration: A search for themes and direction. New York: St. Martin's Press.
47.
Thai, K. V.
(1985). Does NASPAA peer review improve the quality of PA/A education?Public Administration Quarterly, 8(4), 442-460.
48.
Thayer, F.
(1989). Response to Robert Golembiewski's statement. Dialogue, 11(4), 51-56.
49.
Thayer, F. C.
(1973). An end to hierarchy! An end to competition!New York: New Viewpoints.
50.
White, J.
(1986). On the growth of knowledge in public administration. Public Administration Review, 46, 15-24.
51.
Wittgenstein, L.
(1953). Philosophical investigations:New York: Macmillan.
