M
elos
Institute
Research Findings Series
Associations Research Series
Professions and Their Associations
A Symbiotic Relationship
by
James R. Hudson, Ph.D.
Patricia A. Hudson, MPsSc, CAE
Abstract
In analyzing how an occupation becomes a profession, sociologists often include the
presence of a professional association as one element in the process. What has not yet been
analyzed to any extent are the motives that prompt their emergence of these associations
and the functions they serve for the profession and for their members.
Professions have a number of components: practitioners, educational and training
institutions, associations, governmental regulatory agencies, research centers, all which
makes the profession amorphous. Professional associations, by contrast, are concrete entities
with a physical location, budgets, eligibility requirements and other paraphernalia of a formal
organization. This raises the question of just what is the relationship between a profession
and their associations. That is the subject of this investigation.
Using the published histories of sixty-eight professional associations, we found that they
emerge when professionals are face with threats and challenges that jeopardize their
occupational effectiveness. These associations perform five functions for their respective
professions: boundary maintenance; boundary protection; legitimation of the profession;
knowledge management; and professional status. We conclude that these functions create a
symbiotic relationship between professions and their associations.
The Melos Institute thanks the Center for Excellence in Association Leadership for contributing this work
to the Institute’s body of knowledge.
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
2
Professions and Their Associations:
A Symbiotic Relationship
Sociologists have long studied the process by which an
occupation becomes a profession (Abbott 1988; Caplow
1954; Goode 1973; Wilen-sky 1964). Models that have
been suggested include such elements as a recognized
place in the division of labor; adequately compensated
full-time employment; a developed body of know-ledge;
a mastery of that knowledge through training; a formalization of that training into a curriculum by an accredited college or university; and in some cases the
establishment of state licensure as a requirement to
practice.
While these models differ in significant ways, each
includes two elements central to our investigation:
ƒ
ƒ
the development of a body of knowledge that
defines the profession’s domain
the establishment of a professional association
that serves the interests of its members
An implicit assumption made in these studies, as Goode
notes, is that the “profession itself helps to create,
organize, and transmit the [profess-ional] knowledge”
(1973:355). From this perspective, the functions of the
organization are divorced from any particular
organization or body of actors. The concept of a
profession in this context is quite amorphous.
What has not been clearly defined in any of the current
literature is where, how, and by whom this professional
knowledge will be created, organized, and transmitted,
or how it will be judged for its validity and reliability. If
professionalization occurs with the formalization of
information, then who is responsible for the
identification, compilation, analysis, and dissemination
of this information?
We surmised that this is the role of the professional
association -- through strategies that include but are
not limited to training, curriculum development,
publications, and the development of standards.
Given the significance that professional assoc-iations
have in the transformation of the profession, and their
subsequent role as a legitimating agent, we actually
know very little about these organizations with
exception of
their efforts in the political arena (Wilson 1995; Brint
1994; Haber 1991). Abbott effectively argues that we
need to understand how pro-fessions gain and maintain
jurisdiction over their disciplines, and just where and
how these claims are made (1988:59-85).
Political advocacy and efforts to gain jurisdiction are
two functions that professional associations provide for
their members. As our investigation of these
organizations unfolded, we learned that political
advocacy and jurisdictional disputes were not their
most essential functions. We found that volunteer and
staff leaders were constantly striving to engage their
members in a host of other functions to support the
associations’ vision and mission. We suspected that
these actions were contributing to the advancement of
the profession represented. We wanted to know
whether the presence of professional associations has
been a given in the studies of professionalization.
We did not find in the research any studies to support
an understanding of how these organizations began,
who was involved in the beginning, and how they
gained legitimacy for a given profession. Instead,
professional associations are presented as operating
organizations, with little to suggest how they achieved
their respected place in our society.
The lack of any substantive research in this area of
development has created a gap in the literature, one
that requires a fresh look at two important issues:
ƒ
ƒ
the relationship that exists between a profession
and its related association(s)
the critical functions these organizations perform
that contribute to the profession’s ongoing
development and sustainability
To investigate these issues, our research examined the
social dynamics involved in the emergence of a
professional organization and how the organization
overcame “the liability of newness” that Stinchcombe
identified (1965): 148-150).
Methodology
The study presented here is part of a larger
investigation that includes trade associations (for
example, the National Hardwood Association and the
National Cattlemen’s Beef Association) and personal
interest associations (for example, the Fancy Rat and
Mouse Association and the Auto-mobile License Plate
Collectors Association), in additional to professional
ones. A significant amount of the data being collected is
taken from their published histories. Since no
comprehensive list of association histories exist, we
used several techniques to find and obtain the histories
in our data base.
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
First, as part of our work with professional, trade, and
personal interest associations we routinely obtained a
number of their published documents including their
history, if one existed. Secondly, in our meetings with
volunteers and staff of other professional, trade, and
personal interest associations we routinely asked if their
organizations had a history or if they knew of an
association that might have once. We followed these
leads with a certain level of success. Third, we were
alert to and followed up with references in the media to
associations that might be included in our on-going
research project. Fourth, we assumed that some
prominent national associations with long tenure
probably had a published history and used several
standard references to either find them or contact the
associations directly. Finally, we used the Internet to
hunt for books and journals that we could not obtain
from other sources.
Using these various techniques we now have sixty-eight
histories of professional associations on file, fifty-nine
national and nine regional or local. Future research will
incorporate the histories of trade and personal interest
associations.
Each of these histories celebrated some anniversary of
the association, in one case its first decade (Brooks
1947) and, in another, 150 years (Kohlstedt et al.
1999). All of those included in this investigation have
been sanctioned and supported by the associations
themselves in one way or another. In some instances it
is very clear that authors did not have financial support
(see Wisely 1974, Fernberger, 1932; Saylor, 1957),
while others did (Sinclair, 1980; Kohlstedt et al, 1999).
In the acknowledgements or preface, the author(s)
thank the association for its cooper-ation in providing
access to documents, records, and files. These histories
were published as books (for example, Fishbein 1947;
Pauly 1987; McCluggage 1959) or as special issues of
their official journals (for example, Morley, 1966;
Fernberger 1932; SAE Journal, 1930).
As we collected and read these, we established
categories to organize our note taking that would
enable us to identify and analyze patterns. While every
history is unique, a good deal of the same kind of
information is found in each, for example, the founding
date(s), the number of founders, rational for founding,
eligibility requirements, dues and so forth. In addition,
some idiosyncratic information is often included that
shed light on certain aspects of their development, for
example, when the first staff member was hired, how
they socialized and bonded at conventions and other
events, and decisions about admitting minorities. When
these data were assembled, it was possible to paint in
some very broad strokes the general patterns that
became the basis of this analysis.
2
In a number of cases we were able to supplement the
material in these histories. Some professional
associations have librarians and archivists who were
very helpful in answering our queries and in several
cases steered us to other histories.
How Associations Emerge
A professional association is just one example of the
vast array of voluntary and nonprofit organizations
operating in our society (Powell 1987). In 1835 Alexis
de Tocqueville first described this type of organization
in Democracy in America, noting our penchant for
creating voluntary associations to solve common,
collective social problems. When and how these
organizations emerge and just what functions they
perform in our society has engaged social analysts ever
since, resulting in a proliferation of case studies,
theories, and speculations about why and how
voluntary organizations emerge. While this may seem
to contradict an earlier statement about these
organizations, it remains true that professional
associations as a unique population have not been
analyzed.
A common thread in these investigations is some sort
of social disruption that motivates those affected to
create a new organization. To test this proposition,
scholars have examined a wide range of these
disruptive forces, including war, depression, revolution,
urbanization, ecological disaster, and technological
innovations. The effects of these disruptions have been
linked to an array of social dynamics affecting our
society, some sudden and brief, others that fester for
years before producing rips in the social fabric.
Whatever the source of the change and the
restlessness it causes, the result is often the creation of
a new organization. (For a sampling of this literature,
see Brint 1994; Diamond 2005; Haber 1991; Rothstein
1985; Schlesinger 1933; Skocpol 1999; Stinchcombe
1965; Warren 2001; Webb 2003; Wiebe 1967; Wilson
1995.)
Stinchcombe provides a list of motivations that is useful
in understanding the emergence of organizations in
general (1965:146-148), and Aldrich has added
additional insight on this process for entrepreneurs
(2000:75-112). Hawley has offered a theoretical
perspective on the emergence of a general class of
organizations that he calls categoric groups (1950:210;
1986: 70-73). These are formed among individuals who
share a common identity and who believe they are
threatened or challenged; they respond by creating an
organization. The existence of threats and challenges is
a necessary condition for organizing, but not
necessarily sufficient, as Shaw (1996) points out in her
study of the failed attempts of black professional
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
women during the Jim Crow era to build professional
associations. Hawley goes on to argue that this
response has particular salience when these threats
and challenges, if not promptly addressed, “might
impair or eliminate the sustenance base of the
individuals involved” (Hawley 1950:218). He then adds:
“These are usually the most highly skilled occupations
which are often so specialized that the individuals
committed to them cannot readily shift to other
occupations,” and he mentions professions in general
as one such occupational group (1950:218).
Threats or Challenges as a Motive
An examination of these two possible motives, threats
or challenges, is a good place to begin understanding
the relationship between a profession and its
association(s) because they illustrate the social
dynamics involved. A threat is any disruption that
impairs the ability of an individual to achieve
sustainability. A common threat faced by those involved
in emerging professions is a lack of respect for their
integrity, skills, knowledge, and ability to perform the
services that they claim as their special domain -- a
threat that has the potential to halt the advancement of
the profession. In most cases, there was an obvious
need to gain recognition and legitimacy. In some
instances those engaged in such occupations are
regarded as quacks, charlatans, or frauds -- and often
with good cause, as some histories reveal (Evans et al.
1992; Fishbein 1947; Haber 1991; McCluggage 1959).
This threat is often coupled with the fear that the
profession will be flooded by those who make claims to
professional competence without the training or
experience necessary. When those in a profession are
not afforded the respect, their ability to claim legitimacy
is undermined, as Suchman (1995) and Scott (2001:5861) have discussed.
Challenges, on the other hand, are obstacles that
impede the orderly development of the association.
These are divided into internal and external challenges.
For example, internal challenges involve developing a
functioning organization with sufficient resources to
provide adequate services to the members; recruiting
new members who are willing to take on responsibilities to support the organization; and finding a physical
space to locate the organization’s offices and records.
The most common external challenge is gaining respect
from other professionals, from the public and other
important audiences.
Distinguishing between threats and challenges is
sometimes difficult because the terms tend to be used
synonymously and the language in the association
histories reviewed was sometimes ambiguous.
Nonetheless, a sense of the determination of those
involved is clear, as well as the threat or the challenge
faced in the association’s formative years. The passion
3
and zeal exhibited by association founders is apparent
in the following quotations.
American Association for the Advancement of
Science
“Advancing science was not easy in a culture in which
scientific pursuit was not obviously or universally
valued and in which there was only a small scientific
brotherhood.” (Kohlstedt et al. 1999:1)
American Associations of Anatomists
“Someone had to have the courage and ambition to
remove anatomy from the position of surgical
footstool that it temporarily held in America and
bestow upon it the dignity it deserved as the mother
of all biological sciences.” (Pauly 1987:18)
Society of Actuaries
“As deserts are more comfortably crossed by
caravans than by solitary pilgrims, so the dry
wearisomeness of the almost illimitable statistics
required to perfect the business of Insurance may be
relieved by sound co-operation.” (Moorehead 1989)
American Institute of Chemical Engineers
“The early history of the American Institute of
Chemical Engineering was dominated by two
problems -- establishing exactly what chemical
engineering was and establishing the legitimacy of
chemical engineering as an independent discipline.”
(Reynolds 1983:1)
American Sociological Association
“Sociologists have been so largely accustomed to
working along divergent lines, and so frequently hold
radically different views, that there seems to be
peculiar justification for some sort of organization
which would bring together at regular intervals those
interested in some group of problems, permit an
interchange of ideas and comparisons of projects
which in other fields of knowledge has so frequently
contributed to the advancement of science.”
(Rhoades 1981:2)
Gay and Lesbian Medical Association
“Founded in 1981, GLMA works to combat
homophobia within the medical profession and
society at large; to promote quality health for LGBT
[Lesbians, Gays, Bi-sexuals and Transgender] and
HIV-positive people; to foster a professional climate
in which our diverse members can achieve their full
potential; and to support members challenged by
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.”
(Gay and Lesbian Medical Association website 2006)
While founding members were willing to address
threats that endangered their very existence, they also
recognized the importance of securing acceptance from
the general society. On a personal level, members were
concerned that their status in the community was not
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
commensurate with their contribution. Nor was their
contribution considered as those offering similar
services. Their occupation had yet to be taken seriously
within the broader community. Strong feelings emerged
among those involved that their livelihood was tenuous.
To gain the respect, those involved would need to
demonstrate a collective level of competence that could
only be achieved through information exchange.
Creating an organizational structure was a major
challenge in and of itself. Founding members realized
that the profession could not advance rapidly unless
some means of sharing information was not only
established but also institutionalized within the
organization. The founders of these associations were
quite self-conscious that a systematic way to diffuse
information was a key to the profession’s progress.
They intuitively recognized, as Rogers has
demonstrated (1965), how sharing information can
produce social change.
The American Chemical Society
“It is believed that such a Society in the country
would prove a powerful and healthy stimulus to
original research among us, and it would awaken and
develop talent now wasting in isolation, besides
bringing the members of the association into closer
union and ensuring a better appreciation of our
science and its students on the part of the general
public.” Skolnik and Reese (1976:5)
American Bankers Association
“In their correspondence these seventeen men
agreed to meet in New York City, at Barnum’s Hotel,
on May 24, 1875, and put their heads and hearts
together to bring into union of business interest and
hearty affection the bankers of our country for a
better bankerhood and nobler manhood.”
(Proceedings 1895:75)
For many founding members, their passion was to
define the parameters of an emerging profession. For
those who are not on the cutting edge of a changing
profession, this dynamic may be hard to understand.
Consider a world in which no nomenclature exists for
tools, parts, or techniques, and every step or process
needs a word and a definition. Those involved in
founding these organizations were actively working at a
time when clarity and consistency were lacking. They
were willing to shape the profession for those who
would follow.
No organization was formed solely for altruistic reasons.
While altruistic outcomes through involvement would
occur later, it was not sufficient for individuals to
volunteer a significant amount of time to bring
colleagues together and then create a formal
4
organizational structure to ensure that the opportunities
would be sustainable for others.
Discrimination as a Motive
Membership during an organization’s formative years
was often less a function of professional qualifications
than of race, gender, ethnicity, religion (Following the
Great Physician 2002; Perry 1975; Shaw 1996). Those
denied member-ship in existing professional associations responded to this challenge by establishing
their own organization with a specific emphasis on race,
gender, or ethnicity. They then sought to recruit others
who experienced the same discrimination.
Table 1 suggests how the criteria for membership often
went beyond the explicit professional eligibility
requirements. Discrimination in some cases was quite
intentional and reflected the cultural norms at the time
of the association’s founding. And once institutionalized,
the organization’s culture often perpetuated such
values to retain its initial homogeneity as it pertained to
race, gender, and ethnicity. This dynamic continues to
operate in some organizations to this day. Engaging in
this behavior, even unintentionally, limits the
organization’s ability to reflect the diversity that exists
within the profession. When others with the commonly
recognized credentials to practice a profession are
denied membership, the organization’s claim to moral
legitimacy, as Suchman defined it (1995: 579-80), is
also limited, and this discrimination most certainly
undermines the organization’s exclusive jurisdiction
within a profession.
Table 1
Minority Response to Established Associations
Accounting
American Accounting Association (1916)
American Women’s Society of Certified Public Accountants (1933)
American Society of Women Accountants (1938)
National Association of Black Accountants (1969)
American Association of Hispanic CPAs (1972)
Asian American Certified Public Accountants (1979)
Broadcasting
National Association of Broadcasters (1922)
National Associations of Farm Broadcasters (1944)
American Women in Radio and Television (1951)
National Association of Black Owned Broadcasters (1976)
Women in Cable and Telecommunications (1979)
National Association of African-American Sportswriters and
Broadcasters (1994)
Architecture
American Institute of Architects (1857)
National Organization of Minority Architects (1971)
American Indian Council of Architects and Engineers (1976)
Asian American Architects and Engineers (1978)
Medicine
American Medical Association (1847)
National Medical Association (1895) (African-American)
American Medical Women’s Association (1915)
Chinese American Medical Association (1962)
Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People in Medicine (1976)
The minority response to association discrimination
reflects the changing social organization in our society.
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
Such exclusion is debilitating to personal and
professional growth, and provides the needed stimulus
to form a new association (Shaw 1996; Perry 1975).
The new association is then able to provide support and
services to those in the profession who have been
excluded because of some social characteristic not
related to their skills, abilities, or qualifications.
5
like Birdsall, had experiences in other similar and
successful groups. Not only did they understand the
roles that were needed in such voluntary associations,
but they also probably had performed them. Table 2
presents a sample of the founders’ credentials at the
time of the association’s founding.
Table 2
Founders and Their Professional Achievements: 1847-1905
How Organizations Are Sustained
Association founders in our study were experienced and
knowledgeable about organizational development. They
were not neophytes in the profession, and they realized
that a number of obstacles needed to be overcome to
build a new organization. Several histories included
references to earlier failures to organize an association. Thus cautioned, they proceeded to guard
against repeating past mistakes with a number of
strategies and tactics. They also recognized that early
efforts were beneficial, but not adequate for the
changes in the profession.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
“And mechanical engineers in the 1880 were not
without associations for social purposes and friendly
communications of practical information from
personal experience….None of these other
institutions were capable of projecting a national role
for mechanical engineers, however, and in the period
around 1880 there were powerful motives to organize
the field along those broad lines” (Sinclair 1980:25).
American Society of Dental Surgeons
“The movement to supersede the American Society
(of Dental Surgeons) with a new and different
organization found its leadership within the ranks of
the Society itself….The need now…. was to broaden
the base of operations, to reorganize the national
association of dentists to make it comprehensive and
representative of the whole professional talent of the
nation.” (McCluggage 1959:103).
E. T. Birdsall, a founder of the Society of Auto-motive
Engineers, describes his background and experiences.
“Having been somewhat of an organizer of college
clubs, yacht clubs and sundry other collections of
individuals, which uniformly died sooner or later,
usually sooner, of financial insufficiency, I was
loath to add another to the list.” (Birdsall. SAE
Journal. 1930: 694).
Birdsall’s self-mockery reflects the problem that
Stinchcombe (1965) identified as the “liability of
newness.” Stinchcombe argues that new organizations,
and especially new types of organizations, demand new
roles. The founders of these organizations, however,
Association
Founder
Professional Achievements
American Medical
Association,
Nathaniel Chapman
Editor of American Journal of Medical
Sciences, President of the Philadelphia
Medical Society, President of American
Philosophical Society
Alexander H.
Stevens
Surgeon and teacher (New York),
graduated Yale at 18; father
participated in Boston Tea Party
James Laurie
Founder of the Boston Society of Civil
Engineers
1848
American Society
of Civil Engineers,
1852
Alfred W. Craven
American Library
Association,
Melvil Dewey
1876
John Langdon
Sibley
American Chemical
Society, 1876
John William
Draper
Charles Fredrick
Chandler
American Society
of Mechanical
Engineers,
1880
American
Psychological
Association,
1892
Francis A. Pratt
Henry R.
Worthington
G. Stanley Hall
Chief Engineer, Croton Aqueduct
Department (New York)
Inventor of the Dewey Decimal System,
Library Director of Columbia College
(New York)
Director, Harvard College Library
Published widely in the field, in 1838
became professor of chemistry at the
University of the City of New York
Helped establish Columbia University’s
School of Mines, and became its Dean,
when he retired the alumni established
the Chandler Lectureship and the
Chandler medal for research in
chemistry
Founder of the Pratt and Whitney
Company
Founder of the Worthington Pump
Company
Founding president of Clark University;
founder of the American Journal of
Psychology in 1887
William James
Philosopher, Harvard University
Society of
Automotive
Engineers,
Andrew L. Riker
Founding president and chief engineer
of the Locomobile Company of America
Henry Ford
Founding first vice-president and
president of Ford Motor Company
Albion W. Small
Professor of Sociology; University of
Chicago
1905
American Sociological
Society (now
American Sociological
Association), 1905
E. A. Ross
Professor of Sociology; University of
Nebraska
While experienced, these founders still faced a set of
common obstacles in the formation of an organization.
If not addressed, the following obstacles could
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
jeopardize the ability of the organization to achieve
sustainability:
⋅
Developing an adequate means of
communication
⋅
Shifting legitimacy from the founder to the
organization
⋅
⋅
Mobilizing the potential universe
⋅
⋅
Developing an organizational structure
Establishing relationships and building
community
Establishing a common and consistent language
The ways in which associations addressed these
obstacles was instrumental in their subsequent
development. A brief description of how these were
addressed to a varying degree by those associations in
the study will now be examined.
Developing an Adequate Means of
Communication
The general advancement of a body of knowledge
requires a means of sharing information and developing
a system for preserving it. The most common strategy
used by the associations studied to accomplish this
exchange of information was the initiation of meetings
and conventions. The papers presented at these
meetings resulted in a compilation of information that
could be collected, published, and disseminated to
members.
For the founders of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science “no goal was more important
than overcoming geographic distances separating
scientists and creating a coherent voice and a coherent
center for scientists” (Kohlstedt el al. 1999. 9). One
mechanism to achieve this would be their annual
meeting “and the subsequent Proceedings would
constitute its permanent record of activity and
outreach.”
In 1897 members of the American Physiological Society
realized their need for a publication of their own.
“There can be no question that the position of our
profession and its power for usefulness both at home
and abroad would be increased by a publication that
should be to use us what the great archives of
physiology are to Germany, France, England and Italy”
(Appel 1987:40). The first volume consisted of thirtytwo papers in four issues and ran to 522 pages and
included the publication of 1897 proceedings of the
December 1887 meeting. A subscription to the journal
was not included in the members’ dues.
6
Shifting Legitimacy from
the Founder to the Organization
Of the professional associations studied, the vast
majority first gained legitimacy because the founders
were already prominent in the field and their
willingness to take collective action assured a level of
acceptance for the emerging association. All the
professional associations examined were founded by
individuals who were leaders in their respective fields,
as Table 2 illustrates. In fact, some of the founders
were instrumental in establishing important journals
before the association was even organized (Hudson and
Hudson, 2005).
Consequently, the founders, not their associations, had
status and legitimacy within their respective fields, a
status and legitimacy that could be transferred to the
fledgling organization. Because the founders had
established relations with most of their peers, their
status assured that an invitation to form a more formal
means of addressing their common concerns would be
successful. Not every initial effort was successful, of
course, but persistence among these leaders usually
overcame the initial reluctance of others (Moorehead
1989; Pauly 1987; Skolnik and Reese 1976).
Mobilizing the Potential Universe
Once established, the associations worked to expand
the initial membership among those who met the
eligibility requirements. These requirements were
revised from time to time to reflect the growing
confidence of the members in their status, changes in
the field, and the cultural values of the larger society
(Fernberger 1932; Levine 1995; Reynolds 1983). Many
associations in their early years had relatively few
members because the number of qualified practitioners
was relatively small. Initially associations were generally focused on defining the purpose, goals, and
structure of the organization rather than on a rapid
expansion of the membership. The smaller number of
members no doubt helped support a strong consensus
on what the goals of the association should be and who
should be included in the membership.
As Sinclair notes in his history of the American
Association of Mechanical Engineers, “From the outset,
the Society had an intimate character. The number of
members was small and the leading figures remarkably
alike in background” (1980: 23). The small size made
administrative decision making quite simple and
informal. Yet eventually leaders recognized that
recruiting others who participate in the profession was
necessary if the organization were to be considered a
legitimate voice -- and to ensure the sustainability of
the organization.
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
Establishing Relationships and Building
Community
Those who founded these professional associations had
already established bonds with others in the profession.
Therefore they did not have to “rely heavily on social
relations among strangers” (Stinchcombe 1965:148149). Rather, they knew and respected the work of
others who would join them in this new enterprise.
These were not new organizational forms, but a simple
reconfiguration of an existing form with which they
were familiar. Their class position makes such an
assumption probable. They reported the importance of
establishing relationships and building community as
necessary to ensure the organization’s long-term
sustainability.
Another important strategy for building community was
achieved through activities that enabled the founders
and subsequent members to become more familiar with
one another. This provided an opportunity to expand
the network of those involved in the discipline and
better define those who should be invited to participate.
The shared work in the early days of these
organizations was augmented with an emphasis on the
pleasures of socializing with one’s peers and often their
families, as shown in the following examples.
American Library Association, founded in 1896
In 1896, after the annual meeting, the association
chartered a boat for a cruise on Lake Michigan “and
even those succumbed to the ‘whitecaps’ of Saginaw
Bay were ready again by evening to go ashore at
Alpena, Michigan, to ‘do’ the town.” (Thomison,
1978:42)
American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
founded in 1917
According to their 1966 history, with nostalgia, is the
notation that their annual meetings were rather
raucous affairs. (Morley, 1966: Ch. 1)
American Society of Mechanical Engineers,
founded in 1880
The history of this organization reveals a social
element that contributed to the sense of community
and the bonding among members. “Growing numbers
of wives attended programs devised especially for
them, and in time the meetings actually became
reunions in the way the founders had hoped.”
(Sinclair 1980:35)
Society of Automotive Engineers, founded in 1905
The founding members were well aware from their
experiences in other organizations that success was
frequently linked to social bonding. The schedule for
the annual meeting often showed serious papers in
the morning, a relaxing afternoon, a group dinner,
and then more papers. During the afternoon of one
7
early meeting (1930), the society organized several
games: Match-Box Passing, Bag and Balloon Race,
Elephant Walk, Volstead Race (described as an event
that flaunted noncompliance with prohibition), and
the Jiggs and Maggie Derby. (S.A.E. Journal, June
1930)
While these social events may seem somewhat
peripheral to the goals of the association, their impact
on building a consensus among members cannot be
underestimated. The commitment to come together,
whether based on a social agenda or a desire to
exchange information, was dominant in all histories.
In the early years some members within these
organizations found it difficult to attend events because
of distance or inadequate transportation. A significant
barrier to forming national organizations was the
distance from the East to the West Coast -- until
transcontinental rail travel became routine and
dependable.
Early in their history, each association studied built a
reward structure to recognize the contribution of
members to the profession and to the organization. The
annual meetings were occasions to highlight the
accomplishments of the association and to honor those
who had contributed to these achievements. The social
bonds “embellished by ritual and symbolism” helped the
organization build “a defensive wall about its niche in
the division of labor” (Hawley 1950:218).
Developing an Organizational Structure
The future success in building community for these
organizations was not solely dependent on human
resources, but also on its ability to create a physical
space within which daily tasks could be accomplished.
The space also represented some measure of
permanence for the organization and its members. In
some associations, office space was provided at the
business location of members. Faculty members at
universities received space when they held office in
their professional associations.
A host of other subsidies and services flowed from the
membership as the associations were getting started.
These in-kind contributions from the members, as well
as their willingness to serve without compensation,
contributed to a strong sense of community by defining
voluntarism as an organizational norm. When these
organizations were founded, members were responsible
for all administrative and management functions. This
norm of service was deeply embedded in the
organization’s culture. The founders formed a
leadership cadre, committees, and working groups to
attend to the routine functions of the association. No
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
association studied began with a paid staff person, but
as these associations expanded, the need to hire
employees became increasingly clear, as shown in the
following examples:
American Society of Civil Engineers
The American Society of Civil Engineers operated
for twenty years without a paid staff. Finally, it was
“the unanimous sense of the membership…that it
is injurious to the dignity of the Society to longer
accept the services of any gentleman acting as
permanent Secretary without compensation”
(Wisely 1974:42).
American Psychological Association
In 1929 the American Psychological Association,
founded in 1892, recognized that “the present load
of the three [volunteer] executives, the Secretary,
the Treasurer and Business Editor, is too great and
too exacting for anyone whose primary interest is
psychology and who is doing this Association as a
side line” (Fernberger, 1932:21).
Association of Trade Association Executives
The Association of Trade Association Executives
(now the American Society of Association
Executives) waited fifteen years to hire a paid staff
person despite the encouragement of the founding
president, Emmet Hay Naylor in 1920 who stated,
“It is important that the business world generally
knows that the work of the trade executive is a
profession, and that when trade associations
require executives, they should look for a man
skilled in the profession (Shapiro 1987:12).
Establishing a Common and Consistent Language
We have attended a sufficient number of professional
association meetings to recognize that members
converse in a language filled with technical jargon and
insider lingo that only the cognoscenti can use with
comfort. As the organizations we studied emerged,
words most common to professions today did not exist.
As a case in point, when the Society of Automotive
Engineers was founded in 1905, there were no agreed
upon terms for a number of parts for the newly
invented automobile. As the professions expanded and
more individuals entered the field, many terms for the
same item or technique were introduced, making it
harder for members to communicate effectively. The
need to create a consistent nomenclature was essential
for the sustainability of the organization and the advancement of the profession. The use of this lang-uage,
and learning how to use it, was part of the socialization
process that bound the individual to the organization
and to the profession. The common language of
professionals within an organization became a ready
bridge that helped members establish common ground
and build relationships with their peers.
8
How Associations Contribute to a Profession
We have established that no professional association
ever represents an entire profession. As Abbott states,
the “mature profession typically has hundreds of
professional associations, many or most of which are
open only to members of some large, dominant
association” (1988:79). Even at the height of its power,
the American Medical Association (AMA) did not
represent the entire profession. Its failure to serve
minority groups or to recognize alternative medical
practices limited any claim it could make that the AMA
and the profession of medicine were one in the same.
An association, then, represents a segment of a
profession, which in turn is a loosely integrated bundle
actors, organizations, governmental agencies, and
educational institutions. It is spread widely across our
social system. Colleges and universities are engaged in
training students to enter the professional ranks.
Government at all levels makes laws and regulations
that govern business practitioners and its practitioners.
Free-standing research institutions, professional
journals, and ad hoc conferences are all involved in
contributing to a profession’s body of know-ledge. No
association has the power or influence to dictate how
the other sectors of the profession operate. Recognizing
this complex set of relationships that constitute a
profession, our core questions remains: “What is the
relationship that an association has to its profession?”
Based on our investigation of how professional
associations emerge and the functions they provide
their members, we see a symbiotic relationship: two
distinct social institutions linked together in a very close
union (Scott 2001). Obviously, there would be no
professional associations if there were no professions,
but a profession would be hard pressed to have the
level of legitimacy it holds without the functions that its
associations perform.
In this symbiotic relationship, we discovered that
associations contribute at least five primary functions to
a profession:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
boundary maintenance
boundary protection
legitimation of the profession
knowledge management
professional status
We shall look at each of these in detail and then
present our conclusions about how professions and
their professional associations operate symbiotically.
Boundary Maintenance
In almost every case, those who founded professional
associations had gained a reputation in the field. Some
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
had already established respected professional journals,
some had published seminal papers in the discipline,
and some had organized programs or departments in
colleges or universities for teaching and research. To a
large extent, they were not strangers. They had met
and corresponded, and were eager to move from a set
of informal relations to a more stable and continuous
relationship. They had a reasonable idea about who
they wanted to include. Because the emerging
professional community was somewhat small, they
knew the skills and talents their peers had that could
help them establish the newly forming organization.
Consequently, they had a fairly realistic assessment of
who might be eligible for membership.
From the beginning, those forming the organization
defined the boundaries by establishing eligibility
requirements for membership. They knew that if their
organization were to gain status and acceptance, they
had to develop eligibility requirements that limited
membership. Some of these associations were not very
selective when they started. In some cases, an
individual’s interest was all that was needed. In the
nineteenth century, white males were often the only
ones recognized as having the needed status or the
serious interest to be eligible.
When founded in 1892, the American Psychological
Association was very pleased to welcome educators and
philosophers into its ranks. By 1906 the association
recognized “two sorts of qualifications for Membership:
professional occupation in psychology and research.”
This decision established that “in the absence of
research, positions held in related fields, such as
philosophy . . . are not regarded as qualifying a
candidate for membership” (Fernberger 1932:9).
Other professional associations had similar histories of
establishing boundaries. Chemical engineers became so
exclusive that the survival of the American Institute of
Chemical Engineers was in jeopardy (Reynolds 1983:78, 28-35).
Over time, many organizations recognized that to
ensure their sustainability, they needed to develop
eligibility requirements that were either more reflective
of the changing nature of the professsional or more
restrictive because of the increasing specialization
within the field. In essence, the professional association
became the gate keeper that determined who could
become part of the profession’s newly forming
member-ship community. Eligibility criteria were used
to determine who would or would not be accepted.
Defining eligibility also offered members a recognizable
identity among their peers and to the public. The
founders were staking their professional claim to a
discipline based on their knowledge, expertise, and
status. Their invitations to others to join them were an
9
offer to share in this newly defined status and identity.
In the emerging years -- prior to the development of
any formal means of licensing or certification -- this
action became the means of identifying a profess-ional.
Recognition by one’s peers occurred within the
boundaries of the association. In many ways, while
colleges and universities now serve as the primary
grantor of professional expertise, associations continue
to serve as a forum for all those in the profession to
reinforce their professional identity.
The professional association also functioned as a
disciplinarian. Appropriate practices were defined in
their code of ethics, with stipulated penalties for
violations. These functions gave the association some
authority to defend its boundaries.
Boundary Protection
Defending turf was clearly as important a function of a
professional association as defining its domain.
Founders recognized the need to build criteria that
would establish standards for the discipline. Consider
the following description of early dentistry: “Nothing
was more common than for a young man to leave the
plough or work-place, as he was prompted by either
indolence, bodily infirmity or caprice, and, after
spending a few months, or more frequently weeks, with
some neighboring dentist, pass, without examination
diploma or license, to all the privileges of a regular
member of the profession” (McCluggage 1959:21). With
such an evaluation of a profession in its formative
years, the need for qualified practitioners to create
boundaries to limit who could claim professional
competence was painfully clear.
We pointed out that the efforts of archivists, chemical
engineers and others to protect their core technologies
from the infringement of others. J. A. C. Grant
describes intense boundary disputes among closely
related occupations that almost seem like parody. A
good example is the struggle among associations of
barbers, beauticians, and cosmeticians in the 1920s
over licensures. The debate ensued over who could do
what with which tools and technologies. The result is
government regulations that are totally inconsistent
across jurisdictions (Grant 1942:458-477). Today the
issue of prescriptive authority is being debated among
doctors, nurses, and pharmacists (Comer and Posey
1994), and the issue of who can conduct real estate
transactions (real estate agents versus bankers) is on
the current landscape as professions seek to blend roles
to ensure their viability.
From the start, those involved in associations
recognized they would need to create standards of
excellence as a strategy to gain respect and acceptance
from the social community and from government
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
officials. They also sought to monitor the profession to
ensure other disciplines would not seek to encroach on
their carefully defined boundaries.
Legitimating the Profession
The association becomes the agent of the profession,
striving to establish the legitimacy of the professional
within the minds of the general society. While it has
taken various forms throughout history, professional
associations have engaged in public awareness
campaigns for decades, informing the public and their
clients that they have the skills and knowledge to
perform important functions. In the 1930s sociologists - eager to ensure that their profession was regarded as
a science -- wanted to distance themselves from being
devoted “almost exclusively to social problems (e.g.,
Social Work, Religion, Community, Family, etc.)”
(Rhoades 1981:25). One measure of their success was
that in 1953 sociologists in these forbidden arenas
realized that they were no longer welcome in the
American Sociological Association, and broke away to
form the Society for the Study of Social Problems
(Burgess 1953).
Chemical engineers struggled with chemists on one side
and engineers on the other to establish boundaries for
their profession. The archivists were challenged on one
side by librarians and on the other by historians (Brooks
1947; Cook 1983).
The public awareness campaigns have been augmented
by professional associations seeking legislation that
would establish the qualifications to practice. Founders
recognized that in order to capture the recognition and
respect of the general society, they needed to gain the
respect of government bodies as well. The practice of
testifying before legislative and regulatory bodies
virtually did not exist until the corresponding
associations existed. Soon after organizing, many
founders recognized the need to educate those who
would have the power to inhibit the growth or help
support the growth of their profession through public
policy. They recognized that if they were the specialists
of a specific body of knowledge, they needed to be
treated as its source by those considering any type of
legislative or regulatory initiative.
Knowledge Management
Our research demonstrated that one of the prime
motives for establishing an association was to share
knowledge and information with peers. Most association
histories reflected a host of professions that were not
only struggling to gain respect but also to learn the
best practices available. As many professions emerged
on the landscape, they were also building their own
unique body of knowledge of theory and application.
10
The organization founders recognized that the only way
the profession could advance was for those involved to
operate with some level of consistency and competence. The need to develop a widely accepted (and
practiced) body of knowledge was essential. The desire
to organize this information in a central location
became pivotal if sufficient respect from the general
community were to be accorded to those involved in
the profession.
But the problems did not end with simply developing a
body of knowledge. Without mechanisms to identify,
compile, analyze, and convert information into
knowledge-based learning opportunities, professionals
could not even begin to share information and set
standards. The chance of any real progress occurring
was limited if the professionals continued to operate in
isolation. Associations provided the opportunity for
them to share knowledge, skills, and information, and a
vehicle through which the information could be
disseminated among its membership.
Some associations made the exchange of information a
requirement of membership. In a few cases, penalties
were specified if members did not comply, as shown in
the following examples:
American Association of Civil Engineers
In the 1830s an attempt to organize civil engineers
included a provision in the proposed bylaws that
“imposed a fine of $10 against any member who
failed ‘to produce to the Society at least one
unpublished communication in each year, or present
a scientific book, map, plan or model not already in
the possessions of the Society.’ ” (Wisely 1974:10)
American Association of Immunologists
The 1917 bylaws of the American Association of
Immunologists states: “Failure of an active member
to offer a paper at least once in three years shall be
equivalent to resignation.” (Saunders et al. 141:S43).
American Dental Association
The American Dental Association’s code of ethics
includes the requirement that “Dentists have the
obligation of making results and benefits of their
investigative efforts to all when they are useful in
safeguarding or promoting the health of the
public.”(American Dental Association 2003: 4).
An important function for the professional associations
studied was not just sharing the information that
contributed to the advancement of the profession, but
also ensuring that the quality of the information was
accurate, timely, and updated as needed. Associations
began scheduling meetings and conferences so
members could share and exchange their research,
innovations, and discoveries in both the theoretical and
practical realms. When the cost of time and travel
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
limited participation in such an event, other strategies
were invented and controlled by the association.
We take it for granted that most professions have
refereed journals that are peered reviewed, and that
members are eager to contribute to these journals, in
part to achieve a specific level of status in the
profession and in their place of work. Such was not
always the case, as Abbott points out in his discussion
of the early years of the American Journal of Sociology.
Albion W. Small, the editor and a founder of the
American Sociological Association, had to cajole
colleagues into submitting papers to the journal
(Abbott, 1999: 87-89). Before peer-reviewed journals
existed, privately published publications were available
in many professions. While the measure of time varied
from profession to profession, associations soon came
to recognize the need to gain editorial control over the
content of these publications, which had a tremendous
amount of influence over the profession’s growing body
of knowledge (Hudson and Hudson 2003).
Sociologists have included the establishment of
professional schools as one step in the process of
developing a body of knowledge. In many of the
professions that emerged in the nineteenth century in
the United States, these schools were often proprietary
and therefore not accountable to any professional
association (McCluggage 1959:155-176; Rothstein
1985:85-124). Melvil Dewey of the American Library
Association (ALA) pushed hard for the association to
support his efforts to establish a formal training
program at Columbia College. Poole, one of ALA’s
founders, responded to Dewey’s request: “There is no
training-school for educating librarians like a wellmanaged library” (Wiegand 1986:33). Poole won this
battle but lost the war. Library schools eventually
became common in colleges and universities with
support from the ALA. And professional associations
became actively engaged in certifying and accrediting
training programs in a number of institutions, including
colleges and universities. As they do today.
This function of legitimating learning for practical use
played out in yet another way for professional
associations. Those who founded these associations
were often more interested in the esoteric knowledge
of the discipline than in its practical application. Higher
status was accorded to those who did the pioneering
research and theory building than to those who
recognized the pragmatic usefulness of the discipline.
When the American Chemical Society (ACS) was
founded in 1876, the society was “predominantly
academic its members viewed the ACS primarily as a
servant of chemistry; they were confident of their
status; they were little concerned with professionalism
as the term is understood in the Society’s 100th year”
(Skolnik and Reese 1976:78). What professionalism
11
meant in this context applied to those who worked in a
commercial enterprise rather than in “the science of
chemistry” (Skolnik and Reese, 1976:51).
This distinction between theory and practice was also
an issue in psychology. When the American
Psychological Association (APA) was founded in 1892,
its sole field was perception. All twelve papers at its
first annual meeting focused on this topic in one form
or another (Fernberger 1932: 59). As psychology
evolved, it could be “practiced” in a variety of settings.
As a result, the APA needed to re-align its structure to
include the emerging practice settings. This affected
many of its services to members, including but not
limited to training, licensing, and certification (Evans et
al. 1992).
Like many professional associations today, the APA has
functions as an umbrella organization holding together
an enormous variety of practice settings whose only
common denominator is the use of the label of
“psychologist” as an occupational identity. By the same
token, few chemists are capable of reading and
understanding all the material in the twenty-seven
journals (representing some very esoteric specialties)
published by the American Chemical Society. Some professional associations are now very large organizations
whose members are engaged in specialized areas
within the discipline. These organizations function as
moderators of information among these diverse
interests. They monitor and manage the body of
knowledge -- theory and practice -- required to be
effective as professionals. And the task was as
enormous for those who were the first to define the
body as for those who manage and expand it today.
Professional Status
Being a professional has a certain status in our society.
Associations were the vehicle for an occupation to
strive for professional status. Involvement within a
professional association also provided members a
means of gaining status among their peers. Every
professional association we examined has a reward
structure that from time to time singles out members to
honor. Here are some examples:
American Dental Association
In 1865 S. C. Barnum invented the rubber dam, a
dental device that restricts the flow of saliva while a
cavity is being filled. In recognition of this
achievement, the American Dental Association
established a medal in Barnum’s honor. (McCluggage
1949:207)
American Society of Civil Engineers
The 1974 history of the American Society of Civil
Engineers includes thirty-two pages of the names of
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
those who have been honored in every aspect of the
profession. Many are annual awards that were
established in the association’s early years. (Wisely
1974:376-408).
American Chemical Society
The American Chemical Society has been equally
generous, providing a number of awards to
individuals as well as local chapters. These honors
and awards included not only members who made
significant contributions, but also students,
associates, and even some nonmembers. The fact
that those outside the profession have been willing to
accept such awards suggests a measure of legitimacy
desired by these organizations. (Skolnik and Reese
1976: 441-453).
Conclusion
The five functions of a professional organization
described here clearly define the symbiotic relationship
between associations and their professions. It is hard to
imagine how a profession can advance without some
organized contingent defining its parameters, achieving
legitimacy, serving as a clearinghouse of information,
ensuring that other occupations do not encroach on
their territory, and establishing measures of excellence
through recognition of those who have advanced the
profession.
We contend that a profession cannot survive without
professional associations because these organizations
mobilize its members for collective action. The vitality
of the profession depends upon the willingness of
members to take the necessary steps to advance the
body of knowledge and ensure its integrity. From the
time the founders first launched the organization,
members have understood that their active involvement
is required to sustain the organization and the
profession. The organization supports the members’
claims to status and administers reward systems to
honor their efforts.
The network of social relations within these
organizations provides a moral order that supports the
more amorphous profession. Each professional
association operates to support the profession while at
the same time competing on several levels, as Abbott
(1988) noted. These competing organizations also
mutually support the profession by defending against
would be intruders that do not recognize its boundaries.
What is equally interesting, these competitors build
organizations that are isomorphic, as would be
expected from the research on organizations (DiMaggio
and Powell 1983; Hannan and Freeman 1993; Hawley
1950).
12
Implications
Those who have studied the changing status of
occupations and the elevation of some occupations to a
profession status have also noted the role played by
professional associations. Our research clearly shows
that professional associations emerged when a number
of practitioners are faced with threats and challenges.
These founding members came together to defend
themselves against those who would not grant them
hegemony over their domain. A common threat
involves their ability to pursue careers because they are
not considered legitimate, they have little or no respect,
and they cannot have their claims to a particular
jurisdiction honored.
Through our research, we discovered that professional
associations provide a number of critical functions to
their members and the profession. Professional
associations are integral parts of a larger professional
field. They are a vehicle for their members to achieve a
specific set of goals. We posit that the nature of these
organizations extends beyond that of professions and is
similar for those associations representing trades and
personal interests. They are a unique and necessary
element in the profession’s quest for definition,
recognition, and acceptance.
Professional associations are often included in studies
of larger aggregates of nonprofit voluntary
organizations (Powell 1987). Yet their functions differ
from most other nonprofit organizations. For this
reason, we feel these organizational units deserve a
term that clearly distinguishes them from others in the
nonprofit community. We define professional
associations as membership-based organizations. They
differ in that they are non-geographic self-governing
communities in which members are citizens who are
eligible to vote and hold elected office. This definition
has a good deal in common with Skocpol’s, but without
the membership requirements demanded by those
being analyzed here (1999:34, fn.19).
To become a member of a professional organization,
prospective members must meet certain eligibility
requirements. This ensures a degree of homogeneity
among the members that is also reflected in their skills,
talents, and interests. And members are then
knowledgeable about the trade, profession, or personal
interest that is the basis for collective action. By
representing a trade, profession, or personal interest, a
group focuses on defining the core technologies and
issues in its respective domain. Members are then able
to establish venues to share and exchange information
with peers. They produce the products they consume.
The membership-based organization becomes a center
for receiving, processing, and disseminating the
information and knowledge that contribute to the
members’ personal and professional growth. Our
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
definition enables us to treat a professional organization
as a population as defined by Hannan and Freeman
(1989).
“A population of organizations has a unitary character
….if its members are affected similarly by changes in
the environment” (45). We believe these organizations
have much more to offer the research community than
an analysis of their involvement and impact on public
policy.
Once viewed from this perspective, a number of
interesting research issues emerge. Why is it possible
for some professional associations to constantly expand
to included more and more diverse specialties within its
membership while others lose them to newly formed
independent organizations? Why are some
organizations unable or unwilling to embrace all who
practice in the profession? And once excluded, why
can’t institutions serving the same profession find
sufficient commonality to unify? As our society
continues to become more diverse, what consequence
will this have on membership-based organizations and
their ability to fulfill their functions? These questions
and others are part of a continuing research agenda,
one that will affect all of us.
References
Abbott, Andrew. 1988. The System of Professions: An
Essay on the Division of Expert Labor. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
____________. 1999. Department & Discipline: Chicago
Sociology at One Hundred. Chicago: University of
13
Brobeck, John R., Orr E. Reynolds, and Toby A. Appel.
1987. History of the American Physiological Society:
The First Century, 1887-1987. Bethesda: The American
Physiological Society.
Brooks, Philip C. 1947. The First Decade of the Society
of American Archivists. The American Archivist. 10:115128.
Burgess, Ernest W. 1953. The Aims of the Society for
the Study of Social Problems. The Society for the Study
of Social Problems:1:2-3.
Caplow, Theodore, 1954. The Sociology of Work.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Cook, J. Frank. 1983. The Blessings of Providence on
an Association of Archivists. The American Archivist.
46:374-399.
Comer, Becky, & L. Michael Posey. 1994. 25 Years of
Caring. The Consultant Pharmacist. 1267-1301.
Diamond, Jared. 2005. Collapse: How Societies Choose
to Fail or Succeed. New York: Viking Press.
DiMaggio, Paul J., & Powell, Walter P. 1983.
Institutional Isomorphism. American Sociological
Review. 48:147-160.
Evans, Rand B.,Virginia Staudt Sexton, and Thomas C.
Cadwallader (eds).
1992. 100 Years, the American Psychological
Association: A Historical Perspective. Washington, D.C.:
The American Psychological Association.
Chicago Press.
Aldrich, Howard. 2000. Organizations Evolving.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
American Dental Association. 2003. Principles of Ethics
and Code of Professional Conduct. Chicago: American
Dental Association.
Appel, Toby A.1987. Chapter 3. First Quarter Century:
1887-1912 History of the American Physiological
Society: The First Century, 1887-1987. Bethesda: The
American Physiological Society.
Birdsall, E.T. 1930. Builded Better than They Knew.
S.A.E. Journal 76:694.
Brint, Steven P. 1994. In an Age of Experts: The
Changing Role of Professionals in Politics and Public
Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Fernberger, Samuel W. 1932. A Historical Summary
1892-1930. The Psychological Bulletin. 29.
Fishbein, Morris. 1947. A History of the American
Medical Association: 1847-1947. Philadelphia: W. B.
Saunders Company.
Following the Great Physician: The First 70 Following
the Great Physician: The First 70 of the Christian
Medical & Dental Association. 2002. Winfield, Kansas:
The Christian Medical & Dental Association.
Gay and Lesbian Medical Association. 2006. “Our
Mission.” San Francisco, CA. Retrieved May 22, 2006
(http://www.thebody.com/glmapage.html).
Goode, William J. 1973. Explorations in Social Theory,
341-382. New York: Oxford University Press.
Grant, J. A. C. 1942. The Gild Returns to America I & II.
The Journal of Politics. 303-336, 458-477.
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
Haber, Samuel. 1991. The Quest for Authority and
Honor in the American Professions: 1750-1900.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
14
Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Convention of
the American Bankers
Association. 1895. New York: American Bankers
Association.
Hannan, Michael T., & Freeman, John. 1993.
Organizational Ecology. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
Hawley, Amos H. 1950. Human Ecology: A Theory of
Community Structure. New York: The Ronald Press.
____________. 1986. Human Ecology: A Theoretical
Essay. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Hudson, James R., and Patricia A. Hudson. 2003. The
Search for Legitimacy: The Efforts of MembershipBased Organizations. Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of ARNOVA.
____________. 2005. Associations and Their Journals:
The Search for an “Official” Voice. Sociological
Perspectives. 48:271-289.
Reynolds, Terry S. 1983. 75 Years of Progress: A
history of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers:
1908-1983. New York: American Institute of Chemical
Engineers.
Rhoades, Lawrence J. 1981. A History of the American
Sociological Association: 1905-1980. Washington, D.C.:
American Sociological Association.
Rogers, Everett M. 1965 [4th ed.]The Diffusion of
Innovations. New York: The Free Press.
Rothstein, William G. 1985. American Physicians in the
19th Century: From Sects to Science. Baltimore: John
Hopkins University Press.
SAE Journal, 25th Anniversary Issue. 1930. 26.
Kohlstedt, Sally Gregory, Michael M. Sokol, and Bruce
V. Lewenstein. 1999. The Establishment of Science in
Saunders, Joseph F. 1988. The AAI, 1935 to 1988, in
the First Century of Immunology.
The Journal of Immunology. 141:S37-S54.
University Press.
Schlesinger, Arthur Meier. 1933. The Rise of the City.
New York: Macmillan Company.
American: 150 Years of the American Association for
the Advancement of Science. New Brunswick: Rutgers
Levine, Susan. 1995. Degrees of Equality: The
American Association of University Women and the
Challenge of Twentieth Century Feminism. Philadelphia:
Temple University Press.
McCluggage, Robert W. 1959. A History of the
American Dental Association. Chicago: The American
Dental Association.
Scott, W. Richard. 2001. Institutions and Organizations
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Shapiro, Samuel B., 1987. A Coming of Age: A History
of the Profession of Association Management.
Washington, D.C.: The American Society of Association
Executives.
Moorehead, E. J. 1989. Our Yesterdays: the History of
the Actuarial Profession in North American: 1809-1979.
Shaw, Stephanie J. 1996. What Women Ought to Be
and to Do: Black Professional Women Workers During
the Jim Crow Era. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Morley, Harold T. 1966. A History of the American
Association of the Petroleum Geologists: First Fifty
Years. Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum
Enginers. Semi-centennial Issue. 50:669-820. Tulsa:
The American Association of Petroleum Geologists.
Sinclair, Bruce, 1980. A Centennial History of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers: 1880-1980.
Pauly, John E. (ed.). 1987. The American Association of
Anatomists: 1888-1987. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Schaumburg: Society of Actuaries.
Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Skocpol, Theda, and Morris P. Fiorina, (eds.). 1999.
Civic Engagement in American Democracy. Washington,
Skolnik, Herman, and Kenneth M. Reese (eds.). 1976. A
Perry, Thelma D. 1975. History of the American
Teachers Association. Washington, D.C.: National
Education Association.
Century of Chemistry: The Role of Chemists and the
American Chemical Society. Washington, D.C.:
Powell, Walter W. (ed). 1987. The Nonprofit Sector: A
Research Handbook. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Stinchcombe, Arthur L. 1965. Social Structure and
Organizations. In James G. March. Handbook of
Organizations. Chicago: Rand McNally & Company.
American Chemical Society.
Melos Institute’s Research Findings Series
15
Suchman, Mark C. 1995. Managing Legitimacy:
Strategies and Institutional Approaches. Academy of
Management Review. 20:571-610.
De Toqueville, Alexis. 1945. Democracy in America.
New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Thomison, Dennis. 1978. A History of the American
Library Association: 1876-1972. Chicago: American
© copyright 2004
Center for Excellence in Association Leadership
San Francisco, California
Library Association.
Warren, Mark E. 2001. Democracy and Association.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Webb, Walter Prescott. 2003. The Great Frontier.
Reno/Las Vegas: University of Nevada Press.
Wiebe, Robert H. 1967. The Search for Order: 18771920. New York: Hill & Wang.
Wiegand, Wayne A. 1986. The Politics of an Emerging
Profession: The American Library Association 18761917. New York: Greenwood Press.
Wilensky, Harold L. 1964. The Professionalization of
Everyone? American Journal of Sociology. LXX:137-158.
Wilson, James Q. 1995. Political Organizations.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Wisley, William H. 1974. The American Civil Engineer:
1852-1974. New York: American Society of Civil
Engineers.
For reprint permission, contact:
Melos Institute
1071 Yosemite Drive
Pacifica, California 94044
USA
[email protected] email
650.355.4094 voice
650.359.3611 fax