Newly professionalised physiotherapists: symbolic or substantive change?
| Date | 29 November 2019 |
| Pages | 300-314 |
| Published date | 29 November 2019 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-10-2018-0271 |
| Author | Pauline Anderson,Chris Warhurst |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Industrial/labour relations,Employment law |
Newly professionalised
physiotherapists: symbolic or
substantive change?
Pauline Anderson
Department of Work, Employment and Organisation,
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK, and
Chris Warhurst
Institute for Employment Research, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
Abstract
Purpose –There is renewed interest in the professions as a range of occupations pursue professionalisation
projects. The purpose of this paper is turn analysis to an important omission in current research –the skills
deployed in the work of these professions. Such research is necessary because skills determine the formal
classification of occupations as a profession.
Design/methodology/approach –Drawing on qualitative research, thispaper explores the deployment of
skills in workof one newly professionalisedoccupation in the UK’s NationalHealth Service –physiotherapists.
Findings –The findings point to a disconnect between how this occupation has become a profession
(the skills to get the job, and related political manoeuvring by representative bodies) and the mixed outcomes
for their skills deployment (the skills to do the job) in work as a profession.
Originality/value –The paper provides missing empirical understanding of change for this new profession,
and new conceptualisation of that change as both symbolic and substantive, with a “double hybridity”
around occupational control and skill deployment for physiotherapists as a profession.
Keywords Skills, NHS, Professionalization, Double hybridity, Physiotherapists,
Standard occupational classification
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
With a raft of occupations currently pursuing professionalisation projects, there is
renewed research interest in the professions. This research tends to focus on the process
by which these occupations become reclassified as professions, and on the political
manoeuvring of occupational representative bodies that underpin these professional
projects (e.g. Muzio et al., 2013; Saks, 2010). This focus is important but myopic and
detracts attention from changes to the skills deployed –that is used –in the work of these
occupations. This omission is both curious and significant given that it is changes to
these skills that ultimately determines the formal reclassification of an occupation as a
profession (Elias and Birch, 2010). Lacking this focus, Noordegraaf (2007) argues there is
often no substantive change in skill deployment but rather a rhetoric that offers “being”
professional as merely “symbolic”. A refocus on skill deployment is, therefore, required to
enable an assessment of the substance of professional reclassification to determine
whether it is merely a symbolic veneer.
Drawing on qualitative research, this paper redresses this omission by examining the skills
deployed –that is used –in the work of a newly professionalised occupation –physiotherapists
in the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) –and evaluating w hat, if anything, is now different
about this occupation’s skill use and thus whether its upgrading to a “profession”in the UK’s
Standard Occupational Classification System (SOC) is merely symbolic or reflects substantive
change. This occupation was selected because it is an exemplar of a number of occupations
recently reclassified and upgraded as professions (ONS, 2010, p. 6). It is also mainly located in
the public sector, upon which much of the new debate about professionalisation has
Employee Relations: The
International Journal
Vol. 42 No. 2, 2020
pp. 300-314
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0142-5455
DOI 10.1108/ER-10-2018-0271
Received 19 October 2018
Revised 4 March 2019
18 June 2019
29 August 2019
Accepted 29 August 2019
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm
300
ER
42,2
To continue reading
Request your trial