Watson, H B (1975) Organizational bases of professional status: a comparative study of the engineering profession. PhD thesis, London School of Economics and Political Science, UK.
Abstract
British engineers have a lower status than practitioners of other British professions, engineers in other industrialized and developing societies, and than the Victorian Civil engineer. Explanations of this problem in terms of variables specific to British society and culture: are found inadequate, and an explanation is advanced that stresses the role played by the occupational group in determining its own status. Professions are more or less effectively organized for the collective pursuit and legimation of status. The historical development of the engineering profession in its British peculiarity resulted in a fragmented structure of organization by means of which speciality groups attempted to usurp the status of established practitioners, leading to mutual denigration and non-recognition, which eventually undermined the basis and questioned the legitimacy of engineering professionalism. while the British profession differs from some school-based ones such as the French and German in its relationship to the educational system, it is not peculiar in that respect, and the control exerted by the British profession over education and entry by means of pupilage and apprenticeship would normally have enhanced ... (continues)
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | professionalism; apprenticeship; civil engineer; professional; culture; education |
| Index terms: | society, professionalism, historical development, legitimacy, apprenticeship, profession, practitioner, engineer, civil engineer, comparative study |
| Subjects: | architectural and construction history, professional development, professional education, communities and social development, institututions, sociology, profession, practitioner, research design and methodology |
| Topics: | Education, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Information Management, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here