SPECIAL ISSUE N. 179(3)/2027
Introduction
The transformations currently reshaping work – with particular regard to organisational models and processes, job content, skills, working methods, and the places and pace of work – call for a broad perspective capable of studying and analysing work in its old and new forms, as well as ongoing processes of hybridisation, through a range of intra- and trans-disciplinary approaches.
Changes in the world of work have operated at multiple levels. At the macro level, they have affected the ways in which value is generated, advancing a pervasive logic of abstraction capable of continual expansion; at the meso level, they have reshaped organisational models and job content, continuously redrawing the spatial and temporal boundaries of organisational and productive processes; at the micro level, they have strongly affected the different dimensions of people’s working lives and progressively blurred the boundaries between work and life.
The latest generation of technologies is giving further impetus to changes in work organisation and job content, calling into question precisely the scope for decision-making autonomy (at both organisational and operational levels) and for workers’ control over their work.
State of the art
Globalisation, tertiarization, and digitalisation have profoundly transformed labour markets in advanced capitalist economies, and professions have not remained immune to these long-term changes.
A broad body of literature agrees that professionals’ traditional position of occupational dominance (Abbott, 1988; Freidson, 1970) has been challenged by the growing bureaucratisation and commodification of their work (Abbott, 1991; Freidson, 2001). Several studies show that the increasing employment of professionals in large organisations and the expansion of the service economy have significantly affected the decision-making discretion and control they exercise over the content and conditions of their work (Evetts, 2009; 2010; 2013; Faulconbridge and Muzio, 2008; Maestripieri and Bellini, 2024; Noordegraaf, 2015; 2020; Spina and Vicarelli, 2021).
These transformations have prompted extensive sociological reflection on representations of work (Giullari and Ruffino, 2013), as well as on the meaning, role, and content of professionalism (Maestripieri and Bellini, 2024); they have also encouraged the updating of official statistical classifications (Eurofound, 2017; Eurostat, 2018a; 2018b; ILO, 2018a; 2018b; 2018c; ISTAT, 2024). However, in analysing the restructuring of professionalism around the principles of competition and hierarchy (Freidson, 2001), the sociology of professions has adopted an approach that pays less attention to job quality as a multidimensional concept. Drawing on Eliot Freidson’s observation that «the concept of profession tends to keep us from seeing those with that label as workers» (Freidson, 2001, p. 13), Bataille et al. (2024) suggest that limited research interest in the formal and material conditions of professional work may «be due to the fact that these constitute aspects of ‘ordinary’ work, whereas the sociology of professions tradition […] focused primarily on elite occupations» (Bataille et al., 2024, p. 40). In other words, by historically focusing on high-status occupations, studies in the sociology of professions have prioritised the analysis of intrinsic aspects of professional work – such as autonomy and control - while overlooking, or taking for granted, the quality of extrinsic aspects such as pay, work-life balance, working time, job security, and other material dimensions.
Conversely, research on job quality has often focused on ‘ordinary’ occupations not commonly classified as professions – for example, hospitality workers (Knox et al., 2015), chefs in restaurant chains (Belardi et al., 2021), machinists (Kalleberg and Vaisey, 2005), seasonal tourism workers (Guidetti et al., 2020), classroom assistants (Warhurst et al., 2009), and public-sector employees (Sauer et al., 2022) – or on samples of workers (see Eurofound’s European Working Conditions Surveys and INAPP’s Job Quality Survey). These studies have concentrated on the working conditions of employees and self-employed workers (Canal et al., 2023; Carrieri and Damiano, 2020; Della Ratta-Rinaldi, 2024), paying less attention to specific changes in the quality of professional work.
This gap is particularly evident in the case of traditional and established professions that, despite historically enjoying high occupational status, must now redefine their role and adapt to working conditions that raise concerns regarding work organisation, job content, and social recognition. Nurses, physicians, architects, lawyers, and engineers are notable examples.
These ongoing changes in the world of work raise compelling research questions not only about traditional professions, but also about emerging, new-generation professions, which are often linked to technological developments (INAPP, 2024). This line of sociological enquiry intersects with the longstanding study of the deprofessionalisation and proletarianisation of professions (Haug, 1972; 1975; Oppenheimer, 1972; Wilensky, 1964).
In this call, job quality is understood in multidimensional terms, as outlined in the Italian sociological tradition beginning with the work of Michele La Rosa (1983a; 1983b; 2004) and Luciano Gallino (1976; 1978; 1983); in the contributions of several institutional actors (Eurofound, ETUI, ILO, ISFOL/INAPP, among others); and in its numerous conceptual and empirical applications (Canal et al., 2023; Canal and Gosetti, 2023; Gosetti, 2022; ISFOL, 2013; Warhurst et al., 2025).
Objectives of the call and thematic areas
Building on these considerations, the call invites contributions that advance understanding of ongoing changes in professional work, with specific attention to job quality and quality of working life. It also seeks to bring the sociology of work and the sociology of professions into closer dialogue through a joint exploration of job quality within professions.
The special issue invites contributions addressing, among others, the following thematic areas:
1. Professional work: work organisation and job content
The first area focuses on ongoing transformations in professional work from multiple perspectives, with particular attention to work organisation and job content.
2. Professional work and work culture
The second area considers the meanings associated with professional work and those that professionals themselves attach to their work, and therefore welcomes contributions addressing the cultural dimension of work.
3. Professional work and job quality
The third area welcomes theoretical and/or empirical contributions that specifically examine the job quality and quality of working life of professionals, taking into account the different dimensions involved.
4. Professional work and systems of production
The fourth area, closely related to the preceding ones, welcomes contributions that explore the relationship between the job quality of professionals and broader changes in the nature and role of professions in advanced capitalist economies.
5. Methodological approaches
The fifth area concerns approaches to the study of professions across different analytical perspectives and their operationalisation through methodological choices aimed at understanding both established and emerging aspects of the world of professions.
Submission guidelines
Articles, written in Italian or English, must be submitted by 15 April 2027.
To submit an article proposal, authors must follow the online procedure provided by FrancoAngeli’s Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform at:
https://journals.francoangeli.it/index.php/sl/about/submissions.
Technical information for authors on submitting proposals through the platform is summarised in the Authors' Guide, available at:
https://journals.francoangeli.it/public/guide/Authors_guide_FrancoAngeli.pdf.
Articles must not exceed 8,000 words and must comply with the journal’s editorial guidelines, available at:
https://www.francoangeli.it/riviste/NR/Sl-norme_EN.pdf.
Submissions that fail to comply with the journal’s editorial guidelines or exceed the word limit indicated in this call for papers will not be considered. Properly formatted articles submitted through the OJS platform will undergo a double-blind peer review process.
References
Abbott, A. (1988). The System of Professions. An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor. The University of Chicago Press.
Abbott, A. (1991). The future of occupations: occupations and expertise in the age of organizations. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 8, 17-42.
Bataille, P., Le Feuvre, N., and Sautier, M. (2024). When Employment Status Shapes Professionalism. The Case of the Academic Labour Market in Switzerland. In: Maestripieri, L., and Bellini, A. (Eds.), Professionalism and Social Change. Processes of Differentiation Within, Between and Beyond Professions. Palgrave Macmillan, 39-58.
Belardi, S., Knox, A., and Wright, C.F. (2021). Too hot to handle? An analysis of chefs’ job quality in Australian restaurants. Journal of Industrial Relations, 63(1), 3-26.
Canal, T., Gosetti, G. (2023). Il lavoro e le sue qualità. Riflessioni a partire da percorsi di analisi. Economia e Società Regionale, 41(2), 97-112.
Canal, T., Gualtieri, V., and Luppi, M. (2023). Le determinanti di un buon lavoro durante l'emergenza sanitaria. INAPP Working Paper No. 97, INAPP, Roma.
Carrieri, M., and Damiano, C. (Eds.) (2020). Come cambia il lavoro nell'era del COVID. Quarta indagine sui lavoratori italiani. Dicembre 2020. Arcadia Edizioni.
Della Ratta-Rinaldi, F. (Ed.) (2024). Riflessioni sulla qualità del lavoro autonomo, fra aspetti regolativi ed evidenze empiriche comparate, INAPP, Report n. 49, INAPP, Roma.
Eurofound (2017). Exploring self-employment in the European Union. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.
Eurostat (2018a). Labour Force Survey (LFS). Ad-hoc module 2017 on the self-employed persons. Assessment report, Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.
Eurostat (2018b). Self-employment statistics. Eurostat Statistics Explained, November.
Evetts, J. (2009). New Professionalism and New Public Management: Changes, Continuities and Consequences. Comparative Sociology, 8, 247-266.
Evetts, J. (2010). Organizational Professionalism: changes, challenges and opportunities. DPU Conference, Organizational Learning and Beyond, Copenhagen (Denmark), October 20th, 2010.
Evetts, J. (2013). Professionalism: Value and Ideology. Current Sociology Review, 61(5-6), 778-796.
Faulconbridge, J., and Muzio, D. (2008). Organizational professionalism in globalizing law firms. Work, Employment and Society, 22(1), 7-25.
Freidson, E. (1970). Professional dominance. The Social Structure of Medical Care. Atherton Press.
Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism. The Third Logic. Polity.
Gallino, L. (1978). Dizionario di sociologia. UTET.
Gallino, L. (1983). Informatica e qualità del lavoro. Einaudi. Torino.
Gallino, L., Baldissera, A., Ceri, P. (1976). Per una valutazione analitica della qualità del lavoro. Quaderni di Sociologia, 25(2–3), 297–322.
Giullari, B., and Ruffino, M. (Eds.) (2013). Descrivere, classificare, contare: le rappresentazioni del lavoro nello spazio pubblico. Sociologia del Lavoro, 129/2013.
Gosetti G. (2022). La qualità della vita lavorativa. Lineamenti per uno studio sociologico, FrancoAngeli, Milano.
Guidetti, G., Pedrini, G., Zamparini, L. (2020). Assessing perceived job quality among seasonal tourism workers: The case of Rimini, Italy. Tourism Economics, 27(8), 1629-1649.
Haug, M.R. (1972). Deprofessionalisation: An Alternative Hypothesis for the Future. The Sociological Review, 20(1), 195-211.
Haug, M.R. (1975). The Deprofessionalization of Everyone? Sociological Focus, 8(3): 197-213.
ILO (2018a). Resolution concerning statistics on work relationships. 20th International Conference of Labour Statisticians, Geneva, 10-19 October.
ILO (2018b). Testing of proposals for a revised International Classification of Status in Employment. 20th International Conference of Labour Statisticians, Geneva, 10-19 October.
ILO (2018c). Data collection guidelines for ICSE-18. 20th International Conference of Labour Statisticians, Geneva, 10-19 October.
INAPP (2024). Sviluppo tecnologico, digitalizzazione, qualità del lavoro e relazioni industriali. Sinappsi, 2/2024, INAPP, Roma.
ISFOL (2013). Le dimensioni della qualità del lavoro. I risultati della III indagine Isfol sulla qualità del lavoro. ISFOL, Roma.
ISTAT (2024). Classificazione delle Professioni. Revisione 2021. Statistiche Focus, 4 gennaio 2024, ISTAT.
Kalleberg, A.L., and Vaisey, S. (2005). Pathways to a Good Job: Perceived Work Quality among the Machinists in North America. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 43(3), 431-454.
Knox, A., Warhurst, C., Nickson, D., and Dutton, E. (2015). More than a feeling: Using Hotel Room Attendants to Improve Understanding of Job Quality. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(12), 1547-1567.
La Rosa, M. (1983a). Qualità del lavoro e teorie socio-lavoriste: Una ‘chiave’ interpretativa e un ‘percorso’ di ricerca. Sociologia del Lavoro, 5–6(17–18), 11–60.
La Rosa, M. (Ed.) (1983b). Qualità della vita e qualità del lavoro: Problemi e prospettive per gli anni '80. FrancoAngeli.
La Rosa, M. (2004). Il lavoro nella sociologia. Carocci.
Maestripieri, L., and Bellini, A. (Eds.) (2024). Professionalism and Social Change. Processes of Differentiation Within, Between and Beyond Professions. Palgrave Macmillan.
Noordegraaf, M. (2015). Hybrid professionalism and beyond: (New) Forms of public professionalism in changing organizational and societal contexts. Journal of Professions and Organization, 2, 187-206.
Noordegraaf, M. (2020). Protective or connective professionalism? How connected professionals can (still) act as autonomous and authoritative experts. Journal of Professions and Organization, 7, 205-223.
Oppenheimer, M. (1972). The Proletarianization of the Professional. The Sociological Review, 20(1), 213-227.
Sauer, C., Valet, P., Roscigno, V.J., and Wilson, G. (2022). Neoliberalism’s impact on public-sector job quality. The US and Germany compared. In: Warhurst, C., Mathieu, C., Dwyer, R. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Job Quality. Oxford University Press, 469-485.
Spina, E., and Vicarelli, G. (2021). Verso un nuovo professionalismo medico. In: Pipan, T., and Vicarelli, G. (Eds.), La sociologia e la sfida della formazione manageriale in sanità. Salute e Società, Anno XX, 1/2021, FrancoAngeli, 55-71.
Warhurst, C., Hurrell, S.A., Gilbert, K., Nickson, D.P., Commander, J., and Calder, I. (2009). Just ‘mothers really’? Role stretch and low pay amongst female classroom assistants. In: Bolton, S.C., and Houlihan, M. (Eds), Work Matters. Palgrave, 180-196.
Warhurst, C., Knox, A., Wright, S. (2025). Developing a Standard Measure of Job Quality. Work, Employment and Society, 39(4), 927-948.
Wilensky, H.L. (1964). The professionalization of everyone? American Journal of Sociology, 70(2), 137-158.