Rights statement: The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Human Relations, 71(10), 2018, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2018 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Human Relations page: http://journals.sagepub.com/home/HUM on SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/
Accepted author manuscript, 535 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 › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Practice Makes Perfect?
T2 - Skillful Performance in Veterinary Work, Human Relations
AU - Clarke, Caroline
AU - Knights, David
N1 - The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Human Relations, 71(10), 2018, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2018 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Human Relations page: http://journals.sagepub.com/home/HUM on SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/
PY - 2018/10/1
Y1 - 2018/10/1
N2 - Is vetting a craft that must be learned owing to the limitations of scientific discipline, or simply a question of practice makes perfect? This question arose from our empirical research on veterinary surgeons (vets), who we found were often struggling with the divergence between the precise and unambiguous knowledge underlying the training and the unpredictability and imprecision of their everyday practices. These are comparatively underexplored issues insofar as the literature on vets tends to be descriptive and statistical, focusing primarily on clinical matters and associated human-animal interactions. Our cliché title has a question mark because while many vets remain embedded in the disciplined ‘certainties’ and causal regularities within their training, in practice this ordered world is rarely realized, and they are faced with indeterminacy where the ‘perfect’ solution eludes them. Vets often turn these unrealistic ideals of expertise back in on themselves, thus generating doubt and insecurity for any failure in their practices. In analysing vets’ experiences, we pay attention to the anatomical models of science, where linear causal analysis is expected to provide orderly and predictable outcomes or ‘right’ answers to problems, as well as notions of expertise that turn out to be illusory.
AB - Is vetting a craft that must be learned owing to the limitations of scientific discipline, or simply a question of practice makes perfect? This question arose from our empirical research on veterinary surgeons (vets), who we found were often struggling with the divergence between the precise and unambiguous knowledge underlying the training and the unpredictability and imprecision of their everyday practices. These are comparatively underexplored issues insofar as the literature on vets tends to be descriptive and statistical, focusing primarily on clinical matters and associated human-animal interactions. Our cliché title has a question mark because while many vets remain embedded in the disciplined ‘certainties’ and causal regularities within their training, in practice this ordered world is rarely realized, and they are faced with indeterminacy where the ‘perfect’ solution eludes them. Vets often turn these unrealistic ideals of expertise back in on themselves, thus generating doubt and insecurity for any failure in their practices. In analysing vets’ experiences, we pay attention to the anatomical models of science, where linear causal analysis is expected to provide orderly and predictable outcomes or ‘right’ answers to problems, as well as notions of expertise that turn out to be illusory.
KW - competence
KW - doubt practice
KW - expert
KW - medical
KW - perfect
KW - performances
KW - science
KW - skill
KW - vets
U2 - 10.1177/0018726717745605
DO - 10.1177/0018726717745605
M3 - Journal article
VL - 71
SP - 1395
EP - 1421
JO - Human Relations
JF - Human Relations
SN - 0018-7267
IS - 10
ER -