DOMINIOS Y PROCESOS

This section will explore the link between occupation as a referent o f class position and as a determinant o f individual identity. The specific concern is the question whether social identity is a phenomenon which operates at some pre-reflexive internalized level, as per Bourdieu’s notion o f habitus, or is it formed through socialisation processes occurring at the level o f the workplace or institution ? That is, does identity have anything to do with the everyday experience o f working in an occupation deemed to be a ‘profession’, other than in the most rudimentary sense of determining the type o f occupation a person is likely to gravitate towards. Or do occupational cultures, and specifically the ideology o f professionalisation, directly shape the identities o f social agents such as nurses ? This question therefore reflects the traditional sociological dualism of structure versus agency.

Until the late 1960s, the sociology o f the professions continued to be dominated by a functionalist assessment o f professional roles which was in large part influenced by Durkheim’s notion o f the ‘professional association’ and the personal service ethic. This was the idea that division o f labour and occupational groups formed the moral basis o f modem society and that the professions in particular embodied a set of normative ethical values which Durkheim believed gave them a moral authority. The clear implication is that individual professionals somehow embodied these virtues in their everyday practice and that therefore there was an individual identification with these values. However, this professional ‘traits’ approach was largely abandoned with the recognition that such authority derived less fi"om establishing an ethical high ground and more fi*om a collective pursuit o f power, the ‘professionalisation project’ discussed above.

Wilmott’s (1990) ‘materialist theory o f subjectivity’ focuses on the symbolic aspects o f people’s existence and the central role played by work in the formation of identities. This approach reflects the attempt to revitalise ‘labour process theory’ which had become bogged down in discussions around the efficaciousness of Braverman’s (1974) de-skilling thesis (discussed above). Wilmott’s recognition of symbolic identities does not deny the essential subjugation and exploitation of labour power (in the form o f wage labour) within capitalist relations o f commodity

production. Rather, this position seeks to develop Marx’s dialectical understanding of the way in which individual and social development occurs through the application of human capabilities or ‘senses’ in the act of production. Nevertheless, the formation of self-identity through labour is seen to reflect the ideological contradictions o f the exploitative relations o f capitalist production:

“ In a way which parallels the fetishism o f commodities, where the social characteristics o f human labour take on the appearance o f ‘objective characteristics o f the products o f labour themselves' (Marx: Capital Vol 1), the fetishism o f identity disregards the social processes through which identity formation and reproduction are accomplished ” (Willmott: 1990:355 -

emphasis in original).

Whilst the formation o f such ‘fetishised’ identities may well have the effect o f subjugating individuals, it does not then follow (as some have mistakenly accused Marx o f implying) that individuals have an instrumental view o f their ‘labour power’ as purely a means o f acquiring the means o f subsistence. This would be to ignore the valued, symbolic aspects of occupational identity which people will both defend and seek to enhance; even though, following Marx, it is against their class interest to do so. All this is by way o f making the point that, whilst the Weberian action-orientated approach may be compelling in accounting for the professionalisation strategies adopted by occupational groups such as nursing, the contradictions inherent in the class relationship o f work and production necessarily bring social structure back into an account o f social actors’ occupational roles and identities. The so-called ‘service ethic’ adopted by public sector occupations such as nursing and social work sits uncomfortably with the realities o f such work, which is generally characterised by poor financial rewards, less than satisfactory working conditions, and rigid hierarchies. However, as will be discussed below, such a service-orientated identity is often freely adopted by nurses, and this may be cited as an example o f both altruistic behaviour and occupational identity fetishism. As Willmott has argued (in contradistinction to the position o f Savage discussed above), the individualised ‘career’ is not some new social phenomenon. The ultimately ‘self-defeating’ search for security in a coherent identity has long been encouraged and sponsored through the ‘individualised institution’ known as the ‘career’ in the capitalist mode of production. This is an individualising strategy which only succeeds in reproducing the power o f others (Wilmott: 1990:369).

From a different epistemological position, the work of Bourdieu has been o f particular influence in studies o f the relationship between class and identity. For Bourdieu (1990), culture is seen as a ‘field’ in which class relations operate but which is not itself a product o f socio-economic class relations. Bourdieu’s concerns were with the social character o f individualisation and with the socially constructed ways in which individuals distinguish themselves or put distance between themselves and others as a result o f occupying a different class ‘habitus’ that produces different cultural ‘dispositions’. However, these internalised social distinctions may not always be apparent to the individuals themselves, manifesting themselves in a lack o f class awareness, something that is often demonstrated in social attitudinal surveys. Bourdieu does not see class cultures as collectively uniting people but as something with the potential to mark individuals out because o f their taste, demeanour, etc. In this sense, class is something to be denied. Bourdieu’s (1990) argument is that, whilst class continues to be a powerful factor in the formation o f identity, a habitus produces forms o f individuality but does not necessarily produce values held in common by members o f some specific socio-economic occupational class. Savage has attempted to apply at least elements o f Bourdieu’s analysis to the ‘British context’, concluding that : '"''Professional identities are the most salient o f any contemporary class-like identifier. People voluntarily identify as being ‘professionals', or espouse the idea that people should act 'professionally' ” (2000:157). Nevertheless, for Savage, the continuing importance of the notion o f ‘professionalism’ is less about the importance of cultural and social hierarchical structures (as it is for Bourdieu) than about a notion o f the self as engaging in a form o f reflexive individualism. The latter is a conception that also appears in the work o f both Giddens and Beck.

Martin (1998) has also sought to develop the notion o f identity in relation to ‘new middle class’ groups. Like Savage (2000), he argues that the traditional model o f the ‘professionalisation project’ is much less applicable in a more unstable (neo-liberal) labour market for middle class skills and knowledge. He rejects the idea o f identity in relation to occupation as formed through a collective set o f norms, arising in the case o f professionals out o f a sense of ‘vocation’ and commitment to a ‘collegial community’. Martin argues that, for the ‘new middle classes’ (following Savage:2000), identity is built upon a personal reflexive project. Here, Martin utilises

a ‘narrative approach’ when defining the concept o f identity, which includes ongoing individual accomplishments or ‘autobiographical narrative’, in combination with wider ‘public narratives’ connected to ‘cultural and institutional formations’. Martin’s understanding o f social identity reflects something o f Bourdieu’s notion o f class habitus in that, generally speaking, much o f the social action we engage in is seen to be ‘habituated’, with identity not essential for all social action. However, identities are ultimately fimdamental to action because they provide “ .. .both the reference point fo r evaluation o f action when reasons fo r action are sought, and the emotional source o f motivations fo r new forms o f action ” (Martin: 1998:669). In particular, identities are seen to provide the crucial link between types o f knowledge and labour market structures. They act to ‘guide’ and motivate the new middle class groups in developing the distinctiveness o f their particular types o f knowledge and skills. The approach adopted is thus a kind o f individualised ‘social action’ that is used to explain how, when faced by a changing labour market and demands for new patterns o f working, these new middle class groups have been able to respond by drawing upon a particular set o f ‘meta norms’. These are not shared norms or identities but a sharing o f values concerning the importance of the ‘project o f self formation’ and associated forms o f knowledge, and they are mobilised in order to modify the institutional demands o f the labour market.

This approach shares some o f the limitations identified in relation to Savage’s (2000) work. First, it plays down the existence o f very real structural limitations to modifying institutions. Second, it does not satisfactorily explain why collective occupational socialisation has ceased to be significant in the formation of social identities. That is, the collective character that marked the developmental model for the traditional professional groups is somehow no longer applicable (significantly, the example o f a new middle class ‘profession’ cited is that o f IT consultant). Third, it does not discuss whether an individual’s pre-employment ‘identity narrative’ or ‘project o f the se lf (the influence of Giddens is acknowledged by the author) is at all determinate in the type o f occupation that is ultimately taken up, as it is for example in the work o f Bourdieu. Nevertheless, the work o f both Savage (2000) and Martin (1998) seeks to examine the ways in which middle class occupations are responding to changing institutional demands upon traditional middle class professional knowledge and ways o f working. Utilising an analysis based around the ‘micro-foundations’ o f class and

employing the notion o f identity (although this is over-individualised), this approach does potentially offer one way o f exploring the ways in which nurses have responded to the changing institutional demands and (internal) labour market o f the NHS. Nursing certainly does not appear to correspond to Martin’s notion o f an emerging new middle class group or fit in with Savage’s notion of the individualised ‘career’. However, unlike medicine, nursing is not a traditional profession and thus certainly requires an analytical approach that goes beyond traditional professionalisation models.

The question o f whether a relationship continues to exist between an occupational identity and a particular notion o f public service, if discussed purely in terms of a Durkheimian set o f professional ethics involving a shared altruism, is probably no longer o f contemporary relevance. However, if notions o f ‘public service’ are seen in terms o f an occupational commitment to the acquiring o f ‘people-centred skills’, then this form o f ‘emotional work’, as it has been termed (James: 1989), and the ways in which it becomes embedded in organisational and professional relationships may well continue to be relevant to an understanding o f professional and occupational identities. This particular approach has been widely adopted in discussions of the work and identity o f the ‘caring professions’, such as nursing and social work.