Toward a critical, feminist sociology of expertise

Brady, Jennifer

doi:10.1093/jpo/joy004

Cited by 20 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this context, I wonder whether the example of normative occupations such as CSR should encourage a rethinking of categories such as professionalism or professionals as these have been traditionally understood. I'm thinking about the works of Eyal (2013), also Brady (2018), which suggest we should not focus on experts, but on their expertise, regardless of who controls this, and on the network relationships linking the actors, institutional contexts, practises and technologies through which this expertise is actually put in place.…”

Section: R E T H I N K I N G P R O F E S S I O N a L I Z A T I O Nmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The case of CSR also shows how a common normative goal can serve as a sufficient uniting force for emerging professions (Windell 2010;Risi and Wickert 2017). In this sense, CSR can be described as a collaborative occupation, in which, professionalization relies more on solidarity, collegiality, and cooperation (even with other professions) (Adler, Kwon, and Heckscher 2008;Brady 2018). This is in opposition to our view of traditional accounts of professions as 'self-interested cartels' in the sociology of professions (Johnson 1972), where the professionalization dynamic is more about hierarchy and closure over a well-delineated professional jurisdiction (Suddaby and Muzio 2015).…”

Section: R E T H I N K I N G P R O F E S S I O N a L I Z A T I O Nmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rethinking professionalization: A generative dialogue on CSR practitioners1

Brès

Mosonyi

Gond

et al. 2019

Journal of Professions and Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies of emerging professions are more and more at the crossroad of different fields of research, and field boundaries thus hamper the development of a full-fledged conversation. In an attempt to bridge these boundaries, this article offers a ‘generative dialogue’ about the redefinition of the professionalization project through the case of corporate social responsibility (CSR) practitioners. We bring together prominent scholars from two distinct academic communities—CSR and the professions—to shed light on some of the unsolved questions and dilemmas around contemporary professionalization through an example of an emerging profession. Key learnings from this dialogue point us toward the rethinking of processes of professionalization, in particular the role of expertise, the unifying force of common normative goals, and collaborative practises between networks of stakeholders. As such, we expand the research agenda for scholars of the professions and of CSR.

show abstract

Section: R E T H I N K I N G P R O F E S S I O N a L I Z A T I O Nmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: R E T H I N K I N G P R O F E S S I O N a L I Z A T I O Nmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking professionalization: A generative dialogue on CSR practitioners1

Brès

Mosonyi

Gond

et al. 2019

Journal of Professions and Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Power governs accessibility of knowledge in a cycle of mutual constitution; those 'with power' are the ones who are afforded access to knowledge, and thus act as gatekeepers to other audiences. However, when shifting towards a Foucauldian notion of power -where the focus for analysis is distanced from professional status and more towards the current paper's understandings of expertise as dialogic, and socially agreedit is evident that expertise is situated in a network of power, and this must be acknowledged when building bridges between researchers and community spaces (Brady, 2018). Thus, practitioners should be consciously reflective about how relationships are achieved and in what contexts.…”

Section: Power Credibility and Intersectionalitymentioning

confidence: 88%

The Expertise Paradox: Opportunities and Challenges of a Public Psychology Framework

Om¹,

Pownall²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public psychology is concerned with embedding meaningful connections between the public and psychologists. However, there may be tensions between experientially afforded ‘lived experience’ and conventional understanding of ‘expertise’ that must be navigated thoughtfully between lay audiences and psychologists. In this paper, we critically assess how the often ill-defined concept of conventional expertise may or may not be compatible with a framework of psychology that positions science and society as equally credible agents. We will use this core discussion to argue that a public psychology framework, and its inherent attempts to relocate power and voice within knowledge to members of wider society, may prompt us to rethink the notion of expertise. We argue that by reappraising concepts relating to expertise, scientific progress and impact can be made across the discipline. We conclude with a consideration of how these tensions can be eased; namely, through more embodied partnerships between society and science, such as participatory research methods, a fundamental reappraisal of what constitutes knowledge and expertise within the discipline, and an ongoing concern for intersectionality.

show abstract

“…The history of dietetics as a profession began with its initial housing in the field of Home Economics in the late nineteenth century, and included mostly women at the time (Brady, 2018). Thereafter, dietetics arose as an independent profession in the twentieth century (Brady, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%