Professionalism and architects in the 21st century

Duffy, F and Rabeneck, A (2013) Professionalism and architects in the 21st century. Building Research & Information, 41(1), pp. 115-122. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

The astounding success of UK professionals in the three decades after the Second World War inevitably led to a backlash and political recrimination in the economic turmoil of the mid-1970s. The subsequent rise of free-market economics and the deskilling of the demand side in construction weakened building professionals and left them vulnerable to undermining their responsibility, and assimilation into the supply side. Yet the concept of public good embodied in professional principles of trust and mediation between demand and supply not only endures and remains socially valuable, but also is now urgently required to address the challenges of sustainability. It is argued that construction professionals need to place more emphasis on the public good by creating and sharing an open-ended, disinterested, interdisciplinary body of knowledge about buildings and their use. If the broader challenge for society is to reconnect markets and morals, for young building professionals it is to convert their intellectual capital into economic capital within a relentlessly neo-classical economic environment. Different approaches are suggested that are realistic yet that avoid suggesting a return to the mythical golden age of 1945-1970.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: architects; ethics; professional knowledge; professionalism; public interest; responsibility; specialization
Index terms: ethics, professional knowledge, specialization, public interest, mediation, society, professionalism, markets, body of knowledge, war, building professional, construction professional, public good, architect
Subjects: profession, business, dispute resolution, knowledge management, ethical practice, economic analysis, conflict and crisis studies, professional development, communities and social development, political science
Topics: Legal Issues, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Governance, Business Strategy, Information Management, Research Practice
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

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