Verktækni - 2019, Side 63

63

Figure 2. The building blocks of a profession.

The traditional view of what constitutes a profession has somewhat been modified in recent years.
Muzio et al (2011) pointed out that there are new patterns of professionalization in project
management and related occupations. Such “corporate" professionalization departs in many ways from
the traditional paths. Examples of new features of this corporate professionalization are organizational
membership, client engagement, competence-based closure and internationalization. Konstantinou
(2015) discusses the redefined role of the project practitioner and concludes that due to the situated
nature of project knowledge, the project practitioner can have an important role in defining and
legalizing the knowledge that is important both for the practice and the profession. He points out that
newer professions often operate within large organizations, where work does not strictly involve the
application of predetermined bodies of knowledge, but is rather based on human interaction.

But is project management a profession? Peter Morris and his colleagues discussed what distinguishes
professions from non-professions (Morris, 2006). Based on the assumption that an occupation has
particular ‘traits’ that distinguish it from other occupations, they identified the fundamental
characteristics of professions as having to meet formal educational and entry requirements, as having
autonomy over the terms and conditions of practice, as having a code of ethics, and as having a
commitment to service ideals and a monopoly over a discrete body of knowledge and related skills. It is
their conclusion that project management is a ‘semi-profession’ or ‘emerging profession’ at the
moment, as it draws very little of its legitimacy by reference to/by virtue of its contribution to the public
good, or by adherence to an overarching ethical code (Morris et al, 2006). Although there is a strong
sense of aspiration amongst project management practitioners and their representative associations
towards professional status, this remains a matter of debate, and has been questioned by Zwerman and
Thomas (2001). They maintain that although project management has been moving towards satisfying
various criteria indicative of professional status, it is still some distance away, and achievement will
require significant effort on the part of the professional associations and members. Two key
organizations have attempted to achieve a more unified and global approach—the International Project
Management Association (IPMA) and the Project Management Institute (PMI). A common dilemma for
the project management associations is the fact that recognition of project management as an