Reviewed by Frederick L. Neumann University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign
The title of Professor Lubell’s dissertation alone should suffice as the abstract of its content, that is, if you recognize the accounting profession, as used here to mean public accounting. The organizational conflict referred to is both internal and external to the AICPA and that organization’s predecessors. The legislative aspect is primarily a local affair since the profession is regulated principally at the state level. This does not mean that national organizations have not been involved, as the protagonist for this part of the story is the National Society of Public Accountants (NSPA). Much of Professor Lubell’s presentation is an historical narrative about the on again, off again negotiations of recent years between these two adversaries.
After a description of legislative regulation and these two principal organizations, the author goes back to the late nineteenth century to trace the legislative and organizational history relating to public accounting in this country. The presentation highlights the conflicts at two levels:
Internal Conflict — Among CPAs
1885-1896 Early Patterns of Ideological Conflict — American Association vs Institute of Accountants
1897-1923 Professionalization Through Self Regulation or Li-censing — American Institute of Accountants vs the Federation of State Societies of CPAs
132 The Accounting Historians Journal, Spring, 1982
1921-1936 Expanded Internal Conflict — The American Institute
vs The American Society of CPAs 1936-1945 Termination of Internal Legislative Conflict — The
merger of the American Society of CPAs and the
American Institute
External Conflict —With Non-CPAs
1885-1896 Early Attempts at Recognition — U.S. vs British Auditors
1897-1923 Early Spread of CPA Legislation — Public Accountants vs Private Bookkeepers
1921-1936 Institutional Conflict — CPAs vs the National Association of CPAs
1936-1945 New Patterns of External Conflict — CPAs vs Non – CPAs
1945-1954 The Lines are Drawn —American Institute vs National Association of Public Accountants
The remainder of the text is devoted primarily to the latter conflict and chronicles the various attempts of the two groups to achieve a modus vivendi. The early attempts at negotiation between the AICPA and the NSPA, between 1954 and 1960, are summarized and, between 1960 and 1964, are described on a year by year basis. Professor Lubell concludes with a review of relations between the two from 1964 to 1976. In doing so, he relates developments on several fronts: the judicial, Federal government, and state legislative. Some observations about anti-trust possibilities are also made.
All of this is presented within the context of two sociological models of the professionalization process: a static attribute model and a continuum model. The former is identified as “a fixed listing of descriptive qualities that are generally characteristic of the rec-ognized professions.” The author cites several examples of this ap-proach beginning with Abraham Flexner’s model relating to social work, in 1915. Lubell summarizes these efforts and concludes by listing Greenwood’s five elements: (1) systematic theory, (2) authority, (3) community sanction, (4) ethical codes, and (5) a culture. He also introduces Buckley’s exchange model.
Professor Lubell notes some shortcomings of a static model and turns instead to a professional continuum model. He proposes a status spectrum ranging from “non professional” to “professional” with Greenwood’s five elements used to position various occupations. Professionalism in such a model is depicted as a somewhat “relative” phenomenon.
Lubell then raises an interesting chicken or egg type question as to whether attributes create professions or whether professions give rise to professional attributes. He notes that some groups have unsuccessfully sought to attain higher status by just attempting to acquire the attributes. He offers constraints such as those postulated by Goode, Barber, and Montagna as possible explanations of their failure.
The continuum model also better suits Lubell’s evolutionary approach to professionalization. He describes Caplow’s model of the sequence of events leading to professional status and contributes observations from sociologists such as Wilensky.
The identified constraints of his “barriers paradigm” are both internal (internal conflict and technological limitations) and external (competing occupations, legal barriers, and public opinion) and shift in emphasis with time.
The conclusion of this discussion is a multi-stage conflict model that provides an integrated conceptualization of professional evolution. In it, he lists four stages (nonprofessional, marginal, emerging, and generally recognized professional status), their primary objectives, sequence of professionalization, and constraints.
In his concluding remarks, the author introduces the consumer movement as a new and potentially powerful constraint confronting aspiring professions. This force, the author argues, provides a new dimension to the public service or altruism attribute of the profession. Public opinion, he maintains, is beginning to be felt. Sunset laws are offered as an example. Congressional inquiry and the concern of the Federal Trade Commission are cited as others. This two front campaign for survival by the CPAs against government agencies and the “politically astute” National Society of Public Accountants promises to be an interesting if not a tedious one. The author has provided us with a richly supplemented “program” which helps the reader to understand as well as identify the players and the stakes, against a broad background of historical evolution and sociological analysis.
