¹ By “technological society” I mean a society in which not only agricultural and industrial production have been automated, computerized, and otherwise rationalized, but one in which also the provision of human services is increasingly subject to technological innovation. I prefer this expression to “postindustrial society” because the latter does not really convey a meaning of the direction of change. A technological society need not be “technocratic.” The construct of “consultative commonwealth” assumes the technologization (and professionalization) of the human services but not rule by technologists. See Ferkiss, Victor C., Technological Man: The Myth and the Reality (New York: George Braziller, 1969)Google Scholar, or Brzezinski, Zbigniew, Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era (New York: Viking Press, 1970).Google Scholar

² “Consultative” is related to consult and consultation. These words derive from the Latin consultare which has at least three behavior-relevant meanings. All of these meanings define, etymologically, the consultative commonwealth. First, depending on the context in which it is used, consultare can be translated as consider, deliberate, cogitate, reflect, think over, advise with, take advice from, and so on. The variety of these meanings is less helpful, however, than the meanings of the more primitive Latin verb consulere, which directly calls attention to the reciprocal character of the consulting relationship. On the one hand, consulere means to ask, question, or examine; on the other hand, it means to give counsel. The reciprocity appears even more strongly in the German translation of consulere where it simultaneously means to ask someone (jemanden befragen) and to advise someone (jemanden beraten).

To seek, give, or take advice is hardly the only property of professional behavior. Interestingly, consultare refers to a second family of meanings that define the consulting relationship. In some contexts, consultare is used as a synonym for curare—to care for or worry about—and for prospicere—to provide for. In this usage, then, both an empathetic and a providential aspect of consultation are emphasized.

Thirdly, the related adjective constants—one who is consulted—may be used as a synonym for intellegens, peritus or eruditus—intelligent, expert and learned; and the process to which consultus applies is supposed to be dilegens or accuratus—careful or accurate.

In combination, the different meanings and uses of consultare yield a comprehensive profile of the consultative relationship. The relationship is entered voluntarily for the purpose of deliberation or consideration because one party, the seeker of advice, is ignorant or in need of help, while the other party, the consultant, is a skilled or learned person who gives advice diligently and intelligently. But the consultant is not just an expert but also a compassionate person who cares for and worries about the matter brought to him for counsel, and he has the gift of accurate diagnosis and wise prognosis.

³ See Lasswell, Harold D., “The Garrison State and Specialists on Violence,” in The Analysis of Political Behavior: An Empirical Approach (New York: Oxford University Press, 1948), pp. 146–57.Google Scholar

⁴ See Bennis, Warren G. and Slater, Philip E., The Temporary Society (New York: Harper and Row, 1969).Google Scholar In this utopia, problem solving by strangers with diverse professional skills is expected to occur through organic rather than mechanical means of interaction; the executive becomes a coordinator who mediates among task forces; and “people will be evaluated not according to rank but according to skill and professional training.… Adaptive, problem-solving temporary systems of diverse specialists, linked together by coordinating and task-evaluating executive specialists in an organic flux—this is the organization form that will gradually replace bureaucracy as we know it” (p. 74). Bennis's view of democracy, though he does not seem to know it, is anarchosyndicalist: “… democracy seeks no new stability, no end point; it is purposeless, save that it purports to ensure perpetual transition, constant alteration, ceaseless instability. … Democracy and our new professional men identify primarily with the adaptive process, not the establishment” (p. 12).

⁵ For a discussion of “developmental constructs,” see Eulau, Heinz, “H. D. Lasswell's Developmental Analysis,” in Micro-Macro Political Analysis: Accents of Inquiry (Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1969), pp. 105–18.Google Scholar

⁶ The classical work on the professions remains Carr-Saunders, A. M. and Wilson, P. A., The Professions (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1933).Google Scholar See also these authors' article, “Professions,” in Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (New York: Macmillan Company, 1934), Vol. 12, pp. 476–80. For a contemporary overview, see Lynn, Kenneth S., ed., The Professions in America (Boston: Beacon Press, 1965).Google Scholar

⁷ Durkheim, Emile, The Division of Labor in Society, transl, by Simpson, George (Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1960).Google Scholar First published in 1893.

⁸ Harold D. Lasswell, “Skill Politics and Skill Revolution,” in Lasswell, , Analysis of Political Behavior, pp. 133–45Google Scholar, at 135.

⁹ See Witt, Nicholas De, Education and Professional Employment in the U.S.S.R. (Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation, 1961), pp. 207–545Google Scholar; Fischer, George, The Soviet System and Modern Society (New York: Atherton Press, 1968)Google Scholar; for long-term transformations, see some of the essays in The Transformation of Russian Society, ed. Black, Cyril E. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lodge, Milton C., Soviet Elite Attitudes Since Stalin (Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 1969).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Blau, Peter M. and Duncan, Otis Dudley, The American Occupational Structure (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1967)Google Scholar; Hall, Richard H., Occupations and the Social Structure (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1969).Google Scholar

¹¹ See Lasswell, Harold D., Lerner, Daniel, and Rothwell, C. Easton, The Comparative Study of Elites (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1952).Google Scholar

¹² See, for instance, Galbraith, John Kenneth, The New Industrial State (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1967)Google Scholar; Young, Michael, The Rise of the Meritocracy, 1870–2033 (London: Penguin Books, 1961).Google Scholar For an earlier example of this genre, see Burnham, James, The Managerial Revolution (New York: The John Day Company, 1941).Google Scholar

¹³ Mosher, Frederick C., Democracy and the Public Service (New York: Oxford University Press, 1968).Google Scholar This is not to say that I disagree with Mosher's appraisal that “the emergence of the professions [has] revolutionized the precepts and practices of public employment” (p. 123). By turning over the recruitment, training and accreditation of skilled employees to the professions and the universities, current practices “are challenging, modifying, or overturning the most central—and most cherished—principles associated with civil service reform …” (p. 124). It is unlikely, Mosher concludes, “that the trend toward professionalism in or outside government will soon be reversed or even slowed” (pp. 132–3).

¹⁴ “The leadership of the new society will rest,” writes Daniel Bell, “not with businessmen or corporations as we know them …, but with the research corporations, the industrial laboratories, the experimental stations, and the universities.” Bell, Daniel, “Notes on the Post-Industrial Society I,” The Public Interest, 6 (Winter, 1967), 27.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Among the few exceptions are Kaufman, Herbert, The Forest Ranger: A Study in Administrative Behavior (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1960)Google Scholar; Cohen, Bernard C., The Press and Foreign Policy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963)Google Scholar; Eulau, Heinz and Sprague, John D., Lawyers in Politics: A Study in Professional Convergence (Indianapolis: The Bobbs Merrill Company, 1964)Google Scholar; Wood, Robert C., “Scientists and Politics: The Rise of an Apolitical Elite,” in Scientists and National Policy-Making, ed. Gilpin, Robert and Wright, Christopher (New York: Columbia University Press, 1964), pp. 41–72Google Scholar; Rogow, Arnold A., The Psychiatrists (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1970)Google Scholar; Zeigler, Harmon, The Political World of the High School Teacher (Eugene, Oregon: Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administration, 1966)Google Scholar; Janowitz, Morris, The Professional Soldier: A Social and Political Portrait (New York: The Free Press, new ed., 1971)Google Scholar; Ladd, Everett C. Jr., and Lipset, Seymour Martin, “Politics of Academic Natural Scientists and Engineers.” Science, 176 (06 9, 1972), 1091–1100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

¹⁶ See Gilb, Corinne Lathrop, Hidden Hierarchies: The Professions and Government (New York: Harper and Row, 1966)Google Scholar; Mayer, Martin, The Lawyers (New York: Harper and Row, 1968)Google Scholar; Freidson, Eliot, Profession of Medicine (New York: Dodd, Mead, 1970).Google Scholar

¹⁷ The pioneering study is Garceau, Oliver, The Political Life of the American Medical Association (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1941)Google Scholar; see also Kelley, Stanley Jr., Professional Public Relations and Political Power (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1956)Google Scholar; Eckstein, Harry, Pressure Group Politics: The Case of the British Medical Association (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1960)Google Scholar; Grossman, Joel B., Lawyers and Judges: The ABA and the Politics of Judicial Selection (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1965)Google Scholar; Huntington, Samuel P., The Soldier and the State (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957).Google Scholar

¹⁸ See Matthews, Donald R., The Social Background of Political Decision-Makers (New York: Doubleday & Company, 1954).Google Scholar See also Marvick, Dwaine, ed., Political Decision-Makers: Recruitment and Performance (New York: The Free Press, 1961)Google Scholar; Dogan, Mattei and Rokkan, Stein, eds., Quantitative Ecological Analysis in the Social Sciences (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1969).Google Scholar

¹⁹ For an appraisal, see Edinger, Lewis J., “Political Science and Political Biography: Reflections on the Study of Leadership,” Journal of Politics, Vol. 26 (May and 08, 1964), pp. 423–39, 648–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar For a recent reassertion, see Greenstein, Fred I., Personality and Politics (Chicago: Markham Publishing Company, 1969).Google Scholar

²⁰ On emergence, see Nagel, Ernest, The Structure of Science (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1961), pp. 366–80.Google Scholar

²¹ See Reiss, Albert J. Jr., Occupations and Social Status (New York: The Free Press, 1961).Google Scholar For measurement aspects, see Robinson, John P. and others, Measures of Occupational Attitudes and Occupational Characteristics (Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, 1967).Google Scholar For a broad overview, see Ben-David, Joseph, “Professions in the Class System of Present-Day Societies: A Trend Report and Bibliography,” Current Sociology, 12 (1963–1964), 247–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²² Etzioni, Amitai, ed., The Semi-Professions and Their Organization: Teachers, Nurses, Social Workers (New York: The Free Press, 1969).Google Scholar

²³ See Mitchell, William, “The Ambivalent Social Status of the American Politician,” Western Political Quarterly, 12 (09, 1959), 683–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁴ See, for instance, Bell, Daniel, ed., Toward the Year 2000: Work in Progress (Boston: Beacon Press, 1969).Google Scholar

²⁵ The polarity principle is explicated in the writings of the philosopher Cohen, Morris R.. See, for instance, Studies in Philosophy and Science (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1949), pp. 11–13Google Scholar: “The principle of polarity is suggested by the phenomena of magnetism where north and south pole are always distinct, opposed, yet inseparable. We can see it in general physics where there is no action without reaction, no force or cause of change without inertia or resistance. In biology the life of every organism involves action and reaction with an environment. There is no growth without decay. … This suggests a supplement to the principle of causality. Not only must every natural event have a cause which determines that it should happen, but the cause must be opposed by some factor which prevents it from producing any greater effect than it actually does. … The principle of polarity, of necessary opposition in all determinate effects, thus becomes a heuristic principle directing our inquiry. … Yet the principle of polarity is not the same as that of the Hegelian dialectic. …”

²⁶ Boguslaw, Robert, The New Utopians: A Study of System Design and Social Change (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1965), p. 43Google Scholar, puts is nicely: “An applied scientist is a scientist who has had his hair cut.” For further aspects of the problem, see Barber, Bernard and Hirsch, Walter, eds., The Sociology of Science (New York: The Free Press, 1962)Google Scholar, as against Gouldner, Alvin W. and Miller, S. M., eds., Applied Sociology: Opportunities and Problems (New York: The Free Press, 1965).Google Scholar

²⁷ “The client,” writes Hughes, Everett C., “comes to the professional because he has met a problem which he cannot himself handle,” Men and Their Work (Glencoe: The Free Press, 1958), p. 141.Google Scholar

²⁸ See Fox, Renee C., “Training for Uncertainty,” in Abrahamson, Mark, ed., The Professional in the Organization (Chicago: Rand McNally & Company, 1967), pp. 20–4.Google Scholar See also Fox, Renee C., Experiment Perilous (Glencoe: The Free Press, 1959).Google Scholar

²⁹ The best discussion of what is meant by a “problematic situation” is still Dewey, John, Logic: The Theory of Inquiry (New York: Henry Holt & Company, 1938).Google Scholar

³⁰ The literature on America's “unsolved problems” is legion, but few works treat the matter from the perspective of the professions. But see: Wilensky, Harold L. and Lebeaux, Charles N., Industrial Society and Social Welfare (New York: The Free Press, 1965)Google Scholar; Ginzberg, Eli, with Ostow, Miriam, Men, Money, and Medicine (New York: Columbia University Press, 1969)Google Scholar; Marks, F. Raymond, with Leswing, Kirk and Fortinsky, Barbara A., The Lawyer, The Public, and Professional Responsibility (Chicago: American Bar Foundation, 1972)Google Scholar; Stevens, Rosemary, American Medicine and the Public Interest (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971)Google Scholar; Wilson, James Q., Varieties of Police Behavior (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968)Google Scholar; Eulau, Heinz and Quinley, Harold, State Officials and Higher Education (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1970).Google Scholar

³¹ An early and still one of the best arguments in this regard is Marshall, T. H., “The Recent History of Professionalism in Relation to Social Structure and Social Policy,” in Marshall, T. H., Class, Citizenship, and Social Development (Garden City, N.Y.: Double-Day Anchor Books, 1965), pp. 159–79.Google Scholar The essay was first published in 1939.

³² Market regulation of human services is proposed by Friedman, Milton, Capitalism and Freedom (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962), pp. 137–60.Google Scholar

³³ See Edelman, Murray, Politics as Symbolic Action: Mass Arousal and Quiescence (Chicago: Markham Publishing Company, 1971).Google Scholar

³⁴ As Harold L. Wilensky points out, “while there may be a general tendency for occupations to seek professional status, remarkably few of the thousands of occupations in modern society attain it.” See “The Professionalization of Everyone?” American Journal of Sociology, 70 (September, 1964); quotation is from p. 141.

³⁵ As William J. Goode observes, “the occupational structure of industrial society is not becoming generally more professionalized, even though a higher percentage of the labor force is in occupations that enjoy higher prestige rankings and income and that call themselves ‘professions.’” See “The Theoretical Limits of Professionalization,” in Etzioni, , Semi-Professions, p. 267.Google Scholar

³⁶ There is a large literature on the consequences of technological change. Some of this literature is highly sensational; but see the Report of the Study of Critical Environmental Problems, Man's Impact on the Global Environment (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1970)Google Scholar; Ewald, William E. Jr., ed., Environment and Change: The Next Fifty Years (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1968)Google Scholar; Brown, Harrison, The Challenge of Man's Future (New York: The Viking Press, 1954)Google Scholar; Brickman, William W. and Lehrer, Stanley, eds., Automation, Education, and Human Values (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1966)Google Scholar; Teich, Albert, ed., Technology and Man's Future (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1972).Google Scholar

³⁷ Vollmer, Howard M. and Mills, Donald L., Professionalization (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1966), p. viiiGoogle Scholar, differentiate between professionalism and professionalization, as follows: “Professionalism as an ideology may induce members of many occupational groups to strive to become professional, but at the same time we can see that many occupational groups that express the ideology of professionalism in reality may not be very advanced in regard to professionalization. Professionalism may be a necessary constituent of professionalization, but professionalism is not a sufficient cause for the entire professionalization process.”

³⁸ See Wilensky, Harold L., Organizational Intelligence: Knowledge and Policy in Government and Industry (New York: Basic Books, 1967)Google Scholar; Price, Don K., The Scientific Estate (New York: Oxford University Press, 1965).Google Scholar

³⁹ Wilensky, The Professionalization of Everyone?” p. 138, comes to a similar minimal set of criteria: “(1) the job of the professional is technical—based on systematic knowledge or doctrine acquired only through long prescribed training. (2) The professional man adheres to a set of professional norms.”

⁴⁰ See Bowles, Frank and DeCosta, Frank A., Between Two Worlds: A Profile of Negro Higher Education (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1971)Google Scholar; Curtis, James L., Blacks, Medical Schools, and Society (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Epstein, Cynthia Fuchs, Woman's Place: Options and Limits of Professional Careers (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1970).Google Scholar

⁴¹ See Thoenes, Piet, The Elite in the Welfare State (New York: The Free Press, 1966).Google Scholar

⁴² For a balanced view, see Thompson, Victor A., Bureaucracy and Innovation (University, Alabama: University of Alabama Press, 1969).Google Scholar

⁴³ For similar optimistic estimates of the future, see Etzioni, Amitai, The Active Society (New York: The Free Press, 1968)Google Scholar; and Breed, Warren, The Self-Guiding Society (New York: The Free Press, 1971).Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Hughes, , Men and Their Work, p. 85.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ See, for instance, Lane, Robert E., “The Decline of Politics and Ideology in a Knowledgeable Society,” American Sociological Review, Vol. 31 (10, 1966), pp. 649–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁶ Hughes, p. 54.

⁴⁷ This is reinforced by monopolistic practice, the prestige of the profession as a whole and the imputation of competence to the individual consultant. As Freidson, Eliot, Professional Dominance: The Social Structure of Medical Care (New York: Atherton Press, 1970), pp. 120–1Google Scholar, points out, this doctrine is unsatisfactory because it allows the consultant “to rest on the authority of his professional status without having to try to present persuasive evidence to the client that his findings and advice are correct.”

⁴⁸ See Able, Aaron I., ed., American Catholic Thought on Social Questions (Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1968).Google Scholar

⁴⁹ See Schein, Edgar H., Professional Education: Some New Directions (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1972).Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Hughes, p. 83.

⁵¹ See Carlin, Jerome E., Lawyers on Their Own (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1962)Google Scholar; Ladinsky, Jack, “Careers of Lawyers, Law Practice, and Legal Institutions,” American Sociological Review, Vol. 28 (02, 1963), pp. 47–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Smigel, Erwin O., The Wall Street Lawyer (New York: The Free Press, 1964).Google Scholar

⁵² Specht, Harry, “The Deprofessionalization of Social Work,” Social Work, 17 (03, 1972)Google Scholar; quotation is on p. 6.

⁵³ Although this theme has much agitated the academic professions in recent years, it is not especially new. Leighton, Alexander H., Human Relations in a Changing World (New York: E. P. Dutton & Company, 1949), p. 128Google Scholar, reports a Washington saying that “the administrator uses social science the way a drunk uses a lamppost, for support rather than illumination.” See especially Lyons, Gene M., The Uneasy Partnership: Social Science and the Federal Government in the Twentieth Century (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1969).Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Moskow, Michael H. and McLennan, Kenneth, “Teacher Negotiations and School Decentralization,” in Community Control of Schools, ed. Levin, Henry M. (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1970), pp. 191–215.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ For a variety of perspectives, see Glaser, Barney G., ed., Organizational Careers: A Sourcebook for Theory (Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1968).Google Scholar See also Howton, F. William, Functionaries (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1969).Google Scholar

⁵⁶ By 1962, it was possible to speak of a “knowledge industry,” so pervasive had knowledge making become in the American economy. See Machlup, Fritz, The Production and Distribution of Knowledge in the United States (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1962).Google Scholar Also: Chorafas, D. N., The Knowledge Revolution: An Analysis of the International Brain Market (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1968).Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Peabody, Robert L., Organizational Authority (New York: Atherton Press, 1964), pp. 1–43.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ See Wilensky, Harold L., Intellectuals in Labor Unions (Glencoe: The Free Press, 1956)Google Scholar; Kornhauser, William, Scientists in Industry: Conflict and Accommodation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1962)Google Scholar; Glaser, Barney G., Organizational Scientists: Their Professional Careers (Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1964)Google Scholar; Hagstrom, Warren O., The Scientific Community (New York: Basic Books, 1965)Google Scholar; Klaw, Spencer, The New Brahmins: Scientific Life in America (New York: William Morrow & Company, 1968)Google Scholar; Hirsch, Walter, Scientists in American Society (New York: Random House, 1968).Google Scholar

⁵⁹ The president-elect of the American Chemical Society has complained recently that the first loyalty of chemists, seventy per cent of whom are employed in industry, is to their employers. He feels that for the chemist to discharge his responsibility to society, he must have a “professional atmosphere where [he] will identify with his profession rather than his employer.” Science, 175 (February 4, 1972); quotation is on p. 501.

⁶⁰ Wilson, Logan, “Disjunctive Processes in an Academic Milieu,” in Sociological Theory, Values, and Sociocultural Change, ed. Tiryakian, Edward A. (New York: The Free Press, 1963), p. 293.Google Scholar

⁶¹ See Marvick, Dwaine, Career Perspectives in a Bureaucratic Setting (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1954), chapter 4.Google Scholar See also Gouldner, Alvin W., “Cosmopolitans and Locals: Toward an Analysis of Latent Social Roles,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 2 (12, 1957) 281–306 and 2 (03, 1958), 444–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶² Rourke, Francis E., Bureaucracy, Politics, and Public Policy (Boston: Little, Brown & Company, 1969), p. 105.Google Scholar Because he sees professionalism in government as a political force, yet insists that “the importance of preserving the independence and integrity of certain kinds of expertise in government is thus very great,” Rourke concludes that “the need for professional autonomy begins to assert itself in all phases of bureaucratic policy-making” (p. 110). Rourke concedes that professionals are no more immune from political pressure than other public officials and suggests that public policy making in bureaucratic settings “becomes in effect a mixed system of politics and professionalism” (p. 111).

⁶³ Weber, Max, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization (New York: Oxford University Press, 1947), pp. 329–41.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Wilensky, , “Professionalization,” p. 150.Google ScholarMarshall, T. H., Class Citizenship, p. 171Google Scholar, articulated the same idea as early as 1939 when he wrote that in modern democratic societies “State and professions are being assimilated to one another. This is not happening through the absorption of the professions by the State, but by both of them moving from opposite directions to meet in a middle position.”

⁶⁵ Parsons, Talcott, “The Professions and Social Structure,” in Essays in Sociological Theory (Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1954), pp. 34–49.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Freidson, , Professional Dominance, p. 211.Google Scholar This is Freidson's central argument in analyzing professional dominance and the ordering of the health services; see especially pp. 127–64.

⁶⁷ There may be more than meets the eye in all this, for it has also been suggested that professional authority, in addition to being based on knowledge and competence, “does rest to some extent on tradition,” and “to some degree the professional's authority is charismatic. …” See Toren, Nina, “Semi-Professionalism and Social Work: A Theoretical Perspective,” in The Semi-Professions and Their Organization, ed. Etzioni, , p. 152.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ See, for instance, Blau, Peter, The Dynamics of Bureaucracy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1959)Google Scholar; Thompson, Victor, Modern Organization (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1961).Google Scholar

⁶⁹ See Zeigler, Harmon, The Political Life of. American Teachers (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1967)Google Scholar; cambino, Joseph W., “Faculty Unionism: From Theory to Practice,” Industrial Relations, 11 (02, 1972), pp. 1–17.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Shapley, Deborah, “Unionization: Scientists, Engineers Mull over One Alternative,” Science, 176 (05 12, 1972), 618–21, at 618.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

⁷¹ See Ewing, David W., The Managerial Mind (New York: The Free Press, 1964)Google Scholar; Whyte, William H. Jr., The Organization Man (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1956)Google Scholar; Lewis, Roy and Stewart, Rosemary, The Managers: A New Examination of the English, German and American Executive (New York: Mentor Books, 1961).Google Scholar

⁷² See Kadish, Sanford H., “The Theory of the Profession and its Predicament,” AAUP Bulletin, 58 (06, 1972), 120–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lipset, Seymour Martin, “The Politics of Academia,” in Perspectives on Campus Tensions, ed. Nichols, David C. (Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1970), pp. 85–118.Google Scholar

⁷³ Hughes, Everett C., “Psychology: Science and/or Profession,” The American Psychologist, 7 (08, 1952), 441–3Google Scholar; Parsons, Talcott, “Some Problems Confronting Sociology as a Profession,” American Sociological Review, 24 (08, 1959), 547–559.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Freidson, Eliot, “The Impurity of Professional Authority,” in Institutions and the Person, ed. Becker, Howard S.et al. (Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1968), p. 26Google Scholar, points out that if this is so, it suggests an “unemphasized point, namely, that the type of influence or authority exerted by the professional on his clients must be quite different from that exerted by the scientist on his colleagues—that professional and scientific ‘authority’ are different even though profession and science are both characterized by special technical competence.”

⁷⁵ Of course, professional associations like the American Bar Association or the American Medical Association are also devoted to the promotion of knowledge by way of learned meetings and journals. In turn, purely scientific societies share some of the characteristics of the professional associations. This is precisely the reason why the distinction between science and profession is at best of limited analytic value.

⁷⁶ Wilensky, , “Professionalization,” p. 149Google Scholar, also remarks that “the tacit component of their knowledge base is a seldom-recognized cause of the tenacious conservatism of the established professions.”

⁷⁷ Carlin, Jerome E., Lawyers' Ethics: A Survey of the New York City Bar (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1966), p. 170Google Scholar, estimates that “only about 2 per cent of the lawyers who violate generally accepted ethical norms are processed, and fewer than 0.2 per cent are officially sanctioned.” If lawyers are so reluctant to enforce their ethics, other professions are likely to be even more lax.

⁷⁸ See Gilb, , Hidden Hierarchies, pp. 117–28.Google Scholar Gilb reports that in 1960 less than half of attorneys belonged to the American Bar Association, and only 42 per cent of the teachers to the National Education Association. Only 45 per cent of America's 344,823 doctors were reported to be dues-paying members of the American Medical Association in June, 1972, in San Francisco Chronicle (June 17, 1972), p. 5.

⁷⁹ Moore, Wilbert E., “But Some are More Equal than Others,” American Sociological Review, 28 (02, 1963), 13–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸⁰ See Glaser, William A., Social Settings and Medical Organization: A Cross-National Study of the Hospital (New York: Atherton Press, 1970)Google Scholar; Freidson, Eliot, ed., The Hospital in Modern Society (New York: The Free Press, 1963)Google Scholar; Perrow, Charles, “Hospitals: Technology, Structure, and Goals,” in March, James G., ed., Handbook of Organizations (Chicago: Rand McNally & Company, 1965), 910–71.Google Scholar

⁸¹ Epstein, Cynthia F., “Encountering the Male Establishment: Sex-Status Limits on Women's Careers in the Professions,” American Journal of Sociology, 75 (05, 1970), 968–82, at 981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸² Moore, Wilbert E., The Professions: Roles and Rules (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1970), p. 167.Google Scholar

⁸³ Hughes, , “License and Mandate,” p. 79.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Goode, , “Theoretical Limits,” in Etzioni, , ed., p. 291.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Moore, p. 112.

⁸⁶ Hughes, , “License and Mandate,” pp. 69–70.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ For some of the problems involved, see Lipsky, Michael, “Toward a Theory of Street-Level Bureaucracy,” in Kirst, Michael W., Stale, School, and Politics (Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath and Company, 1972), pp. 205–12.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Goode, William J., “Community within Community: The Professions,” American Sociological Review, 22 (04, 1967), 194–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸⁹ Marshall, , Class, Citizenship, p. 165Google Scholar, has argued that the professions “have not always struck a true balance between loyalty to the client and loyalty to the community, and they have sometimes treated loyalty to the profession as an end rather than as a means to the fulfillment of other loyalties. They are often accused of neglecting the public welfare.”

⁹⁰ Parsons, , “The Professions,” p. 36Google Scholar: “Perhaps even it is not mainly a difference of typical motives at all, but one of the different situations in which much the same commonly human motives operate. Perhaps the acquisitiveness of modern business is institutional rather than motivational.”

⁹¹ Gilb, Hidden Hierarchies, Truman, David B., The Governmental Process: Political Interests and Public Opinion (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, second ed., 1971), pp. 93–8, 168–9, 249–50, 452–3.Google Scholar

⁹² These investigations were made possible in part by a training grant from the National Institute of Mental Health, in part by support for dissertation research from the National Science Foundation, and in part by fellowship support from the Social Science Research Council, the Danforth Foundation, and the Mabelle McLeod Lewis Research Fund.

⁹³ Quinley, Harold E., The Prophetic Clergy: Social Activism among Protestant Ministers (Berkeley: University of California Press, forthcoming).Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Buck, J. Vincent, City Planners: The Dilemma of Professionals in a Political Milieu (unpubl. Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1972).Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Lochner, Philip R. Jr., Learning to be a Lawyer: Homogenization and Differentiation into Public and Private Sector Professional Roles (unpubl. Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1971).Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Becker, Ruth Ann, Potential Groups: An Exploration of the Conditions and Processes of Group Formation among Doctors and Lawyers (Ph.D. dissertation in process, Stanford University).Google Scholar

⁹⁷ O'Connor, Robert, Scientists in Politics: A Study in Political Participation (Ph.D. dissertation in process, Stanford University).Google Scholar

⁹⁸ Goldenberg, Edie, Politics and the Press: A Study of the Access of Welfare Groups to the Boston Metropolitan Press (Ph.D. dissertation in process, Stanford University).Google Scholar

⁹⁹ Levine, Ellen B., Role Conflicts among Black Businessmen (Ph.D. dissertation in process, Stanford University).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ See Schubert, Glendon, The Public Interest (Glencoe: The Free Press, 1960), p. 11Google Scholar: “Most of the literature characteristically tends either to define the public interest as a universal, in terms so broad that it encompasses almost any type of specific decision, or else to particularize the concept, by identifying it with the most specific and discrete of policy norms and actions, to the extent that it has no general significance.”

¹⁰¹ Harrington, Michael, The Other America (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1962).Google Scholar

¹⁰² See Kaufman, Herbert, “Administrative Decentralization and Political Power,” Public Administration Review, 29 (January-02, 1969), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁰³ Marshall, , Class, Citizenship, p. 164.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ See Lipsky, Michael, “Protest as a Political Resource,” American Political Science Review, 62 (12, 1968), 1144–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wilson, James Q., “The Strategy of Protest: Problems of Negro Civic Action,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, 3 (09, 1961), 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁰⁵ See Beck, Bertram M., “Community Control: A Distraction, Not an Answer,” Social Work, 14 (10, 1969), 14–20.Google Scholar For an opposite point of view, see Gittell, Marilyn, “Professionalism and Public Participation in Educational Policy Making: New York City, A Case Study,” Public Administration Review, 27 (09, 1967), 237–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar See also Levin, Henry M., ed., Community Control of Schools (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1970).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ Moore, p. 169. See Lowi, Theodore J., The Politics of Disorder (New York: Basic Books, 1971), p. 80Google Scholar: “Decentralization through delegation of power merely meant conversion from government control to a far more irresponsible, enigmatic, unpredictable group control.”

¹⁰⁷ Hughes, , “License and Mandate,” p. 54.Google Scholar As Hughes continues, the professional's “very competence comes from having dealt with a thousand cases of what the client likes to consider his unique trouble.”

¹⁰⁸ Haug, Marie R. and Sussman, Marvin B., “Professional Autonomy and the Revolt of the Client,” Social Problems, 17 (Fall, 1969), at p. 156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁰⁹ Carr-Saunders, Alexander M., “Metropolitan Conditions and Traditional Professional Relationships,” in Fisher, Robert M., ed., The Metropolis in Modern Life (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday and Company, 1955), p. 283Google Scholar, writes: “As a consequence of the trend toward specialization, the professional man no longer takes a comprehensive interest in his client. He feels that he has no general responsibility for those who come under his care, and the personal relationship between practitioner and client is weakened.”

¹¹⁰ See Lynd, Helen Merrell, On Shame and the Search for Identity (New York: Science Editions, 1965).Google Scholar

¹¹¹ Haug, and Sussman, , “Professional Autonomy,” pp. 157–8.Google Scholar

¹¹² Haug and Sussman, p. 159.

¹¹³ Haug and Sussman, p. 160.

¹¹⁴ Lipsky, Michael, Protest in City Politics: Rent Strikes, Housing and the Power of the Poor (Chicago: Rand McNally & Company, 1970) p. 168.Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ See Michaelson, Michael G., “Medical Students: Healers Become Activists,” Saturday Review (08 16, 1969), pp. 41–3, 53–4Google Scholar; Bazell, Robert J., “Health Radicals: Crusade to Shift Medical Power to the People,” Science, 173 (08 6, 1971), 506–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

¹¹⁶ Brager, George A., “Advocacy and Political Behavior,” Social Work, 13 (04, 1968), 5–15, at 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹¹⁷ Cann, Richard Du, The Art of the Advocate (London: Penguin Books, 1964).Google Scholar

¹¹⁸ Schein, p. 51.

¹¹⁹ See Meyerson, Martin and Banfield, Edward C., Politics, Planning, and the Public Interest (Glencoe: The Free Press, 1955)Google Scholar; Altshuler, Alan, The City Planning Process: A Political Analysis (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1965)Google Scholar; Rabinovitz, Francine F., City Politics and Planning (New York: Atherton Press, 1969).Google Scholar

¹²⁰ This was recognized in an early study by Rossi, Peter H. and Dentier, Robert A., The Politics of Urban Renewal (Glencoe: The Free Press, 1961).Google Scholar

¹²¹ See Blecher, Earl M., Advocacy Planning for Urban Development: With Analysis of Six Demonstration Programs (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1971).Google Scholar

¹²² Marks, , The Lawyer, the Public, p. 250.Google Scholar

¹²³ Gilb, , Hidden Hierarchies, p. 89.Google Scholar

¹²⁴ Client control, however, may be frustrated by what Clark Kerr calls “institutional markets” in which the boundaries of service are not set by the participants in the consultative relationship but by institutional rules. See Kerr, Clark, “The Balkanization of Labor Markets,” in Labor Mobility and Economic Opportunity, ed. Bakke, E. Wightet al. (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1954), p. 93.Google Scholar

¹²⁵ Multiple advocacy as a conscious decision-making strategy is recommended by George, Alexander L., “The Case for Multiple Advocacy in Making Foreign Policy,” American Political Science Review, 66 (09, 1972), 751–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹²⁶ Rourke, p. 45.

¹²⁷ See Pelz, Donald C., “Interaction and Attitudes between Scientists and the Auxiliary Staff,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 4 (12, 1959), 321–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar and 4 (March, 1960), 410–25.

¹²⁸ Gilb, , Hidden Hierarchies, pp. 162–64.Google Scholar

¹²⁹ Moore, , The Professions, p. 73.Google Scholar

¹³⁰ “There are professional ethics for the priest, the soldier, the lawyer, the magistrate, and so on,” Durkheim observed three quarters of a century ago, and then asked: “Why should there not be one for trade and industry?” Durkheim, Emile, Professional Ethics and Civic Morals (Glencoe: The Free Press, 1958), pp. 30–39.Google Scholar No answer has yet been forthcoming, but see Barber, Bernard, “Is American Business Becoming Professionalized?,” in ed. Tiryakian, , pp. 121–45.Google Scholar The English Socialist Tawney, R. H. argued, in The Acquisitive Society (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1920), chapter VIIGoogle Scholar, “Industry as a Profession,” that nationalization of industry was a necessary condition of its professionalization.

¹³¹ Daniel Bell comes to the same conclusion, if by a different route: “It is more likely, however, that the post-industrial society will involve more politics than ever before for the very reason that choice becomes conscious and the decision-centers more visible.” See his essay, “The Measurement of Knowledge and Technology,” in Sheldon, Eleanor B. and Moore, Wilbert E., eds., Indicators of Social Change: Concepts and Measurements (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1968), p. 238.Google Scholar

¹³² On contemporary institutional trends, see Cronin, Thomas E. and Greenberg, Sanford D., eds., The Presidential Advisory System (New York: Harper and Row, 1969)Google Scholar; Committee on the Utilization of Young Scientists and Engineers in Advisory Services to Government, Office of Scientific Personnel, National Research Council, The Science Committee (Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1972). 2 vols.Google Scholar; Moynihan, Daniel Patrick, “The Professionalization of Reform,” The Public Interest, 1 (Fall, 1965), 6–16Google Scholar; Advisory Committee on Government Programs in the Behavioral Sciences, National Research Council, The Behavioral Sciences and the Federal Government (Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1968)Google Scholar; Special Commission on the Social Sciences of the National Science Board, Knowledge into Action: Improving the Nation's Use of the Social Sciences (Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation, 1969).Google Scholar