Hill, S and Lorenz, D (2011) Rethinking professionalism: Guardianship of land and resources. Building Research & Information, 39(3), pp. 314-319. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The rise of modern professions, and the concept of professionalism, usually has two sides. On the one hand, it can be seen as self-serving as it circumscribes practices, controls a knowledge base, controls entry into the occupation, demands public recognition of professional status and fixes the market for its services. On the other hand, built environment professions and professionalism also offer the promise of a covenant with society to protect it from unscrupulous, unfair or short-term practices through the provision of impartial advice and services. This ethical basis for professionalism is considered in the context of the property market, with a focus on valuation professionals. It is argued that if property professionals have a stewardship or guardian role for society and the built environment, then this means the right and a duty to challenge what 'the client' or 'the market' may seek. The property profession in general and valuation professionals in particular must find a new role in proactive 'market-shaping' which involves a re-examination of unquestioned assumptions and underlying fundamentals of current professional practices.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | built environment; ethics; intelligent practice; professionalism; property valuation; public interest; stewardship; values |
| Index terms: | society, knowledge base, profession, professionalism, occupation, public interest, duty, ethics, professional practice, built environment, property market, land |
| Subjects: | professional development, contractual role, real estate economics, infrastructure and transport systems, communities and social development, political science, sociology, information systems, institututions, ethical practice |
| Topics: | Information Management, Stakeholder Management, Governance, Research Practice, Contract Administration, Digital Applications, Urban Studies, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 CT |
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