Rights statement: This is a pre-copy-editing, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Journal of Professions and Organization following peer review. The definitive publisher-authenticated version James Faulconbridge, Lasse Folke Henriksen, Leonard Seabrooke, How professional actions connect and protect, Journal of Professions and Organization, Volume 8, Issue 2, July 2021, Pages 214–227, https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joab008 is available online at: https://academic.oup.com/jpo/article-abstract/8/2/214/6338320
Accepted author manuscript, 341 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - How Professional Actions Connect and Protect
AU - Faulconbridge, James
AU - Henriksen, Lasse
AU - Seabrooke, Len
N1 - This is a pre-copy-editing, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Journal of Professions and Organization following peer review. The definitive publisher-authenticated version James Faulconbridge, Lasse Folke Henriksen, Leonard Seabrooke, How professional actions connect and protect, Journal of Professions and Organization, Volume 8, Issue 2, July 2021, Pages 214–227, https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joab008 is available online at: https://academic.oup.com/jpo/article-abstract/8/2/214/6338320
PY - 2021/7/31
Y1 - 2021/7/31
N2 - 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, below,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
AB - 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, below,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
U2 - 10.1093/jpo/joab008
DO - 10.1093/jpo/joab008
M3 - Journal article
VL - 8
SP - 214
EP - 227
JO - Journal of Professions and Organization
JF - Journal of Professions and Organization
SN - 2051-8803
IS - 2
ER -