专业行为如何连接和保护

IF 2 Q3 MANAGEMENT Journal of Professions and Organization Pub Date : 2021-08-03 DOI:10.1093/jpo/joab008
J. Faulconbridge, Lasse Folke Henriksen, Leonard Seabrooke
{"title":"专业行为如何连接和保护","authors":"J. Faulconbridge, Lasse Folke Henriksen, Leonard Seabrooke","doi":"10.1093/jpo/joab008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Below we provide responses to the ongoing debate sparked by Mirko Noordegraaf’s intervention in suggesting that we are moving toward forms of ‘connective professionalism’. Critics in this debate have objected to Noordegraaf in a number of ways. Some object to a conflation of ideal types and empirical description. Others assert that Noordegraaf suggests a staged process of moving from protective to connective types of professionalism does not ring true; that we can finds forms of connection and protection in contemporary professionalism and in professional action. Our companions in this issue (Alvehus, Avnoon, and Oliver) suggest that greater connectiveness also permits new forms of protection as part of professionalism. Our short essays contribute to the Noordegraaf debate by focusing less on professionalism and more on how forms of professional action lead to mechanisms of connection and protection.","PeriodicalId":45650,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Professions and Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How professional actions connect and protect\",\"authors\":\"J. Faulconbridge, Lasse Folke Henriksen, Leonard Seabrooke\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jpo/joab008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Below we provide responses to the ongoing debate sparked by Mirko Noordegraaf’s intervention in suggesting that we are moving toward forms of ‘connective professionalism’. Critics in this debate have objected to Noordegraaf in a number of ways. Some object to a conflation of ideal types and empirical description. Others assert that Noordegraaf suggests a staged process of moving from protective to connective types of professionalism does not ring true; that we can finds forms of connection and protection in contemporary professionalism and in professional action. Our companions in this issue (Alvehus, Avnoon, and Oliver) suggest that greater connectiveness also permits new forms of protection as part of professionalism. Our short essays contribute to the Noordegraaf debate by focusing less on professionalism and more on how forms of professional action lead to mechanisms of connection and protection.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45650,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Professions and Organization\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Professions and Organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joab008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Professions and Organization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joab008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

下面,我们对Mirko Noordegraaf的干预引发的持续辩论做出回应,他暗示我们正在朝着“连接专业”的形式迈进。在这场辩论中,批评者以多种方式反对诺德格拉夫。有些人反对将理想类型和经验描述混为一谈。其他人则断言,Noordegraaf认为,从保护型职业转变为连接型职业的阶段性过程听起来并不真实;我们可以在当代职业精神和职业行为中找到各种形式的联系和保护。我们在这个问题上的同伴(Alvehus、Avnoon和Oliver)认为,更大的联系也允许作为专业精神的一部分的新形式的保护。我们的短文较少关注专业精神,而更多地关注专业行动形式如何导致联系和保护机制,从而为Noordegraaf辩论做出了贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How professional actions connect and protect
Below we provide responses to the ongoing debate sparked by Mirko Noordegraaf’s intervention in suggesting that we are moving toward forms of ‘connective professionalism’. Critics in this debate have objected to Noordegraaf in a number of ways. Some object to a conflation of ideal types and empirical description. Others assert that Noordegraaf suggests a staged process of moving from protective to connective types of professionalism does not ring true; that we can finds forms of connection and protection in contemporary professionalism and in professional action. Our companions in this issue (Alvehus, Avnoon, and Oliver) suggest that greater connectiveness also permits new forms of protection as part of professionalism. Our short essays contribute to the Noordegraaf debate by focusing less on professionalism and more on how forms of professional action lead to mechanisms of connection and protection.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
36.40%
发文量
14
期刊最新文献
The constellations of design: Architects’ practice modalities when working with embodied individuals and virtual collectives in later life facilities in the UK Elite lawyers in Türkiye: Educational capital, status hierarchies, and feminization The customer is always right? Corporate client influence and women’s attainment in large US law firms Discipline, caregiving, and identity work of frontline professionals: Talking about the acts of compliance and resistance in the everyday practices of social workers Intra-professional collaboration and organization of work among teachers: How entangled institutional logics shape connectivity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1