Professional Authority

Abstract

Abstract This chapter questions the continued efficacy of expertise derived from proprietary, abstract knowledge systems in producing professional authority. Recent studies demonstrate alternative means used to generate authority in contemporary workplaces, including interdependence, contextual expertise, interactive expertise, and the ethos or the moral character of how work is done. These forms of knowledge and practice generated through interactions with adjacent professions and clients inform how members of professions leverage traditional expertise to diagnose and treat problems in situ, and influence how those around them understand and contribute to their work. Beyond substantive capacities (arguing a legal case or treating a disease), authority depends on accomplishing outcomes preferably in ways that reflect the clients’ interests, including saving them time, money, and discomfort. This relates to the more recent ways in which expertise is evaluated and valued through bureaucratic (managerial evaluations in organizations) and technological means (client evaluations on social media).

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 24 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.