240 / 264
GAZE1TE
DECEMBER 1977
FEDERATION OF PROFESIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
Address by the President to the Association's Annual General Meeting
5th May, 1977
Ladies and Gentlemen, Professional Colleagues:
We meet tonight at the Annual General Meeting of the
Federation of Professional Associations — a grouping of
fourteen Assoications representative of the Professions.
Several other groups are interested in joining us, some
have left.
What do we represent? By definition we represent
professionalism. Professionalism is understood in varying
ways in society. To some it represents people in certain
occupations who by reason of their occupation achieve a
high status. To others it represents membership of an
elitist group — a closed shop — membership of which
guarantees high financial awards. Some see the
professions as secure well-paid employment to be attained
by their children, if not by themselves. And yet others see
paternalistic groups of nineteenth century origin,
irrelevant in today's world. To such a latter group
professionals must seem antisocial, and if not to be
removed, then surely to be left to themselves to eventually
become extinct.
Where does the truth lie? I do believe that there is
value in reaffirming the strengths and values of
professionalism at this time, when there is so much
unclear and incorrect thinking around on the subject. In a
society dominated by economic measurement — where
the Gross National Product is taken to represent our well-
being — where wage increases are expected to solve the
problems of workers — where financial awards go to
those who produce, irrespective of the need of society for
the goods produced — where do we, who offer a personal
service, fit? How can our service be measured? Does it
have to be related to the Gross National Product? I'm
sure that there are some who would attempt to do so —
but what we represent does not come off a conveyor belt,
and cannot be measured that way. And while some of our
Associations may have been founded in the nineteenth
century, what we represent is much older than that. From
time immemorial men and women have used their skills in
the service of other members of the group. Christianity
sought to reinforce the value attributed to such service,
and in the nineteenth century Professional Associations
were formed to re-define professional service relationships
and support those who chose to adopt them.
We professionals offer a service within the boundaries
of our own discipline. Each professional group guarantees
the competence of its members to perform the tasks
particular to its discipline. Each member of a professional
group subscribes to an ethical Code. The combination of
competence and ethical code support the professional
person in his task performance, Tlie professional person
in turn is enabled to be 'task orientated'. This then is the
essence of the service we offer. This is what we mean
when we say that we give 'objective' advice. We mean
that our advice is governed by the task — by the problem
in hand — and not by reasons of comfort for ourselves,
whether that comfort is gained by financial remuneration
or otherwise. This is not 'pie-in-the-sky' thinking: this is
real. While we must be as concerned as anyone to achieve
a measure of comfort, while on the job, this is not our
prime motivation.
Our professional groups give us an authority structure.
An authority structure occurs when members can define
their roles and can work collectively in pursuance of the
task. I believe that each of us could benefit by being a lot
clearer about the roles we take in pursuance of different
tasks, whether our role is that of member of a particular
profession, that of citizen, that of golf club member, or
that of church member. Not that I am suggesting that one
should bring less than the whole person to any task, just
that one should be clear what each task is and which of
one's skills might be called upon. The maintenance of the
authority structures of our professional groups is
dependent on capability to define our roles and to work
collectively in pursuance of the task.
Situations will arise which put us under stress — both
individually and collectively. Under stress we can use our
energy solely for survival — developing power tactics
rather than maintaining our authority by working at the
task. Those operating within an authority structure need
not be afraid of conflict, because they can learn how to
use it. They can bring to the conflict their own capacities
to achieve common goals. A power network can develop
when, in attempting to avoid conflict, our energies are
diverted from die performance of the task and in the
resultant conflict of interests hostile relationships can
develop and can be used for the destruction of other
parties. On the other hand, an authority structure
represents an efficient use of power — that power being
our own personal abilities and capacities.
Having established our authority, we might look at our
professional relationships. Those relationships which
belonged to long-standing forms of service have on the
whole been well thought out — and our various Codes of
Professional Conduct reflect collective experience.
However, many of us find ourselves working within new
systems or relatively new systems. Very many of us find
ourselves in salaried employment. Many of us find
ourselves working in commercial concerns. How are our
professional colleagues supporting us in our task
performance? Are we keeping our colleagues informed
about the kind of stress we experience? Or have our
energies been diverted into survival tactics? Can we learn
how to use conflict, by together using our power, our
capacities, within our authority structure to achieve our
common goal — in our case the maintenance of our
professional standards.
Again, how are our relationships with our fellow
professionals? Sometimes our fellow professionals will be
our employers or our employees. Sometimes we may be
their client. Sometimes the relationship may not be very
close. But in all cases, do we allow them maintain their
authority? Or do we introduce power tactics because we
are experiencing stress — thereby undermining their
authority. Our authority depends on an acceptance of the
inter-dependence of our relationships. Power tactics breed
a hostility in which we use our capacities inefficiently. We
may achieve an objective outside the authority structure.
Our achievement must destroy other interests — and in
the long term we have a dependency on those other
interests. This can apply to the employing professional
person who keeps a professional employee in an
immature dependency and thereby de-skills him. It can
apply to the employee who puts his capacities either into
stealing his employer's clients, or conversely meets his
employer's supposed wishes, rather than in either case
using his capacities in the performance of the given task.
201