Hi Fil,
You are dead on target. there is nothing wrong with them being professionals
or non professionals...It simply does not matter. I am not saying that they
are part of a semi-profession. I am just saying that the distinction is
meaningless in itself. But if we use a laundry list of "traits" to assess
what counts as a profession and what does not, (which was done before 50s in
sociology), all you need to do is to compile lists of occupations that can
be regarded as professions and keep adding and subtracting to your list.
This really does not tell us anything about the process of
professionalization itself. A traits based approach creates an essentialist,
static view of expertise, which crumbles in the face of empirical evidence.
Let me give another example. Because of this traits based approach, some
design scholars are asking this question :" what is the unique, codified
knowledge base that we, industrial designers have" (or any other design
profession). First, this question is being asked because the same
functionalist literature claims that a "true profession" should have a
unique, codified knowledge base. So it follows that if we want to be a true
profession we must develop a unique knowledge base. There is no such thing
in design (or any other profession for that matter).
This question, as we tried to show in an article (Wang, David, and Ali O.
Ilhan. 2009. “Holding Creativity Together: A Sociological Theory of the
Design Professions.” *Design Issues* 25 (1) (January): 5-21.), leads us to
downplay the interdisciplinary character of all design endeavors. Second, a
unique knowledge base is not a must for being a profession because such a
thing does not exist. For instance medicine, the "purest" of all
professions, uses knowledge from biology, pharmacology, you name it... No
one in medicine tries to define what their "unique body of knowledge" is. It
is just pointless.
I hope this is at least a partial answer to your question...
Best,
ali
On 2 June 2011 17:00, Filippo A. Salustri <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Ali,
>
> 2 questions:
>
> 1. What are the "wrong kinds of questions" that we are led to ask by
> Terry's
> criteria? (I can't think of any.)
> 2. What's wrong with beauticians or massage therapists forming a profession
> or, as I think you suggest, a "semi-profession"?
>
> Cheers.
> Fil
>
> On 2 June 2011 17:52, Ali Ilhan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > As I said in my other post I do not find these distinctions between
> > professions and semi-professions really useful. Of course, they are good
> > starting points, but they are reminiscent of functionalist era in
> > sociology,
> > which does not really have much coinage right now. And I think they lead
> us
> > to the wrong types of questions.
> >
> > If you look at each criteria, in some places beauticians, or massage
> > therapists will fit into those. If you think about all of them, I don't
> > think even medicine counts as a profession. When it comes to legal
> > mandates, legal protection results from a rather complex social process
> in
> > which states, the public and the professionals engage in a long process
> > of compromise and debate about whether some occupation deserves legal
> > protection or not. As such, legal recognition does not spring from an
> > essential list of "true traits of professions" but a long boundary
> > construction and maintenance process. The core question again is not
> asking
> > which occupation is a semi-profession or full profession but rather
> looking
> > at how different occupations behave to be recognized as full
> "professions"
> > in a plethora of arenas.
> >
> > So I would daresay industrial design, depending on the context, might or
> > might not be be perceived as a profession... I don't think
> > the distinction is all black and white.
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > ali
> >
> > On 2 June 2011 06:12, Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > > Mark and Lubomir point to the role of 'profession' in defining design
> as
> > > an activity.
> > >
> > > Viewing design fields in terms of 'professions' and 'semi-professions'
> > > appears to be a useful way of viewing the issue.
> > >
> > > The seven essential elements of a profession are:
> > >
> > > 1. Single organisation that represents the profession legally in a
> > > jurisdiction
> > > 2. Ability of professional organisation to control who enters a
> > > professional group
> > > 3. Explicit definition of criteria that must be satisfied to join the
> > > professional group
> > > 4. Ability of professional organisation to limit who can work in the
> > > professional area of activity in that jurisdiction
> > > 5. Appropriate organisaitonal processes for professional development
> as
> > > individuals and the organisation develops
> > > 6. Legal and financial responsibility by individual professionals for
> > their
> > > actions
> > > 7. Names of specific professional activities are accurately and
> carefully
> > > defined, particularly in terms of qualifications.
> > >
> > > Semi- professions have only some (or none) of these. For example,
> > 'lawyers
> > > are a 'profession' and 'legal secretaries' are a semi-profession;
> > 'doctors'
> > > and 'nurses' are professions and 'first aiders' are a semi-profession;
> > > teaching in school is usually a profession and university-lecturing is
> > > (nowadays) a semi-profession.
> > >
> > > Some design fields, in some countries, are professions, others are
> > > semi-professions, and some are neither.
> > >
> > > For example, architecture is a profession and interior design is
> commonly
> > a
> > > semi-profession.
> > >
> > > Engineering design is a profession in the US, Australia and most of
> > > Europe, and only a semi-profession in the UK.
> > >
> > > Engineering design in the UK provides an example of two consequences of
> > the
> > > difference between a profession and a semi-profession: a) it is an
> > ongoing
> > > complaint by UK engineering designers that they are not taken seriously
> > and
> > > don't have status and pay equivalent to other professionals such as
> > doctors;
> > > b) in spite of organisationally being a semi-profession, UK engineers
> > want
> > > to blur and extend the definition of profession to include them.
> > >
> > > This "wishing to extend the definition (and benefits) of 'profession'
> to
> > > semi-professions " is a common call by semi-professions who do not want
> > to
> > > go through the development process to establish the above seven
> > professional
> > > characteristics.
> > >
> > > 'Industrial Design' and 'Product Design' are typically
> semi-professions
> > > and as such the title of the field and its meaning does not have to be
> > well
> > > defined (an exception is 'Product Design' courses that sit within
> > > Engineering in jurisdictions in which undertaking engineering design is
> > > regulated and the Product Design courses satisfy the legal requirements
> > of
> > > licensing to operate as an engineering design professional.
> > >
> > > This suggests that if 'Industrial Design' and 'Product Design' fulfil
> > the
> > > above 7 characteristics of a profession in a jurisdiction, then it will
> > be
> > > important to define accurately what the terms mean - otherwise not.
> > >
> > > Best wishes,
> > > Terry
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and
> related
> > > research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Mark
> > > Evans
> > > Sent: Thursday, 2 June 2011 6:24 AM
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > Subject: Re: Whats' in a name - Industrial Design or Product Design
> > >
> > > Hi Miles
> > >
> > > Thanks for raising this as it’s an issue that’s hounded me for many
> years
> > > in my roles as an admissions tutor and PhD supervisor. I’m unaware of
> > any
> > > academic papers that define the terms and have seriously considered
> > writing
> > > one myself. However, I do have an opinion.....
> > >
> > > After making countless presentations to potential students and having
> > > supervised PhDs that have a focus on industrial design, I believe that
> > > ‘industrial design’ describes a clearly defined professional activity.
> > > Whilst this embodies a broad range of knowledge and skills that include
> > > understanding users and manufacturing processes, the distinctive focus
> > > involves producing proposals for beautiful and innovative products and
> an
> > > ability to confidently sketch 3D form. There are two major associations
> > that
> > > support these activities, the Industrial Designers Society of America
> > (IDSA)
> > > and the International Council of Societies of Industrial Design
> (ICSID).
> > I’m
> > > unaware of any similar associations for product design.
> > >
> > > The UK is somewhat unusual in that there are undergraduate courses in
> > both
> > > ‘industrial design’ and ‘product design’. Industrial design courses
> > involve
> > > the activities as previously identified. Product design courses can be
> > > identical to industrial design courses; have a focus on engineering
> > design;
> > > or be hybrid variants. This also extends to job titles given after
> > > graduation.
> > >
> > > So, to summarise, I’d say that industrial design is a well defined term
> > > with a long history of professional practice. Product design can be
> used
> > to
> > > describe anything from industrial design to engineering design.
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> \V/_
> Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.
> Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
> Ryerson University
> 350 Victoria St, Toronto, ON
> M5B 2K3, Canada
> Tel: 416/979-5000 ext 7749
> Fax: 416/979-5265
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> http://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/
>
|
