The bigger picture

The political question of who counts as a profession is one of the central political questions of any modern economy. The political authority that professions hold, the political conditions under which they operate, the political relationship between professional self-regulation and state regulation, and the political contests about whose work counts as professional, have been continuous across modern history.

The German sociologist Max Weber documented how the political conditions of modern economic life produced what he called rationalisation: the political project of organising work, knowledge, and decision-making according to formal rules and expert authority. The modern professions, including law, medicine, accounting, and engineering, were political achievements of this rationalisation project, and the political authority they hold is a political settlement, with material consequences for how the work is conducted and who is permitted to conduct it.

The American sociologist Magali Sarfatti Larson documented in detail how the modern professions emerged through political contest. The political project of professionalisation, including the establishment of professional schools, the political achievement of state licensing, the political contest about what counted as professional knowledge, and the political conditions under which professionals operated, was the work of decades of organising in each profession. The political legacy of these contests continues to shape what professional services in Australia is, who is admitted, and on what terms.

The colonial transfer

Australian professional services inherited British political settlements about professions. The Inns of Court tradition, the Royal Society scientific tradition, the chartered accountancy tradition, and the political assumption that professionals were a particular kind of social and political authority, were all transmitted into colonial Australia largely intact.

What that political vision excluded is part of the history. Women were politically excluded from most Australian professions until well into the twentieth century, with successive political contests required to open admissions. First Nations people were politically excluded for longer, with the political achievement of First Nations professionals across law, medicine, accounting, and other professions still being made today. Migrants from non-British backgrounds, particularly with overseas qualifications, faced political conditions that limited recognition for decades.

The political conditions of the Australian professions through the twentieth century reflected the political conditions of British professional politics, modified through local political contests about admission, recognition, and authority.

The post-war settlement

The post-war political settlement extended the political project of professionalisation. Professional bodies were established or strengthened. State regulation of professional conduct expanded. The political relationship between the state and the professions was settled in particular ways that reflected the post-war consensus about expertise, authority, and public interest. 

The settlement was a political achievement, contested in detail and reached through specific political compromises. The political conditions of the legal profession, the medical profession, the accounting profession, and the engineering profession were all set during this period, and the political legacy continues to shape contemporary practice.

The neoliberal turn and the consultancy boom

From the 1980s, a different political settlement began to assert itself. The political idea that government should buy professional advice from external consultants rather than maintain its own expertise was developed in the United Kingdom and Australia and rolled out through successive reforms.

The consultancy boom, accelerating from the 1990s, produced political conditions that reshaped Australian professional services. The big-four accounting firms, the major management consultancies, and the rise of significant law-firm consulting practices were political artefacts of this turn. The political relationship between government clients and consulting firms, which had been distant in the post-war settlement, became increasingly central to how government worked.

The political legacy is significant. The high-profile cases of the late 2010s and early 2020s, involving conflict of interest, unauthorised disclosure, and the political conditions of consulting firms operating across audit, advisory, and government work, surfaced political contests that had been building for decades.

The integrity political moment

The political conversation about professional services integrity, accelerating since 2022 and still continuing, has been one of the most consequential political moments for the sector in decades. Federal Senate inquiry attention, regulator scrutiny, and public conversation about the political conditions of major firms reshaped what was politically acceptable.

The integrity political moment is not over. It continues to reshape what firms can do, what political risks they carry, and what reputational economics applies. The political conversation about professional services as serving the public interest, rather than only the firm interest, is sustained.

The present moment

AI in professional work, firm culture politics, and cross-border practice politics are reshaping the sector now.

AI in professional work arrives as a contested political question. AI tools are reshaping what professional work involves, who is paid for it, and how the professions justify their continuing political authority. The political question of whether AI is a tool used by professionals or a partial replacement of professional labour is being negotiated globally.

Firm culture politics arrives through sustained political attention on harassment, partner accountability, and the political conditions of associate and emerging professional work. The political conversation about the firm as workplace, with safe conditions for women, queer, trans, multicultural, and First Nations professionals, is sustained.

Cross-border practice politics arrives through geopolitical conditions in the Asia-Pacific reshaping what client work is politically acceptable. The political conditions of Australian firms working with overseas clients in particular jurisdictions are politically contested.