The Gazette 1977

DECEMBER 1977

GAZE1TE

FEDERATION OF PROFESIONAL ASSOCIATIONS Address by the President to the Association's Annual General Meeting 5th May, 1977

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

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