Larson M S
Int J Health Serv. 1979;9(4):607-27. doi: 10.2190/68JG-4BT4-JDW9-0LHR.
Historically, the early professionalization movements in medicine and the law appear as organizational projects which aspire to monopolize income and opportunities in markets of services or labor and to monopolize status and work privileges in occupational hierarchies. Their central task is to standardize training and link it to actual or potential markets of labor or services, a linkage that is structurally effected in the modern university. The second wave of professionalization has different protagonists than the older "market professions": placed in a different structural situation, the bureaucratic professions transform the model of profession (which they adopt as a strategy of collective ascension) into an ideology. The import of the ideology of professionalism is examined in relation to two issues: the relationships between professional occupations and bureaucratic organizations; and the position of professional occupations within the larger structure of inequality. Analysis of the first point requires consideration of the distinctions between professional occupations in the public and private sectors, the use of professional knowledge and the image of profession in bureaucratic organizations, and the specific characteristics of professions that produce their own knowledge. In the discussion of the second point, professional occupations and their ideology are examined in relation to other occupations and to the possibilities of political awareness generated by uncertain professional statuses.
从历史上看，医学和法律领域早期的职业化运动表现为一些组织项目，这些项目渴望在服务或劳动力市场中垄断收入和机会，并在职业等级制度中垄断地位和工作特权。它们的核心任务是规范培训，并将其与实际的或潜在的劳动力或服务市场联系起来，这种联系在现代大学中得以在结构上实现。职业化的第二波浪潮与早期的“市场职业”有着不同的主角：处于不同的结构情境中，官僚职业将职业模式（他们将其作为集体提升的策略加以采用）转变为一种意识形态。本文从两个问题出发审视了职业主义意识形态的意义：职业与官僚组织之间的关系；以及职业在更大的不平等结构中的地位。对第一点的分析需要考虑公共部门和私营部门职业之间的区别、官僚组织中专业知识的运用和职业形象，以及产生自身知识的职业的具体特征。在讨论第二点时，将职业及其意识形态与其他职业以及不确定职业地位所产生的政治意识可能性联系起来进行考察。
