¹ Larson, Magali Sarfatti, The Rise of Professionalism: A Sociological Analysis (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977), x.Google Scholar

² Mok, A. L., Beroepen in Actie: Bijdrage tot een Beroepen-sociologie (Meppel: Boom, 1973), 17–23.Google Scholar

³ Carr-Saunders, A. M. and Wilson, P. A., The Professions (London: Frank Cass [1933]Google Scholar). Other British titles in the sociology of the professions include the following: Millerson, Geoffrey, The Qualifying Associations: A Study in Professionalization (London: Rout-ledge & Kegan Paul, 1964Google Scholar); Lewis, Roy and Maude, Angus, Professional People (London: Phoenix House Ltd., 1952Google ScholarPubMed); Johnson, Terence, Professions and Power (London: Macmillan Press Ltd., 1972Google Scholar); Prandy, Kenneth, Professional Employees: A Study of Scientists and Engineers (London: Faber & Faber, 1965Google Scholar); Reader, W. J., Professional Men: The Rise of the Professional Classes in Nineteenth-Century England (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1966)Google Scholar; and Salami, Graeme, Community and Occupation: An Exploration of Work/Leisure Relationships (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974).Google Scholar

⁴ Parsons, Talcott, “The Professions and Social Structure,” Social Forces, 17 (05 1939), 457–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵ Mok, , Beroepen, 19–20Google Scholar, 42; Parsons, “Social Structure,” passim; idem, “Professions,” International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, XII (New York: Macmillan, 1968), 536–47.Google Scholar

⁶ Cf., e.g., Weber, Max “Bureaucracy,” in From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, Gerth, H. H. and Mills, C. W., trans. and eds. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1970 [1946]), 196–244Google Scholar; and the preface to the second edition of Durkheim, Emile, The Division of Labor in Society (New York: The Free Press, 1964 [1933]).Google Scholar

⁷ Habermas, Jürgen, Technik und Wissenschaft als ‘Ideologie’ (Frankfurt a/M: Suhrkamp, 1968).Google Scholar

⁸ See such works as Bledstein, Burton, The Culture of Professionalism: The Middle Class and the Development of Higher Education in America (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., Inc., 1976)Google Scholar; Collins, Randall, The Credential Society: An Historical Sociology of Education and Stratification (New York and San Francisco: Academic Press, 1979)Google Scholar; Freidson, Eliot, The Profession of Medicine: A Study of the Sociology of Applied Knowledge (New York: Dodd-Mead, 1970)Google Scholar; Mills, C. Wright, White Collar: The American Middle Classes (New York: Oxford University Press, 1951); and Larson, Professionalism.Google Scholar

⁹ Mok, , Beroepen, 18,Google Scholar 48; similarly, Hesse, Hans Albrecht, Berufe im Wandel: Ein Beitrag zum Problem der Professionalisierung (Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke Verlag, 1968), 70–78.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Johnson, , Professions and Power, 27.Google Scholar

¹¹ Mok, , Beroepen, 19–20Google Scholar, 30, 37–70; Johnson, , Professions and Power, 7–38.Google Scholar

¹² a, Beroepen, 21Google Scholar. See also Hesse, , Berufe, 70–78Google Scholar; and Daheim, Hansjürgen, Der Beruf in der modernen Gesellschaft, 2d ed. (Cologne and Berlin: Kiepenheuer & Witsch, 1970), 39–44.Google Scholar

¹³ Conze, Werner, “Beruf,” in Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe: Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland, Brunner, Otto, Conze, Werner, and Koselleck, Reinhart, eds., 5 vols. (Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Verlag, 1972), I, 499Google Scholar; Deutsches Wörterbuch von Jacob Grimm & Wilhelm Grimm (Leipzig: Verlag von S. Hirzel, 1889), VII, 2159–60.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Brockhaus-Wahrig Deutsches Wörterbuch, 1983, V, 214.Google Scholar

¹⁵ See in particular the recent anthology, Bildungsbürgertum im 19. Jahrhundert. 1: Bildungssystem und Professionalisierung in internationalen Vergleichen, Conze, Werner and Kocka, Jürgen, eds. (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1985)Google Scholar, which focuses on the history of British, continental European, and American professions in a broadly comparative framework. See also Huerkamp, Claudia, Der Aufstieg der Aerzte im 19. Jahrhundert (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985), and, for related work on Germany done in the United States, the recent work of Charles McClelland and Konrad Jarausch.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁶ Daheim, , Beruf, 34–66. In ordinary usage the term Professionalisierung refers to the transition from casual or amateur activity to full-time, paid work. Cf. Brockhaus, V, 214.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Daheim, , Beruf, 34–66Google Scholar, 280–94; Mok, , Beroepen, 71–103.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Mok, , Beroepen, 22–23;Google ScholarGoode, William J., “Community within a Community: The Professions,” American Sociological Review, 22:2 (1957), 194–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁹ Mok, , Beroepen, 7–18, 22–23.Google Scholar

²⁰ Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, Lawyers and Their Society: A Comparative Study of the Legal Profession in Germany and in the United States (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973), 126, 32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²¹ Larson, , Professionalism, xvii-xviii, 178–207.Google Scholar

²² See also Lintsen, Harry W., Ingenieurs in Nederland in de Negentiende Eeuw: Hun Streven naar Erkenning en Macht (Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff, 1980), as an example of an empirical study (of the Dutch civil engineering corps) that rejects the concept profession.Google Scholar

²³ Larson, , Professionalism, xvi.Google Scholar

²⁴ Ibid., 25–31, esp. 30.

²⁵ For the various attributes, see Millerson, , Qualifying Associations, 4Google Scholar; Goode, , “Community within a Community,” 194Google Scholar; Wilensky, Harold L., “The Professionalization of Everyone?” The American Journal of Sociology, 70 (09 1964), 142–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁶ Larson, , Professionalism, xvii, 254.Google Scholar

²⁷ It is precisely this kind of combination in modem bureaucratic professions that disturbs Larson in Professionalism, 208–45.Google Scholar

²⁸ Carr-Saunders, and Wilson, , Professions, 3.Google Scholar

²⁹ Ibid., 284–87.

³⁰ Parsons, , “Professions,” 545.Google Scholar

³¹ Larson, , Professionalism, xviii.Google Scholar

³² Ibid., 190.

³³ Kornhauser, William, Scientists in Industry: Conflict and Accommodation (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1963)Google Scholar. But see also Mills, , White Collar, 112–41Google Scholar; Vollmer, Howard M. and Mills, Donald L., eds., Professionalization (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966), 264–94Google Scholar; Freidson, Eliot and Rhea, B., “Processes of Control in a Company of Equals,” Social Problems, 11:2 (1963), 119–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁴ Larson, , Professionalism, 191.Google Scholar

³⁵ Larson ends up arguing that modern professionalism in the context of large bureaucratic organizations amounts to little more than the defense of unwarranted inequality and privilege, since the professionals' individual freedom and power are irretrievably lost and they themselves, servants of power, are increasingly characterized by “collective powerlessness, subordination, and complicity,” Professionalism, 243Google Scholar. See also Vollmer, and Mills, , Professionalization, ch. 8.Google Scholar

³⁶ The affinity of profession and bureaucracy is briefly noted by Johnson, Terence, Professions and Power, 15.Google Scholar

³⁷ Cf. Carr-Saunders, and Wilson, , Professions, 503.Google Scholar

³⁸ Vollmer, and Mills, , Professionalization, 265.Google Scholar

³⁹ For the ideology of the Prussian bureaucracy, see e.g., Koselleck, Reinhart, Preussen zwischen Reform and Revolution: Allgemeines Landrecht, Verwaltung und soziale Bewegung von 1791 bis 1848 (Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Verlag, 1967), 279–83Google Scholar, 388–91; also, Kocka, Jürgen, Unternemensverwaltung und Angestelltenschaft am Beispiel Siemens 1847–1914: Zum Verhältnis von Kapitalismus und Bürokratie in der deutschen Industrialisierung (Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Verlag, 1969), 37–40. Parsons' view is summarized above in section II.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Weber, Max, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, 5th ed. (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck];, 1972), 80–82, 178–79.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Weber, , “Bureaucracy,” 198–99.Google Scholar

⁴² Ibid., 199. See also Hintze, Otto, “Der Beamtenstand,” in Soziologie und Geschichte: Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur Soziologie, Politik und Theorie der Geschichte, 2d ed., ed. and intro. Gerhard Oestreich (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1964), 76–77, an the psychology of civil servants.Google Scholar

⁴³ Weber, , “Bureaucracy,” 200.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Ibid., 240–44; see also Collins, Credential Society, passim.

⁴⁵ Weber, , “Bureaucracy,” 233.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Hintze, , “Beamtenstand,” 76Google Scholar; Prandy, , Employees, 37–47Google Scholar; Dahrendorf, Ralf, Society and Democracy in Germany (Garden City: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1969), 89–91.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Rosenberg, Hans, Bureaucracy, Aristocracy and Autocracy: The Prussian Experience, 1660–1815 (Boston: Beacon Press, 1966Google Scholar [1958]), passim; Weber, , “Bureaucracy,” 233.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Weber, , “Bureaucracy,” 201–202, 211, 225.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Prandy, , Employees, 30–60Google Scholar; Reader, Professional Men; Bledstein, Culture; Larson, Professionalism; Seymour Martin Lipset and Bendix, Reinhard, Social Mobility in Industrial Society (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1959), 38–42Google Scholar; Ringer, Fritz K., Education and Society in Modern Europe (Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press, 1979).Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Pirenne, Henri, “European Guilds,” in Man, Work, and Society: A Reader in the Sociology of Occupations, Nosow, Sigmund and Form, William H., eds. (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1962). 160–68.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Weber, , “Bureaucracy,” 212.Google Scholar

⁵² Banaclough, Geoffrey, The Origins of Modern Germany (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1984 [1947]), 391–92.Google Scholar

⁵² Ibid., 395.

⁵⁴ Rosenberg, , Bureaucracy, 89.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Ibid., passim; Kocka, , Unternehmens verwaltung, 37–40.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ For this well-established view concerning the German Sonderweg, see, e.g., Baraclough, , Origins, 391Google Scholar; Dahrendorf, Society and Democracy; Holborn, Hajo, “German Idealism in the Light of Social History,” in his Germany and Europe: Historical Essays (Garden City: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1971), 1–32Google Scholar; Stem, Fritz, “The Political Consequences of the Unpolitical German,” in his The Failure of Illiberalism: Essays on the Political Culture of Modern Germany (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1975), 3–25Google Scholar. But see also the recent criticism of this orthodox interpretation by Blackbourn, David and Eley, Geoff in The Peculiarities of German History (New York: Oxford University Press, 1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and the discussion by Wehler, Hans-Ulrich, “‘Deutscher Sonderweg’ oder allgemeine Probleme des westlichen Kapitalismus?” Merkur, 35:5 (1981), 478–87Google Scholar; Heinrich-August Winkler, “Der deutsche Sonderweg: Eine Nachlese,” Ibid., 35:8, 793–804; Faulenbach, Bernd, Ideologie des deutschen Weges (Munich, 1980).Google Scholar

⁵⁷ In addition to the literature cited in note 56, see also Jürgen Kocka's pertinent discussion of bureaucracy and capitalism as related manifestations of the “unfolding of specifically Western rationality,” Unternehmensverwaltung, 16–17.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ For engineers' employee status, see above, 553–54, and below, 567–69. For inherent tendencies toward fragmentation, see Perrucci, Robert and Gerstl, Joel E., Profession without Community: Engineers in American Society (New York: Random House, 1969)Google Scholar, and Evan, William, “Engineering,” International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (1968)Google Scholar; see also Benguigui, G. and Monjardet, D., “Profession ou corporation? Le cas d'une organisation d'ingenieurs,” Sociologie du Travail, 10:3 (1968): 275–90.Google Scholar For more general discussion of endogenous factors promoting or preventing occupational solidarity, see Goode, , “Community within a Community,” 194–200;Google ScholarBucher, Rue and Strauss, Anselm, “Professions in Process,” American Journal of Sociology, 66:4 (1961): 325–33; Salaman, Community and Occupation, and the collection of articles edited by Vollmer and Mills, Professionalization.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵⁹ Quoted in Rosenberg, , Bureaucracy, 202–3.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Conze, Werner, “Das Spannungsfeld von Staat und Gesellschaft im Vormärz,” in Staat und Gesellschaft im deutschen Vormärz, 1815–1848, Conze, Werner, ed. (Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Verlag, 1970), 207–69;Google ScholarKocka, , Unternehmensverwaltung, 41–47; Koselleck, Preussen, passim.Google Scholar

⁶¹ See Hintze, , “Bearntenstand,” 77. Hintze notes the affinity and kinship of the “free” and the “bureaucratic” professions.Google Scholar

⁶² In Britain and the United States, by contrast, entrepreneurial engineers steeped in a tradition of empiricism arose as the first leaders of their profession; cf. note 63.

⁶³ For the notion of a split between “shop culture” and “school culture” see Calvert, Monte, The Mechanical Engineer in America, 1830–1910: Professional Cultures in Conflict (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1967).Google Scholar

⁶⁴ The above remarks about the VDI are based on, among others, Hortleder, Gerd, Das Gesellschaftsbild des Ingenieurs: Zum politischen Verhalten der Technischen Intelligenz in Deutschland (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1970)Google Scholar; Scholl, Lars Ulrich, Ingenieure in der Frühíndustríalisierung: Staatliche und prívate Techniker im Königreich Hannover und an der Ruhr (1815–1873) (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1978)Google Scholar; Ludwig, Karl-Heinz, ed., Technik. Ingenieure und Gesellschaft: Geschichte des Vereins Deutscher Ingenieure 1856–1981 (Düsseldorf: VDI-Verlag, 1981);Google Scholar and Gispen, C. W. R., “Technical Education and Social Status: The Emergence of the Mechanical Engineering Occupation in Germany, 1820–1890” (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1981).Google Scholar

⁶⁵ For these concepts and the timing of their manifestation, see Winkler, Heinrich-August, ed., Organisierter Kapitalismus (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hardach, Gerd, The First World War (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Chandler, Alfred D., The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business (Cambridge and London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1977); Larson, Professionalism.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Kocka, , Unternehmensverwaltung, 13–29Google Scholar, 547–59, esp. 554–55; see also his White Collar Workers in America 1890–1940: A Social-Political History in International Perspective, Kealy, Maurice, trans. (London and Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1980), passim.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Kocka, , Unternehmensverwaltung, 547–59.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Ibid., 521.

⁶⁹ Ibid., 554.

⁷⁰ These references to the engineers' problems before World War I are a highly condensed version of the author's current research.

⁷¹ This is not to argue that no comparable agitation among engineers elsewhere existed. Cf., e.g., for the American case, Layton, Edwin T., Jr., The Revolt of the Engineers: Social Responsibility and the American Engineering Profession (Cleveland and London: The Press of Case Western Reserve University, 1971).Google Scholar

⁷² For political radicalization of German engineers after World WarI, see Ludwig, Karl-Heinz, Technik und Ingenieure im Dritten Reich (Düsseldorf: Droste Verlag, 1974)Google Scholar; and Herf, Jeffrey, Reactionary Modernism: Technology, Culture, and Politics in Weimar and the Third Reich (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984).Google Scholar

⁷³ Kocka, , Unternehmensverwaltung, 552–55.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Chandler, , Visible Hand, 8–9,Google Scholar 468; Burnham, James, The Managerial Revolution (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1945), 73Google Scholar and passim; Veblen, Thorstein, The Engineers and the Price System (New York: Viking Press, Inc., 1933 [1921]), 33.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ For European manifestations of Chandler's “managerial revolution,” see, e.g., Siegrist, Hannes, Vom Familienbetrieb zum Managerunternehmen: Angestellte und industrielle Organisation am Beispiel der Georg Fischer AG in Schaffhausen, 1701–1930 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wehler, Hans-Ulrich, “Der Aufstieg des Organisierten Kapitalismus und Interventionsstaates in Deutschland,” in Organisierter Kapitalismus, Winkler, Heimich-August, ed., 36–57Google Scholar; Locke, Robert R., The End of the Practical Man: Entrepreneurship and Higher Education in Germany, France, and Great Britain, 1880–1940 (Greenwich and London: JAI Press Inc., 1984).Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Rosenberg, Bureaucracy, passim; and Barraclough, , Origins, 320–405.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Rosenberg, , Bureaucracy, 8.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ The power and status of modern bureaucratic elites in the various European societies are documented by, among others, Armstrong, John A., The European Administrative Elite (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973).Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Cf. Reader, , Professional Men, 1–24Google Scholar; Rosenberg, , Bureaucracy, 175–201Google Scholar; Mok, , Beroepen, 40–44.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ On the British case, an excellent recent treatment is Weiner, Martin J., English Culture and the Decline of the Industrial Spirit, 1850–1980 (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1981).Google Scholar