The professions are also globalising, largely by following their clients in the business professions and perhaps to a lesser extent as the result of technology. Globalisation is now seen in all the professions, more or less, with some progressing faster than others. The faster ones are those led by business – the locomotive of globalisation. See, for example, the speed and scale of change anticipated in the legal profession in the YouTube clip below.

Given the changing scope and nature of the professions, perhaps it is timely to revisit the notion of professionalism. What is it about the professions that make them so special? Why have they been so consistently esteemed throughout history? Specialised knowledge has always given professionals power over their clients. Balancing the use of this power for individual and public good while meeting their own needs has long created an obligation for professionals to behave ethically. We’ve observed this need for ethics grow stronger as the half-life of specialised knowledge has become shorter with the exponential growth of information in our age.

As such, there are personal and public expectations of the professional based on the assumption that a professional is motivated by something other than raw gain. This is even an expectation of business professionals, whose explicit raison d’être is to make a profit. When a company promotes its paper as being made from recycled material or that no animal testing was done on its products, the public is reassured. The public is also reassured when a corporation’s CEO contributes to charity. They are less reassured when he or she flaunts wealth in ways reminiscent of a Roman bacchanalian banquet. Professionals, because they are professionals, are expected to have some sense of the larger picture of life – some sense of responsibility to the whole of society and humanity, a certain degree of altruism, a certain amount of selfless service.

But the internet, diminution of self-employment, and erosion of public trust are beginning to threaten the future of professionalism. Indeed, it has been argued that while professionalism, at present, seems to be holding its own, it may ultimately lose out to organisations. In its study of British professionalism, Spada – a UK research and communications consultancy – identified several other threats as well, including consumerism, the desire for instant gratification, lessening client loyalty, declining deference to and respect for authority, increasing media scrutiny and growing regulation. But Spada cite ethics, or the ‘real or perceived lack of ethical standards’ among the professions to be the ‘most serious of threats’ to the future of professionalism, asserting that ‘even more than the high-quality provision of services, professional ethics are paramount to maintaining the public trust’.

It is of some concern, then, that in his book The Creation and Destruction of Value: The Globalization Cycle, Princeton economic historian, Harold James, argues that the greatest danger of the current financial crisis is not the destruction of wealth but the destruction of value in the moral sense: the erosion of trust. There is an uncertainty about values, such that people wonder if the rules of the game still hold. Likening current times to the bank failures of 1931, James says people are once again drawing back from institutions out of mistrust: ‘Ethical questions have become again absolutely central…We are back in a world in which trust is a virtue that is required as a logical precondition of being an effective participant in markets’.

This requirement for trust unquestionably applies to the professions. The Josephson Institute Report 2004 found that 80 per cent of people make their decision to buy from a corporation or firm based upon what they perceive about its ethics. Seventy-four percent of people said they only buy shares in a company known to be ethical. Although there is a great deal of trust vested in the professions simply because they are professions, if individuals within them prove themselves unworthy of trust, it will reflect on the profession itself.

Trust is especially important in an increasingly transparent world where a damaging reputation can be flashed across the globe via the internet in a few minutes. Professionals do not escape unscathed the power of media like the internet to make or break the reputation of themselves and their profession. Erosion of trust due to unethical conduct can go viral in the wink of an eye.

Within this context, then, can the professions remain relevant – even credible and esteemed – in today’s world?

I argue, yes. Those with a true understanding of professionalism appreciate that its essence is its integrity – a sense of being beholden to use its asymmetrical knowledge and attendant power for the greater good of humanity and in service of truth. To continue to exist with integrity (and perhaps to exist at all), the professional must be attached to a transcendent ideal in order to overcome both the forces within professionalism itself – pressures to further the profession’s own prestige and profits – and the forces of organisations.

According to the Spada report, it is this attachment to a higher ideal – even more so than safeguarding knowledge and skill – that will assure the independence and longevity of any given profession. As long as professionals and professions hold onto their integrity – even and especially in an age of globalisation – they will not only survive and flourish, but professionalism will fulfil its role in serving humanity. As such, professionalism is not only relevant in today’s world: it is indispensable. The question arises, what do your actions say about you as a professional? And more to the point, how do they help or hinder the survival of the professions as a whole?

George Beaton has been the consummate professional for many years, from his time as a medical doctor through to his current roles as Executive Chairman of Beaton, a leading global research and consultancy for professional services firms, and Executive Director of WellmarkPerspexa, a marketing communications firm specialising in the B2B, healthcare and corporate sectors.

Click here to download his major thought-leadership essay on this subject.

Downsizing is currently associated with the recessionary times, but it is no stranger during more stable periods. It’s an unfortunate fact of life during mergers and acquisitions, and when new ways are introduced to reduce cost, such as off-shoring and technology substitution for labour. Downsizing is always a possibility in any organisation.

As a traumatic event that is feared by all, nothing can take away the angst and anger associated when it occurs (for whatever reason). That said, both employers and employees cope better with downsizing when they are prepared for the eventuality. The critical part of being prepared for downsizing is thinking through the rights of the stakeholders. Rights that apply in downsizing situations apply to the employees, the managers involved, and the employer.

What are these rights?

For employees, they include the right to be psychologically safe, to be informed, to choose how their departure is communicated, and to be heard.

For managers, they include the right to be heard, to have their decisions respected, and to be supported in executing difficult tasks.

For the organisation, the main right is to remain viable and thereby continue to meet the needs of customers, continuing employees and investors.

So, what can employers do to retain the trust of staff? Critical to preparation is an obligation to tell the truth. Consider these questions:

• Does the organisation publish a set of ‘vital signs’ that are available to interested employees? Is it clear at what point employment may become endangered? Is the possibility (not the specifics) of a pending merger or acquisition known to employees? Is a minimum notification period for termination known by all?
• Is counselling available upon notice of termination? Is on- or off-site outplacement assistance provided? Has provision been made to provide references and information that might facilitate job search?
• Was notice communicated directly and personally, by the appropriate staff member, to each affected person? Was the rationale for the layoff explained?
• Are employees encouraged to enhance their skills in an ongoing way? Does the company share the cost or pay in full for training? Ethically speaking, employability is a two-way street. The individual is ultimately responsible for ensuring the marketability of his or her personal labour. And every employer who profits from this labour shares that responsibility.

If management is sensitive to the moral issues associated with reductions, the probability that justice and compassion will accompany any downsizing decision is enhanced. The absence of ethical reflection signals danger ahead for individual dignity and institutional integrity in a corporate culture where lean all too easily translates to mean, and where management, if inattentive, can lose its moral compass.

In essence, true leadership means following one’s true north even during difficult times. The current financial crisis has tested us all. As the business community begins to recruit and replace those who were lost, it’s perhaps an ideal moment for organisations to reflect on how well they treated their employees – immediate past and present – during recent times. Let us know how you think you scored.

George Beaton is an Executive Chairman and Director who believes in business sustainability in the broadest sense, encouraging organisations to think and act for the long term, and answer the growing call for greater transparency in the corporate world.