1

CANDIDATE NO: 29509

UNIT: SOCI30050, Dissertation

ESSAY TITLE: The Spirit of Employment Law: Empirical Application of French Pragmatist Theory to a Case Study of a Medium-Sized Law Firm

SUPERVISOR: Dr Rosa Vasilaki

WORD COUNT

(excluding footnotes): 9,992

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 3

LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................. 5 THEORETICAL OVERVIEW .................................................................... 5 THE IMPERATIVE TO JUSTIFY .............................................................. 6 SITUATIONS OF DISPUTE ..................................................................... 7 EQUIVALANCE ...................................................................................... 8 AGREEMENT AND ENDING DISPUTES ................................................. 8 JUSTIFICATORY REGIMES .................................................................... 9 THE NEW SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM ....................................................... 10 PROJECTIVE LOGICS AND ORDER OF WORTH .................................. 12 FP RESEARCH AND EMPIRICAL TESTING WITHIN THE WORKPLACE . 15 THE ENGLISH LEGAL PROFESSION .................................................... 17 APPLYING FP TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION ........................................ 20

METHODOLOGY ........................................................................ 22

DATA ANALYSIS ......................................................................... 26 OVERALL STRATEGY .......................................................................... 26 THE PREVELANCE OF JUSTIFICATORY REGIMES .............................. 26 EXCITEMENT ...................................................................................... 28 LAWYERS KNOWLEDGE ..................................................................... 29 MAKING MONEY FOR THE FIRM ......................................................... 31 SEEKING JUSTICE, FAIRNESS, AND HELPING OTHERS ..................... 33 THE CLIENT RELATIONSHIP AND SERVICE ........................................ 39

CONCLUDING REMARKS ........................................................... 42

APPENDIX .................................................................................. 45 TABLE 1: TABLE OF INTERVIEW PARTICIPANTS ................................. 45 TABLE 2: LIST OF DATA SOURCES FOR DISCOURSE ANALYSIS ........ 45 TABLE 3: ORDER OF WORTH FRAMEWORK ....................................... 46

BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................... 48

3

INTRODUCTION

The legal profession in England has been subjected to decades of

macro-sociological scrutiny using top-down deductive reasoning to

illuminate findings (Travers, 2001). However, a new theory has

emerged out of the French woodwork since the late-80s that

purports to explain the plurality of pragmatic regimes of action.

French Pragmatist Theory (FP) has been the intensely discussed,

researched and tested in Francophone sociological writings. Yet it

has failed to permeate English sociological discourse, empirical

studies are fleeting and scarcely found in any major journals. This

study will apply Boltanski and Thevenot’s (2006) theory of

justificatory regimes to the experiences of lawyers in Southwest

England. A case study (Yin, 2009; Thomas, 2011) of a medium-

sized solicitors firm, called TEF – a pseudonym – that focuses on

employment law will be conducted. FP’s organisational pluralism

provides novel explanations of how workers actions can be oriented

around one – or several – common goods.

This dissertation will uncover the workplace motivations,

justifications, and rationales of lawyers at TEF through a

qualitative mixed-methods study. It will answer how justificatory

regimes orient lawyers actions around a common good and analyse

how this affects the experiences of individuals working in a

particular firm. This research is guided by two recent changes:

Firstly, a change to the legal profession where solicitors firms can

become Alternative Business Structures (ABS) since 2011,

meaning non-lawyers can own them. Secondly, a broader

transformation of workplace logics throughout France – and

possibly beyond – termed “the Third Spirit of Capitalism”

(Boltanski and Chiapello, 2005a). My core argument is that

projective logics articulated by lawyers are beginning to displace

4

top-down market logics within TEF, leading to compromises and

tensions. Lawyers draw upon a diverse range of argumentative

resources depending on the situational grammar; this dissertation

seeks to explain the specific orders of worth lawyers refer to in the

workplace. It is unique as one of the first case studies in English

sociology that applies FP to a specific working environment.

5

LITERATURE REVIEW

FP represents an epistemological departure from Bourdieu’s (1990)

Structuralism (Blokker, 2011: 252-3), characteristic of a pragmatic

turn from ‘a critical sociology’ to ‘a sociology of critical capacity’ –

rather than a paradigm shift (Kuhn, 2012) or the collapse of

metanarratives (Lyotard, 1984) – where the sociologist clarifies how

actions and behaviours become ‘justified’. This dissertation applies

and tests key FP concepts through empirical analysis focusing on

justificatory regimes and lived experiences within the solicitors’

office. As FP is relatively recent this dissertation begins with a brief

theoretical overview before reviewing the literature and research.

THEORETICAL OVERVIEW

FP focuses on our uniquely human capacity for justification that

evolved out of advanced language (Henriques, 2011: 142-9). The

seminal book “On Justification” (Boltanski and Thevenot, 2006) is

one of the most important sociological publications in recent times

(Wagner, 2008: 236); it advocates a pragmatic sociology focusing

on the individual agent’s actions, rhetoric, and behaviour within

social situations. Boltanski and Thevenot (B&T) study how actors

reach agreements, justify actions, and solve disputes without

resorting to violence (2006: 32). B&T avoid the binary debates of

relativism/universalism; agency/structure; and

realism/utopianism; by combining “the sociology of collective

phenomena and the economy of the marketplace” (2006: 28; Diaz-

Bone, 2011: 50-51).

B&T argue “[that a] rigorous social science must take seriously

the justifications of persons and the metaphysics of agreement on

which these justifications are based” (2006: 345), which have

previously eluded sociologists; these justifications are illuminated

6

within the coexisting orders of worth in shared social spaces

(Kostiner, 2003; Annisette and Richardson, 2011; Ramirez, 2013).

Accordingly, the social world can be analysed through the

justification of action arising out of critical disputes and

disagreements – which are daily occurrences – managed by

referring to particular rhetoric and grammar1. Their interest is

somewhat Durkheimian: “devoted to understanding a political and

social equilibrium” (B&T, 1999: 366), aiming “to describe the

actors’ sense of justice and to build models of the competence

which actors [possess] in order to face ordinary critical situations.”

(ibid: 364)

Their model articulates a plurality of pragmatic regimes of action:

love, familiarity, justice, and violence. “On Justification” focuses

explicitly on regimes of justice, where actors justify social

arrangements throughout their day-to-day existence, not in a

political/ethical sense (Rawls, 1971), doxa (Bourdieu, 1990: 67), or

social justice (Kostiner, 2003). Situational justice is characterised

by both conflict and equivalence.

THE IMPERATIVE TO JUSTIFY

When actors meet in close proximity and engage in conversation, a

need for justifying decisions arises, this “imperative to justify

underlies the possibility of coordinating human behaviour” (B&T,

2006: 37). The resulting agreements and compromises following

disputes co-ordinates and structures action, creating social order.

Individuals make associations that are supported by

justifications; these associations often reach convergence on a 1 This is contrasted with Goffman’s (1967) Interaction Ritual where disagreements and disputes are also part of everyday life, but analysed in terms of the situational etiquette that the actor draws upon. Whereas B&T (1999; 2006) analyse social action by the higher common principle granted primacy in the situation, which the actor expresses through a constructed grammar.

7

higher common principle, which requires justice to end disputes

(ibid: 33-4). Once legitimate agreement is reached, social

equilibrium is attained and the dispute ends (ibid: 38). TEF can be

examined as a social order built upon a multitude of agreements,

holding its culture in place through unwritten, internalised

behaviours.

SITUATIONS OF DISPUTE

FP focuses on interactive situations of dispute (Blokker, 2011:

256), during which actors must reflexively articulate justifications

that both support their own arguments and effectively criticises

others (B&T, 1999: 360). Judgements must be made to resolve this

uncertainty between parties (ibid: 367); actors therefore use

rhetorical strategies and arguments appealing to a common good to

denounce each other’s claims, “during critical moments… actors

are called to put their cards on the table and justify their accounts

with specific orders of worth” (McInerney, 2008: 1112), avoiding

coercive and Machiavellian tactics.2 The actor uses stable referents

to reach legitimate, grounded agreement, which ends a dispute

without resorting to violence.

2 The use of coercion, or deceit is considered to be a regime of violence, outside the object of study. Although conflict and dispute exist, the situation is no longer characterised by equivalence. Althusser (1971), Gramsci (1971: 210-76), Marx and Engels (1998), and Lukacs (1968: 46-81) give Marxist accounts of how ‘deceit’ can be part of the legitimising tactics of the ruling class through the use of ideology, used as a weapon to dominate, oppress, or mislead the proletariat. Foucault (1986a; 1986b) and Bourdieu (1991: 163-170) also write on ideology as a form of coercive power, from their own unique perspectives. These stances differ from the Neo-Weberian view of ideology in FP Writings (see Chiapello, 2003; Boltanski and Chiapello, 2005a: 9-12), where ideological power derives from a “spirit” or “worldview” that the actor internalises. This view draws upon Geertz (1973), Dumont (1977: 27-31), Hirschman (1977), and Weber (2002).

8

EQUIVALANCE

The unit of analysis are situations of equivalence – where

something is held accountable. Equivalence is paramount in

managing disputes and justificatory regimes (B&T, 1999: 361),

each regime has its own principle of evaluation that categorises

and orders objects according to an equivalency principle to

determine their worth or “greatness” (Lamont, 2012).

In situational disputes, actors depart from the ordinary use of

language and refer to general, normative principles to make

justifications; basing arguments upon the grammar of the common

good, which must be tested according to the principle of

equivalence (ibid: 363). Forms of equivalence are situational

specific, and people can shift between different forms accordingly;

a form of equivalence is only granted universal validity if the

situation permits it (ibid: 365). Actor’s arguments should be based

on strong evidence that coherently justifies their behaviour; the

grammar of the common good in a solicitors’ office might refer to

general principles of profit-maximisation or inspired-labour, for

instance, if a situation permits it.

AGREEMENT AND ENDING DISPUTES

Actors avoid resorting to violence by coming to terms with mutual

disagreements through compromises or legitimate agreements.

Actors are “endowed with an ability to differentiate legitimate and

illegitimate ways of rendering criticisms and justifications… [which]

can be said to be legitimate in a concrete situation when the

speaker can stand by it whatever the social characteristics of a

newcomer may be” (ibid: 364). This competence allows actors to

resolve disputes grounded upon the model of justificatory regimes

that functions social order.

9

JUSTIFICATORY REGIMES

Justificatory Regimes embody a common humanity that clarifies

our “ordinary sense of justice” (ibid: 366-7) giving us coherent,

concrete principles of ordering and evaluation. Culture, language,

and arguments are used strategically as tools to motivate and

justify action, helping us make sense of our lived experiences

within regimes (Vaisey, 2009: 1679).

B&T develop a common model of the cité that explains the

possibility of shifting between compromising positions, drawing

upon political philosophies that stress a common humanity.

Justificatory regimes – encompassing social bonds that hold

legitimate social order together – are everyday grammars of the

common good, inherited from political philosophy.

B&T identify six orders of worth3 actors utilise to justify their

actions: the industrial order; market order; inspired order; domestic

order; civic order; and order of fame (2006: 159-212). Boltanski and

Chiapello (2005a: 107-28) articulate a seventh order of worth

termed the projective cité following their analysis of managerial

discourse 4 . Each order gains legitimacy in different contexts,

providing actors with the grammar and rhetoric to defend their

position. These modes of justification co-ordinate action and give

concrete principles of evaluation (Diaz-Bone, 2011: 47),

constituting an ‘everyday metaphysics’ where identity is fluid

according to the situation (cf. Bauman, 2000).

Moral principles gradually become embodied within institutional

structures and situations, where actors mobilise the same moral

3 Orders of worth are sometimes termed cités, justificatory regimes, polities, worlds, or economies of worth. These terms are used interchangeably. 4 See the “Order of Worth Framework” table in the Appendix for a General Overview of the Seven Justificatory Regimes used as a theoretical overview and for coding and data analysis.

10

principles towards a common good, e.g. “The Family” is an

embodiment of the Domestic order of worth. Justificatory Regimes

“are now encapsulated in the core of a large number of ordinary

institutions and social devices such as polling stations, shop-

floors, media, artistic shows and family ceremonies” (B&T, 1999:

366). Furthermore, “each of these constructions proposes a specific

principle of order or equivalence, which can be implemented with a

view to specifying what the worth or ‘size’ of [individuals]… and

base a justifiable order between persons” (ibid: 367). One can

denounce and disarm critique from one cité using another cité, or

critique internally.

THE NEW SPIRIT OF CAPITALISM

Boltanski and Chiapello’s (B&C) “The New Spirit of Capitalism”

(2005a; 2005b) is described as “the most important event of the

[pragmatic] turn so far” (Bugden, 2000: 150). B&C answer how the

internal logic and ideology of capitalism transformed itself in the

absence of critical resistance, arguing that capitalism re-organised

its dominant worldviews that justify commitment to wage-earning

activities (B&C, 2005b: 161-2).

Chiapello (2003) argues that the spirit of capitalism has a social

integration function, which creates a stabilising sense of belonging,

justifying the capitalist system (2003: 165), when criticised this

takes on a distortion function (ibid: 166). Accordingly B&C reject

views of ideology that have dominated sociological discourse,

disagreeing that ideology is: “False Consciousness” as Marxists

argue (Marx and Engels, 1998: 57-116), used as a weapon

(Bourdieu, 1991: 163-170; Foucault, 1986b), a part of the state

apparatus (Althusser, 1971), or a hegemonic force (Gramsci, 1971:

210-76); B&C lean towards a Neo-Weberian depiction of ideology

11

influenced by Geertz (1973) and Dumont (1977), who view ideology

as a justificatory force with legitimating properties.

The Spirit of Capitalism is: “the ideology that justifies people’s

commitment to capitalism, render[ing] this commitment attractive”

(B&C, 2005b: 162), providing actors with normative arguments to

justify committing themselves to a vocation. B&C argue that

capitalism needs “a spirit” to justify the constant infinite

accumulation of capital. The emphasis of study is therefore

Weber’s (2002) articulation of a moral dimension, rather than an

economic dimension of capitalism; this ideology rationalises actors’

commitment to wage-earning activities (Chiapello, 2003).

B&C argue that the spirit of capitalism justifies workplace

commitment in a way money cannot (2005a: 8-9). Pink’s (2009)

research demonstrates that money is not the primary motivator at

work and that financial incentives can often be detrimental to

performance in highly-skilled occupations. He emphasises the

individual drive for mastery, purpose, and autonomy at work (ibid:

85-150), mirroring aspects of B&C’s (2005a) articulation of a

projective cité.

The Spirit of Capitalism is reformulated from Weber’s (2002: 13-

38) conceptual definition, this First Spirit of Capitalism was

instrumental in one’s vocation, which offered personal salvation.

B&C (2005a: 9) and Hirschman (1977) argue that this spirit was

transformed in the 1930’s and profit-making derived justification

from a common good, becoming legitimate by appealing to a higher

(industrial-civic) order. Accordingly the worker can justify work in

exchange for money, capitalism is seen as “a mode of co-ordinating

action and a lived world” (B&C, 2005a: 12), even if few people ever

accumulate enough to live comfortably beyond their means, it

receives justification from a higher order.

As well as appealing to the common good, involvement in

capitalism is also stimulating and fulfils workers’ expectations of

12

autonomy and security by keeping them engaged and providing

valid justifications and arguments for this engagement (ibid: 15-

16). The tension between autonomy and security exists in all forms

of modernity and the spirit of capitalism relieves this tension

somewhat (Wagner, 2001: 10, 2008: 112-120). There are three

dimensions that provide a concrete expression to the spirit of

capitalism: excitement (personal liberation, authenticity, and

creativity); security; and a notion of fairness that is “coherent with

a sense of justice, and… contributes to the common good.” (B&C,

2005b: 164). The capitalist system relies on these justifications to

provide arguments that keep workers engaged (ibid, 2005a: 20-21).

This spirit is internalised to furnish justification, it is the dominant

ideology that permeates and infiltrates all forms of discourse, even

those critical of capitalism (ibid: 57). This concept gives a

rationalisation that compels ordinary people to take up a vocation

and provides workers with the “argumentative resources” to defend

their choices (ibid, 2005b: 163-4). The Spirit of Capitalism is

therefore relevant when examining the justifications lawyers give

for their engagement with their vocation, particularly when

examining their choices and experiences from an FP perspective.

PROJECTIVE LOGICS AND ORDER OF WORTH

Projective ideologies and logics have displaced traditional notions of

management within large organisations since the 1960s, changing

the way individuals work (B&C, 2005a: 70-99; 2005b: 165-6). The

third spirit of capitalism manifested itself following the widespread

critique of 1968, where network logic began displacing industrial

logic – which dominated managerial discourse until the 1960’s –

leading to a major re-organisation of systems and values (B&C,

2005b: 170).

13

Managerial discourse criticised older bureaucratic, hierarchical

styles of management in the 60’s, favouring autonomous work with

flatter structures; a new kind of authority emerged emanating from

the network, which was seen as flexible and innovative (ibid,

2005a: 64-71). The economy began to be conceived in network

terminology, with people gradually becoming interdependent,

relying on connections and access to social capital to ‘get ahead’

(Granovetter, 1973; Burt, 2000; Timberlake, 2005), “fairly” and

“justly” by making the best use of their acquaintances and ties in a

projective world (B&C, 2005b: 168-9). Furthermore, hierarchy is

demolished as worker flexibility increases and the project becomes

an appropriate tool for organising work, leading to: new jobs;

outsourcing; a rejection of Taylorism and Fordism; and relaxed

workplace controls (ibid, 2005a: 73-81). This transition is evident

in newer organisational structures based on networks

encapsulating technological shifts (Castells, 2000). Work becomes

personified with properties of individuality, meaning and

authenticity emerging amongst workers motivated by a sense of

inner purpose and mastery (Fleming and Sturdy, 2009: 577-80;

Pink, 2009).

Authority had come from the top-down, where managers

delegated power in a highly centralised manner; nowadays a moral

property of trust unites members of a team (B&C, 2005a: 83). The

legitimacy from an industrial-civic order that dominated the second

spirit of capitalism is diminished; a projective order gains

legitimacy (ibid: 90-92). Concurrently the boundaries of

private/professional life blur, with an increased emphasis on

“skills”; employability fragments the world of work (ibid: 155), yet

individuals are capable of flourishing and are given more

responsibility – shifting the emphasis away from control and

surveillance that Foucauldian’s emphasise within the workplace

(Foucault, 1986a; McKinlay and Starkey, 1998) – making their

14

identities fluid using the resources around them (Bauman, 2000:

130-167). Finally, work is now seen as exciting and a solution to

the disenchantment of modern life (B&C, 2005a: 99), where

consumerism makes life seem dull and empty (Ritzer, 2009). An

examination of authenticity and excitement in TEF Law will be

conducted.

B&C (2005a: 105-7) argue that contemporary management

literature justifies engagement with work by organising it around a

series of reflexive projects. These projects are expressions of

growing network logics (ibid: 136), that have changed the world of

work: workers have greater autonomy and take ownership of their

work, yet paradoxically it has led to the rise of subcontracting,

outsourcing, and temporary labour (ibid: 219-221). Employment

rhetoric has shifted from job security concerns that were once seen

as liberating (ibid: 468) to a need for flexible employment, where

the ideal worker is flexible and malleable within a fragmented

labour market (B&C, 2005a: 224-239; 2005b: 169).

The biggest critique of B&C (2005a) is that they wrote a

“specifically French book”. Parker (2008: 611) echoes criticisms

that empirical analysis might not be suitable for Anglo-American

sociology5 as capitalism has evolved differently in each country;

this criticism is responded to in the preface (B&C, 2005a: xxi).

Although in 1999 it was estimated that 20% of all establishments

within France adopted a projective mode of justification, more

empirical testing is needed outside France to determine

institutional, national, and global orders of worth. B&C (2005b:

178-9) suggest that political differences between Britain and

France indicate a divergence in the modes of justifications; they

5 Vaisey (2009) has reformulated concepts of Motivation and Justification into a new model that explains cultural meanings. Furthermore Walzer (1983) has developed a theoretical model of plural spheres of justice, similar to Boltanski and Thevenot (2006). Yet a detailed sociological account of a “New Spirit of Capitalism” specific to Britain or the US does not exist.

15

speculate that British institutions might adopt more market-

oriented forms of worth. This hypothesis will be tested in the

empirical section of the thesis: Have British firms adopted a

projective logic or market logic? What orders of worth do lawyers

refer to in the workplace?

FP RESEARCH AND EMPIRICAL TESTING WITHIN THE

WORKPLACE

B&T (1999: 369-70) argue that: “companies are, a very good field to

test this hypothesis [of justificatory regimes]… The co-presence in

the modern company of heterogeneous resources, leading to

different forms of consistency and based on different principles of

justice, is particularly striking” as workplaces rely upon common

agreements. B&T (1989) collected eleven studies on fairness and

justice in the workplace that tested FP; more recently empirical

studies have applied FP to various occupations in the UK,

including: social activists (Kostiner, 2003), auditors (Ramirez,

2013), accountants (Annisette and Richardson, 2011); and

Fairtrade labellers (Reinecke, 2010). More organisations have been

analysed using FP abroad 6 , even justifications for Opioid

Maintenance Therapy (OMT) in Finnish Drug Dependency

treatment clinics (Perälä et al, 2013). However, there is a notable

gap in the literature with no FP studies on the legal profession.

Ramirez (2013) analyses institutional change within the British

Audit profession. Auditors argued changes were “unjust” and

“unfair” as an external body was monitoring them. In order to

resolve these tense situations between changing justificatory

regimes a compromise was reached to stabilise the situation and

restore a so-called “natural order” (ibid: 865). Ramirez shows how

6 See Jagd (2011: 347-354) for a review of empirical studies in Organisational Research that apply FP.

16

FP can be used to frame experiences within the workplace,

particularly those of indignation at the height of change. B&C

(2005b: 171) argue that institutional changes need “to ensure the

fairness of work”, especially within organisations; what auditors

deemed “unfair” led to a breakdown in the justifications for work

and a rejection of top-down power (Ramirez, 2013: 867-70).

There have been several French-language studies on justificatory

regimes within various non-profit organisations (Jagd, 2011: 349),

yet FP has been slow in catching onto English-language discourse.

Justificatory regimes and processes actively transform the

workplace and capitalism, McInerney (2008: 1093-4) argues that

justifications mobilise workers to construct “organisational fields”

that legitimise their work, in doing so they draw upon a civic

justificatory regime. Rolandsson et al (2011: 578) argue that civic

justifications motivate and legitimise the work of open-source

software programmers; these justifications are also used by

Finnish medical professionals in OMT (Perälä et al, 2013: 962)

allowing them to construct a field based around a “civic common

good”, where argumentative tools are applied in specific ways to

disarm criticism and tension within their field (McInerney, 2008:

1107). Boivin and Roch (2006) used a case study of Apple

Computers demonstrating conflict and tension between workers

applying inspirational justifications alongside industrial justificatory

regimes. Fuller (2013: 649-654) used similar insights to develop an

understanding of human agency related to the justification of

urban politics, specifically on how consensus is reached in the

logic of action. Cloutier and Langley (2013: 375) argue that

individual justification’s result from institutional effects, creating

“field-level logics” – localised agreements cause justifications to

become institutionalised. However, this process requires further

illumination – especially on localised agreements and how these

17

agreements become legitimate parts of social order – which this

dissertation aims to provide by examining the solicitors’ profession.

THE ENGLISH LEGAL PROFESSION

Classical theorists (Weber, 1978; De Tocqueville, 2000) studied the

legal profession, but only when Parsons (1954a; 1954b)

emphasised the importance of the legal profession – as a stabilising

mechanism that creates an orderly functioning society – did

sociological discourse shift from theoretical to empirical work.

Parsons (ibid) saw the legislative power of lawyers as a mediating

force between the market-economy and politics and argued that

the lawyer-client relationship revolves around trust, efficiency and

providing a service instead of profit-creation and money.

Lawyers’ knowledge and expertise is a common theme,

particularly the means of knowledge reproduction within the

professional field (Bourdieu, 1986; Hunt and Wickham, 1994;

Larson, 2013). However, the Sociology of the Legal Profession

remains a relatively small and under-researched subfield in Britain

(Travers, 2001), where research often has a macro-bias – an

overemphasis on structural conditions as opposed to individual

actions (Travers, 1993: 446-7). There are a number of statistical,

quantitative studies on solicitors (Law Society, 2012), yet a lack of

ethnographic, qualitative work – Flood’s (1981, 1983) studies on

Barristers’ clerks and a recent study conducted by Sommerlad et al

(2010) being notable exceptions. This dissertation aims to address

this gap by conducting an examination of solicitors in their

workplace setting.

Not only is the legal profession a distinctive hallmark of

capitalism (Friedman, 1989: 16), but the level of economic activity

in capitalist countries is strongly correlated to the number of

18

lawyers and their level of activity (Rueschemeyer, 1986: 418-9)7.

This interdependency makes the study of broader changes in the

spirit of capitalism affecting transformations in the legal profession

quite intriguing. Weber (1978) and Rueschemeyer (1986: 430)

recognised that early-capitalism created the demand for legal

professions to mediate disputes regarding property, employment,

and the family.

Common themes within the Sociology of Solicitors include: entry,

exclusion, and segregation within the profession. Historically the

solicitor’s profession was an “exclusive club” of white, economically

privileged men (Nicolson, 2006: 109-112) who used their status to

exercise control over who can enter the profession (Abel 1988: 13).

However, as greater numbers of women and ethnic minorities

entered the expanding Higher Education System these controls

relaxed (Francis and Sommerlad, 2009: 64). Despite the increased

proportion of female and ethnic minority solicitors over the past

few decades, solicitors still report a homogenous, masculine,

ethnocentric culture, especially within the upper echelons of the

profession (Law Society, 2010a, 2010b, 2012). Larson argues that

the legal profession is still exclusionary and maintains a monopoly

of power through maintaining an elitist status (2013: 168). The

exclusionary mechanisms help it maintain specific interests whilst

appearing objective and neutral (ibid: 175-7).

Significant managerial changes in English solicitors’ firms have

led to more relaxed controls, structural reorganisation and

heightened agency (Hanlon, 1997; Ackroyd and Muzio, 2007).

External pressures often shape internal culture within firms

(Cotterrell, 2006: 87), these changes are in-line with structural

transformations highlighted by B&C (2005a). One example is the

7 Japan is an exception, it is a highly advanced capitalist economy with few bengoshi (lawyers) per capita in comparison to the United States and other capitalist countries (Rueschemeyer, 1986: 420-21).

19

birth of the “modern firm” in the 1950’s in response to staff

shortages and a rejection of nepotism (Galanter and Roberts, 2008:

152-9); by the 1970’s the number of partners in “Magic Circle” 8

firms increased exponentially as firms diversified business

opportunities. Unfortunately, this historical analysis does not

elaborate on workplace justifications, motivations, or lived

experiences.

A distinctive characteristic of the legal profession cross-

nationally is that justice promotion is highly valued

(Rueschemeyer, 1964, 1986). Lawyers themselves are “entrusted

with a social function” of administering justice, mitigating conflicts

and mediating disputes (Bourdieu, 1986: 819). The juridical space

appears neutral because of its orientation towards the truth (ibid:

830) and the high level of trust involved in the client-lawyer

relationship (Parsons, 1954b). Bourdieu (1986: 844) argues that

specific interests – especially concerning justice – guide legal

professionals becoming manifest in their work. The juridical field

makes individual interests universally legitimate by transforming

ordinary problems into legal problems. Legal specialists have

mastery over the juridical field and use their knowledge, specialist

language, and terminology to seek just resolutions for their client

(ibid: 829). Therefore, they have the power to reveal the rights of

their clients, as injustice leads to the discovery of individual rights

(ibid: 833) and costly work becomes justified by the lawyer seeking

to redress unfairness create just equilibriums (Sarat and Felstiner,

1989: 1683-4).

Knowledge is also addressed in Sarat and Felstiner’s (1989)

study of Divorce Lawyers in the US. They argue that within the

legal system, objectivity and fairness are irrelevant, instead the

8 Magic Circle refers to the five leading UK law firms by revenue, amongst the most prestigious in the world. They are: Clifford Chance, Linklaters, Freshfields, Allen and Overy, and Slaughter and May.

20

system is dependent on experts who possess specialist legal

knowledge and articulate it effectively (ibid: 1667). This means that

the costly work of lawyers can be justified in terms of fairness (ibid:

1671); a view critical of Parsons (1954b) notion that lawyers offer

advice altruistically as opposed to being money-motivated. Larson

(2013) is also sceptical of lawyers’ altruism. However, Friedman

(1989: 17) believes that lawyers are not only needed as

information-brokers and experts, but as insiders who are aware of

the rules of the game and how the juridical field operates (cf.

Bourdieu, 1986, 1991). Foucault goes further by claiming that

lawyers are part of truth politics, where their statements hold

implicit value (1986b: 131); Lawyers authorise what is true

through the dissemination of knowledge in their practice and this

gives them inherent power (Hunt and Wickham, 1994: 12).

Forstenlechner and Lettice (2008: 645-50) examined the

motivations and expectations of young lawyers seeking a career in

England, arguing that “career prospects” and “high wages” were

key motivators, indicating the dominant presence of a market

justificatory regime (B&T, 2006: 193-203), hinted by B&C (2005b:

178-9). However, other authors highlight structural changes

towards an increasingly projective logic within the solicitor’s

profession (Muzio, 2004; Ackroyd and Muzio, 2007). Blokker

argues that: “organisational order and change are closely related to

forms of justification.” (2011: 357) These areas will be expanded on

within this research where justificatory regimes will be tested, with

a view to uncovering whether a projective logic exists.

APPLYING FP TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION

As identified above, a gap exists in sociological discourse; presently

there is no synthesis of FP and research on the solicitor’s

profession. Although FP has been tested through research on

21

various professions, no examination of justificatory regimes

amongst English solicitors and their lived experiences in the

workplace has been conducted. Current research on solicitors

highlights themes of inequality and segregation, whereas

motivation and justification are often ignored.

This research aims to fill two empirical gaps: Firstly, by

introducing FP to the analysis of English professions. Although FP

is well received in France, it has only been recently translated into

English and lacks strict empirical and methodological testing.

Secondly, by researching solicitors themselves – whom sociologists

often ignore – as the Law Society conducts the majority of research

on solicitors9. Contemporary sociological studies often ignore the

role of agency within the legal profession. This dissertation will

examine lawyer’s agency and use FP as its theoretical

underpinning, contributing a unique insight into the rhetoric,

motives, and experiences of solicitors.

This dissertation will examine the impact of transformation upon

the solicitor’s profession and solicitor’s lived experiences. Jagd

(2011: 354) stresses the importance of studying reflexive action in

different forms of justification as an avenue for future research. FP

gives a deeper understanding of the justifications and lived

experiences of solicitors, whilst rigorously testing the theory in the

context of the solicitor’s office: “explicitly focusing on the processes

of justification…[as a] focus for empirical study” (ibid: 344), in line

with the maxim that “[a] rigorous social science must take

seriously the justifications of persons and the metaphysics of

agreement on which these justifications are based.” (B&T, 2006:

345).

9 The Law Society represents the interests of solicitors by providing training and regulation.

22

METHODOLOGY

This study adopts a similar methodological framework as both

Ramirez’s (2013: 853) and Greenwood and Suddaby’s (2006: 31)

institutional analyses: a qualitative case study following Thomas’s

(2011) typology aiming to provide an insight into a firm. The subject

(ibid: 514) of the case study is TEF Law, an ABS with over 100

solicitors operating in Southwest England owned by a larger

European conglomerate. TEF Law focuses on two areas of practice:

Personal Injury and Employment Law. The sample focused on

solicitors and barristers working in employment law, as these

lawyers practice provided a unique site to focus on situational

justifications within a highly specific area.

The methodological standpoint of FP analyses the situation as

arrangements of objects within a particular frame (Diaz-Bone,

2011: 49), where action can be explained by situational disposition

towards a common good (ibid: 54). The study aimed to assess FP’s

theoretical validity through case study testing (George and Bennett,

2005: 76), which was achieved by combining qualitative methods

with a discourse analysis consisting of data sources from the TEF

Law Website and Law Society briefs directed at solicitors.10

The use of qualitative procedures was appropriate for several

reasons: Firstly, exploring the ideas of workplace justification and

legitimacy, would require the participants to articulate their

rationales for choosing a vocation within a specific site in their own

terms, allowing for personal reflection on their workplace

experiences. Secondly, to disentangle how lawyers consume

supposedly neutral ideologies from professional regulatory bodies.

Thirdly, to uncover how various manifestations of order within TEF

10 Table One in the Appendix shows the Interview Participants and their characteristics. Table Two in the Appendix shows a list of data sources for the discourse analysis.

23

Law give a voice to attributes of passion, drive, and motivation

amongst the participants that legitimate their vocation towards a

particular common good (B&C, 2005a: 8-9). Fourthly, the case

study designates TEF Law as a subject within clearly defined

boundaries temporally – following recent changes to the legal

profession allowing firms to become ABS’s – geographically, and

institutionally that allow easy replication and further testing

(Thomas, 2011: 517). Using mixed methods gave an overview of the

justificatory logics salient within TEF Law’s organisational culture

(Tolbert, 1988) by exploring “the logic actors apply in order to

coordinate themselves in the process of production” (Diaz-Bone,

2011: 54). The analysis identified implicit categories,

conventions and practices that were used to reconstruct

justificatory regimes that are part of the deeper structure of the

knowledge-order (ibid: 58).

Initially there were several difficulties persuading lawyers to

participate in the study (cf. Flood, 1981). However, a gatekeeper

was used to gain access to four participants under the condition of

anonymity using pseudonyms. Two solicitors (Jack and Ronald)

agreed to take part in a focus group at TEF’s offices. One barrister

(Susan) and one solicitor (Rose) took part in one-to-one semi-

Figure 1: The Design Path of my Case Study, based on Thomas's (2011: 518) Typology.

Local Theory-Testing

Single Snapshot

Exploratory

24

structured phone interviews. The interviews and focus group took

between thirty to forty minutes to conduct and were fully recorded

and transcribed. As one researcher conducted all the interviews

and transcribed all the data, it avoided what Peräkylä (1997: 326)

describes as a loss of understanding of key conversational

interactions, such as physical cues. The interviews were semi-

structured which allowed the researcher to change the question

order and wording and also probe certain areas in more detail

depending on the respondents’ answers. A narrative analysis was

applied to make sense of participants experiences by asking them

how they “make sense of what has happened” (Bryman, 2008:

551).

Hunt and Wickham (1994: 121) argue that professional and

regulatory knowledge empowers legal professionals through

production – which can be studied through discourse analysis –

which justified using data sources from the Law Society. Further

data was collected from the TEF Law website, where ‘ideology’ is

open to the public eye and served as an important site to analyse

the firm’s self-justification and self-presentation. The materials

purpose was to regulate the solicitors’ behaviour and provide them

with workplace justifications. All data was subject to systematic

coding that highlighted emergent themes. In order to identify

justificatory regimes a matrix of reference values and grammar was

organised to aid evaluative comparison, allowing the researcher to

document tensions between competing grammars and identify

references to the common good as suggested by Lamont

(2012:213)11.

One limitation with theoretical testing is that the methodology is

partially dependent on FP’s internal causal assumptions (George 11 This matrix has been reproduced in the appendix. Similar tables have been used as methodological instruments in other studies that apply FP as reference values actors make in justifications (see Thevenot et al, 2000: 241) or as semantic descriptors in coded text (see Patriotta et al, 2011: 1815-6).

25

and Bennett, 2005: 116). The case is only generalisable to the

theoretical propositions – within a specific temporal and

geographical frame – being tested (Yin, 2009: 15). Furthermore, the

findings are limited to a “single snapshot” of TEF and do not

portray the wider legal profession. Therefore, the validity of the

findings can only be tested through replication.

Studies on the legal profession have been criticised for lacking

wider representativeness. For example, gender equality on entry to

the solicitor’s profession was only reached in the 1997 (Law

Society, 2011) and the profession itself has been criticised for being

the domain of white, Oxbridge-educated, affluent males,

particularly in the upper echelons (Ackroyd and Muzio, 2007; Law

Society, 2010a; Sommerlad et al, 2010). This case study makes no

claim of representativeness outside of TEF Law. However, the

sample is gender equal. Furthermore, the demographics of the firm

are more heterogeneous and diverse than Magic Circle firms.

26

DATA ANALYSIS

This case study aims to study how legal actors mobilise

justificatory regimes and analyses the narratives emerging out of

broader transformations to the workplace. TEF was chosen for this

case study in order to contextualise the on-going changes within

the legal profession, as Ronald pointed out: “There’s been a lot of

changes to the legal profession in recent years, and I think our firm

particularly has been one of the firms involved in and influenced

heavily by those changes”.

OVERALL STRATEGY

Several techniques were used to make sense of the justifications

that lawyers mobilise within their profession. Firstly, a discourse

analysis was conducted of several sources referred to in the

appendix. Secondly, two semi-structured telephone interviews and

a focus group were conducted, transcribed, and coded for emergent

themes and justificatory regimes. The transcribed data was

analysed to make sense of how lawyers mobilise justificatory

regimes within their grammar and practice. These strategies

provided rich content that contributed to my understanding of

prevalent regimes within TEF Law and how lawyers situate

themselves and their clients.

THE PREVELANCE OF JUSTIFICATORY REGIMES

In my analysis three justificatory regimes emerged within TEF Law:

The Market Order, The Projective Order, and to a lesser extent the

Industrial Order. The analysis highlighted considerable tension

between the projective and market orders; The desire for client

27

satisfaction, involvement in cases, and the search for justice were

identified as a higher common principle by all interview

participants and seen as under threat by a renewed emphasis on

profit-creation and competition by three of the four interview

participants.

Overall, the market justificatory regime emerged most frequently

in both the discourse and qualitative analysis, even though some

participants resisted this. Civic justificatory models tended to

underpin the discursive materials, although references were made

to other regimes. The lawyers situated their own realities between

the market and projective orders, which occasionally conflicted,

leading to compromises (B&T, 2006: 277-84). One participant,

Susan, was fully embodied within the projective justificatory

regime and her work reflected projective manifestations:

enthusiasm, adaptability, flexibility, vision, charisma, autonomy,

and a deep desire for the proliferation of connections (B&C, 2005a:

111-2).

Justificatory Regimes in Descending Order of Prevalence throughout all

sources

Regime Codes and Markers

Market

Wins, Competition, Consumer, Success, Money, The

Client, Wealth, Productivity

Projective

Supervision (Coaching), Cases (Projects), Autonomy,

Communication Skills, Personal Experience,

Adaptability, High Mobility, Flexibility, Trust, Network

Expansion, Employability

Industrial Targets, Efficiency, Quality, Reliability, Predictability

Civic Equality, Legal Forms, Rules, Regulation, Community

Domestic Hierarchy, Seniority, Trust, Honesty

Fame Building a Reputation, Social Networks

Green (Environmental)12 Environmental Friendliness, Sustainability

12 The grammar of the Green Order – not previously identified within the literature – was only mobilised in one source. A webpage on the TEF Law Website entitled “Environmental Policy”.

28

Five themes emerged from the analysis: The dimension of

excitement within work, the knowledge and expertise of lawyers, a

desire to restore justice (by far the most prevalent theme, emerging

in every source), the lawyer-client relationship; and profit-creation

for the firm. Interestingly, although lawyers are generally viewed as

conservative and maintaining the status-quo (Friedman, 1989: 20),

this was untrue of my participants – which will be demonstrated

later in the analysis. This could reflect a broader generalisation of

TEF Law’s values or perhaps of workers who challenge

indignations day-to-day.

EXCITEMENT

Excitement was identified as one of three concrete expressions of

the spirit of capitalism (B&C, 2005b: 164). Excitement contributes

to the common good and mobilises workers by giving them

justifications, which allow them to flourish. When Susan was

asked why she decided to work in law she replied:

“I wanted it [my career] to be intellectually challenging and I

wanted to do something that was exciting and that also pays

quite well… I’m dealing with quite exciting areas of law, and

it’s very challenging in all the right ways really.”

She expressed with great enthusiasm her passion for law that went

beyond a paycheque; it was meaningful and authentic to her (B&C,

2005a: 76). Susan dismissed the notion that money was a

significant motivator emphasising repeatedly that “you can make

more in other professions… so you have to do it for the enjoyment

of the job” and was completely immersed in her profession. She

29

ended the interview with “saying that you love your job, is a bit

scary, but I really really enjoy my job, it’s a bit of a lifestyle… and [I

get] all the excitement I want from that.”

Jack also emphasised his excitement (ibid: 96), arguing that legal

work gave him a sense of fulfilment and enjoyment. Both responses

reveal how workers can mobilise excitement to generate subjective

meaning and justification, expressed throughout their work. This

provides both innovation and creativity within the workplace (B&C,

2005a: 166). All participants were dismissive of purely economical

or money-oriented motivations. Ronald acknowledged that mass-

media outlets typically portray lawyers in Magic Circle firms who

earn a lot of money, giving lawyers an unfair representation, he

said “you can earn decent money, but it’s not megabucks… overall

what will keep you in the job is enthusiasm, passion and

motivation.” The participants’ work fulfilled subjective criteria that

provided them with excitement and a sense of legitimacy,

characteristic of a projective order (ibid: 90-92).

LAWYERS KNOWLEDGE

Hunt and Wickham (1994: 121) advocate studying how legal

knowledge is produced institutionally to empower professionals.

The discourse analysis demonstrates that legal institutions – both

regulators and TEF – repeatedly emphasised the lawyer’s expertise.

Under the heading “What Solicitors Do?” the Law Society source

stated: “Solicitors provide expert guidance on the issues people

regularly face”, this was justified in greater detail in the practice

note, where supervisors were determined to possess “a high level of

legal knowledge” that they disseminate to trainees (Law Society

Practice Note).

30

The advertising flyer from TEF Law entitled “TEF First For

Justice: Why Use Our Preferred Law Firm?” gave several

justifications for clients to choose TEF over another legal provider.

The first justification was “Expertise”, noting that lawyers are

qualified by personal experience and “are chosen for their expertise

in dealing with specific claims”, further stating that lawyers “have a

wide and in-depth expertise and experience in resolving matters”.

This was also emphasised on several web pages, notably in Our

Values, Customer Care, and the Testimonials. Actors are therefore

qualified to work in the legal field through technical mastery, and

specialist knowledge (Bourdieu, 1986: 828).

The interview participants mobilised their knowledge as a source

of power at work, where what they say is valued (Foucault, 1986b:

131), providing a stronger sense of self-worth:

“One of the elements of satisfaction is… from feeling that

you’re an expert in your field, more than that, you can advise

on something that they [the client] don’t know about, so

there’s a sense of satisfaction.” (Ronald)

Legal knowledge provided participants with a sense of satisfaction

and enabled them to perform better by effectively concluding cases.

Rose argued that legal knowledge gained through practice

(Bourdieu, 1990), made her better equipped to help clients by

understanding the complex terminology (Bourdieu, 1986: 829).

Jack concurred and stressed helping others:

“It’s not all about the money, it’s about helping people, who

are maybe not as knowledgeable, and don’t have the

expertise on the subject, so you can pass on your knowledge

to help them.”

31

All the participants view themselves as insiders in the profession

who effectively know how to operate within the juridical field

(Friedman, 1989: 17). The legal insider who helps others by

disseminating highly specialist knowledge to laypersons is

distinctive of the third spirit of capitalism (B&C, 2005a: 79).

Although both De Tocqueville (2000) and Weber (1978) identified

the expertise and “specialist” role of lawyers in the nineteenth-

century, the fact that both the participants and advertising

materials mobilise knowledge as an ideological justification in an

altruistic manner to “help people” – as Jack and Rose emphasised

– and “resolve matters” was only identified by Parsons (1954b).

MAKING MONEY FOR THE FIRM

Although law is “not all about the money” (Jack), the data analysis

indicated that profit-maximisation for the firm is highly valued. The

market justificatory regime (B&T, 2006: 193-202) is the most

prevalent within TEF Law – followed closely by the projective

justificatory regime (B&C, 2005a: 107-28) – and solicitors must hit

income targets, conclude cases successfully, and generate revenue.

When asked “what qualities do you think are valued in the

profession?” Ronald responded:

“One of the things that I think is particularly valued in the

profession, which is not what I thought was the highest

value when I was at university, where I thought it was about

winning cases, achieving case outcomes, or trying to exploit

a novel area of law. As I’ve worked in law I’ve found out that

the main, main thing is to make money for the firm…

32

Essentially you need a certain level of knowledge, but the

people who are most successful are the people who you see

and someone says “this person has brought in this amount

of money for the firm this month”, and they may not be the

most knowledgeable in that area, but their skills have

enabled them to bill effectively or conclude cases quickly…

What I’ve experienced whilst working here, is that there have

been some people who have fantastic knowledge of the law,

but they’ve been pushed out because, although they have the

knowledge, they haven’t grasped the objective which is to

bring money in.”

Although Ronald acknowledged the importance of knowledge, his

own professional experiences gave him a sense that the senior

partners value bringing money into TEF more highly. Both Jack

and Ronald agreed that lawyers who fail to create substantial

profits for TEF struggle in the profession because “they’re not cost

effective”. Therefore those least equipped to generate profit are

segmented and excluded (B&C, 2005a: 233-4).

Rose explained “the business model [of TEF] is that you take on

a high number of cases and you conclude them quickly so that

you’re making money for the company”. The instrumental aim of

making money and maximising profit ensures the dominance of a

market order of worth (B&T, 2006: 195-6). The market regime

emphasises cost-effectiveness over civility, network-maximisation,

and tradition (B&C, 2005a: 129-32; B&T, 2006: 261-9). The spirit

of capitalism provides workers with justifications for profit-

maximisation, legitimated by a higher common principle

(Hirschman, 1977); this is embodied quite bluntly in some of the

texts analysed. For example, the Law Society Practice note justifies

the role of supervisors because they “improve motivation,

33

efficiency, and profitability”, all of which are reference values

derived from market-industrial forms of worth as shown in Table

Three.

Two pages of the TEF Law website focus primarily on

profitability. On the “Business Partners” page profitability is

qualified by offering companies “Increased revenue streams” that

ensure maximum income. The “Our Values” page also implicitly

references profitability, deriving values from market-industrial

forms of worth, with terms such as “efficiency” and “productivity”

(cf. B&T, 2006:159-63).

All the interview participants acknowledge that money partially

motivates them, although is not the primary driver for work. For

example, Susan claimed that “if my job was poorly paid I’m not

sure I could justify working like I do, and I’ll probably have a look

at alternative careers”. All of the participants, except Jack, receive

financial incentives for their work; these monetary rewards formed

a key component of their security (B&T, 2005b: 164). This might

indicate that work for British and French firms are structured

around different organisational models and regimes (ibid: 178-9).

SEEKING JUSTICE, FAIRNESS, AND HELPING OTHERS

By far the most prevalent theme – the only one that emerged in

every data source – was that lawyers wish to restore a sense of

justice by helping others. Both B&C and the interview participants

agree that law is a central form of justice in the projective world

(2005a: 519). The participants claimed to fight inequality, help

those discriminated against, seek fairness, bring about justice,

right wrongs, and mobilise critique as a source for social change.

Their costly labour is justified as it produces fairness, coherent

with their own values of justice (Sarat and Felstiner, 1989: 1683-4;

34

B&C, 2005b: 164), which helps denounce exploitation and promote

social change.

Bourdieu argues that legal professionals use juridical power to

discover individuals’ rights and fight injustice (1986: 833), which is

reflected in The Law Society booklet, emphasising that a solicitor’s

role is to “protect the rights of individuals… ensuring they are

treated fairly by public and private bodies, and that they receive

compensation when they have been unfairly treated”. The words

“fairness” and “justice” appeared over one hundred times

throughout all the textual sources, semantically they were the

most common terms used by two of the four interview participants.

This dimension of fairness cuts through all the data analysed.

The SRA Code of Conduct begins with ten mandatory principles

expected of all lawyers. The first, fundamental principle is that

lawyers “must uphold the rule of law and the proper

administration of justice”, it further states that solicitors “must

treat clients fairly… in a manner which protects their interests in

their matter, subject to the proper administration of justice” (SRA

Code of Conduct). Law is an instrument to deliver justice –

something embedded within the grammar of regulatory institutions

(Horrigan, 2003: 19-20) – which explains why the participants use

the term “justice” often. However, the grammar they subjectively

mobilise justice as central to the meaning of their vocation – that

justifies their work to a higher common principle – is sociologically

significant. Jack repeatedly emphasised how law is a means of

justice, which was the main reason he entered the profession, so

he could help others:

Interviewer: “What motivated you to seek a career in the legal

sector in the first place?”

35

Jack: “I found law is a way of helping people and bringing

justice wherever someone is being unjust… when I first

started law I studied criminal law and criminal justice.

Getting justice for people who’ve done wrong and making

sure justice is served. I suppose that the more I’ve learnt

about the law, the more I learnt about how justice is really

about helping people… Law is where you can help people in

different ways.”

Later he articulated how he sees work as a way of making a change

in people’s lives and the world:

“It’s about making a change, I suppose if you help an

employee who is going to get sometimes the value of the

claims awarded to them, like over 10 grand, so I guess you

make a change to their life, because they get this money

which could help them for a while…”

“I see it [law] as my way of making a change. One person

can’t change the world, but everyone together can help

restore justice and make a bit of change, by helping out bit

by bit.”

This strong sense of justice as promoting change clearly influenced

Jack’s worldview and sense of himself within the profession. In

order to maximise workers labour potential, the spirit of capitalism

must incorporate a moral dimension (B&C, 2005a: 486), where

workers justify their own involvement. Whereas workers in the first

spirit of capitalism invoked a moral-religious dimension to justify

their labour (Weber, 2002), Jack invoked a moral-legal dimension

to justify his own continued involvement in the accumulation of

capital. This dimension makes his work morally acceptable

36

towards both the common good (B&C, 2005b: 173) and to himself

as a solution to the sources of indignation he opposes.

Susan also views her work as a way to fight injustice and

address everyday sources of indignation she sees, especially

discrimination within employment:

Interviewer: Are there any particular areas of law that you

specifically work in?

Susan: Yeah, so employment law is 99% of my practice and

I absolutely thoroughly love it; particularly I have an

interest in discrimination.

Interviewer: Is there any reason why you’re particularly

interested in discrimination?

Susan: I’m not really sure how it evolved, but since I was a

kid I’ve absolutely despised people treating anybody

unequally and unfairly and I really really feel very strongly

about discrimination particularly, well across the board, but

particularly I get very irritated about racial and religious

discrimination because that seems to me the most prevalent

type of discrimination. So I don't know why I have just

always been very like that since I was a child, so I obviously

took quite a lot of interest in discrimination law, and it falls

under the head of employment, so I have managed to

specialise in that particular area.

Susan referred to the grammar of the civic common good (B&T,

2006: 185-192), which clarified her sense of justice and provided

her with coherent principles that motivated her work (B&T, 1999:

366-7). Some characteristics devalued by the civic polity include:

37

social divisions and inequalities, which Susan addressed by giving

her clients a voice in her legal practice:

“Justice sometimes doesn't mean that they win, it means

that they have their case heard fairly. So it’s about giving the

client the mouthpiece and practicality to do themselves

justice in the hearing, because without legal representation

it’s exceptionally difficult for people to articulate themselves;

particularly in areas like discrimination because it's actually

very complicated.”

Essentially, Susan used her knowledge of the legal system and own

oral advocacy skills to give her clients a “mouthpiece”, so they

would articulate themselves indirectly and have their case heard

fairly. By invoking a notion of fairness in her labour she reconciles

the notion that her own capital accumulation contributes towards

“the common good” (B&T, 2005b: 164). Legal work is oriented

towards upholding everyone’s collective interests, the SRA

Handbook explicitly states that discrimination and division is

devalued and that lawyers must encourage equality in their

professional lives. This is further invoked ideologically in several

places on the TEF Law Website: On the “Employment” Web Page,

emphasis is placed on invoking a sense of fairness, encouraging

potential clients to contact TEF as soon as possible to “right any

wrongs” and “restore justice”. This is followed by several

testimonials from clients who have been given a mouthpiece,

including the following:

“Once again thank you for handling my case and achieving a

successful outcome. At least I now feel as if some small

justice has been granted. I wish you all the best in the

future.” (Testimonials Page, TEF Law Website)

38

The website is one way that TEF transmits its ideology and beliefs

to the public. By presenting statements in terms of “justice being

granted” as opposed to saying “our client won £10,000” they

distance themselves from monetary compensation and the market

order of worth and situate themselves as defenders of the civic

common good (B&T, 2006: 260).

Rose invoked this civic common good during her interview. When

asked indirectly whether she situated her own reality within a

market regime or civic regime (ibid), she articulated a grammar of

the common good that mobilised the civic order of worth:

Interviewer: Do you get a sense of satisfaction in knowing

that you helped the client if they win their case, or is it more a

sense of competitiveness – the fact that you’re winning?

Rose: I think it depends on the individual case. In some

cases you’re representing an employee and they’ve been

treated really badly, which means they’re classed as a

vulnerable client and you’re able to get them a good

settlement, then you feel a sense of justice has been done for

them because they’ve been very badly discriminated against.

That feels nice for that reason.

For Rose, satisfaction is achieved by challenging discrimination,

which is qualified through equality. All the interview participants

expressed varying degrees of solidarity with their respective clients,

and they felt that they were able to effectively mobilise a grammar

of the common good to seek justice in their everyday working lives.

This is reflected in the firm’s ideology throughout their website, as

well as broadly within the profession itself through the SRA

Handbook and Practice Note.

39

Although Larson (2013) is sceptical of Parsons’ (1954b) notion

that legal professionals act altruistically in accordance with ethical

procedures, this analysis reveals that Parson’s claims have some

grounds of legitimacy. Furthermore, the participants inject moral

dimensions towards themselves and towards a common good.

Susan and Jack see their advocacy as a form of social critique

(Chiapello, 2013: 65) where underlying indignations – poverty,

inequalities, exploitation, and workers values – are addressed

through pragmatic action (ibid: 68). The exploitation of the

workplace is seen as alienating to some clients (ibid: 66) and can

lead to their exclusion from the workplace (B&C, 2005a: 361).

However, legal work addresses this by effectively mobilising

projective logics and reviving social critique, which provided all the

participants with coherent principles of justice to uphold (ibid:

346).

THE CLIENT RELATIONSHIP AND SERVICE

Parsons (1954b) and Bourdieu (1986: 819) argue that law has a

perceived social function of servicing the client whilst maintaining

pre-existing norms. They both argue that the primary interest of

the legal professional is to provide a “service” oriented around trust

and efficiency as opposed to profit13. Throughout the texts and the

interviews, there was a strong emphasis on the client. Table Three

of the appendix indicates that the client is one of the subjects of

the market justificatory regime. The SRA Code of Conduct begins

by setting out requirements for lawyers to consider “the best 13 Bourdieu (1986) goes further and argues that legal professionals are also guided by specific, personal interests in their professional conduct, this generates capital within the juridical field, whereby ordinary problems are transformed into legal problems. However testing Bourdieu’s theories goes beyond the scope of this current analysis. More pertinently, his comments on the client-professional relationship seem to accurately reflect the outward culture of TEF, in line with Boltanski and Chiapello’s comments.

40

outcomes for clients”. Furthermore, three of the ten mandatory

principles are focused on the client: the solicitor must “act in the

best interests of each client”, “provide a proper standard of service

to clients”, and “protect client money and assets.” (SRA Code of

Conduct)

All six chapters analysed in the SRA Code of Conduct related to

the conduct of solicitors with clients, focusing on “providing proper

standard of service” that ensures “clients are treated fairly with

openness and transparency”. The code itself was a direct

manifestation from the civic justificatory regime, yet it referred to

values from the domestic and market regimes occasionally through

grammar such as “trust” and “honesty”.

The emphasis on client care was exhibited on the TEF

Advertising leaflet; there were numerous images and quotations of

clients who were pleased with the service provided, with similar

values to the SRA Handbook being echoed on the flyer. However,

the Industrial justificatory regime was also mobilised by using

various figures, statistics, and numbers. For example, “our

preferred solicitors settled claims 42% faster than our

policyholders’ favoured solicitors”, further stating that TEF would

“ensure a high-quality service.” (TEF Advertising Flyer)

The values of openness and transparency were also embedded

within TEF’s practice and ideology. They strongly emphasise the

importance of customer care and aim to “set themselves apart

from” traditional firms, who they contrast themselves against on

the “About Us” and “Customer Care” web pages. The prominence of

TEF’s “Customer Care” page itself demonstrates their commitment

to client care, as they value their commitment and make pledges to

“Always be polite and courteous” as “there is never an excuse for

rudeness or an unprofessional approach”, amongst other

deferential claims (Goffman, 1967: 60) that espouse a Domestic

Justificatory Regime.

41

The interview participants also valued the client relationship.

Jack claimed that he was “emotionally invested” in clients and

often checks up on them, arguing that client service is highly

valued within the profession and he aims to “provide a better

service to clients, reduce complaints, and hit customer [service]

targets”. This indicates that the general interests of service are

valued within TEF (Parsons, 1954b; Bourdieu, 1986; B&C, 2005a:

133-5).

42

CONCLUDING REMARKS

TEF Law can be seen as a complex organisation entangled by

intense compromises between the market and projective

justificatory regimes that mobilise workers (B&T, 2006: 9). It is

beyond the scope of this case study to unravel and deconstruct all

the agreements, compromises, and tensions that form the rules

and regulations of the firm that mobilise action. However, the

analysis shows that the firm may be seen as what Thevenot (2001)

describes as a “compromising machine”. In order to operate

effectively, different orders of worth must be mobilised by

employees depending on the situation. All the participants –

besides Susan – mentioned situations where they felt that the need

to maximise TEF’s profit and close cases came into conflict with

their own values of justice, client-service, or fairness. This analysis

indicates that the market regime is the most prevalent because it

motivates action through: financial rewards – incentivising

performances by closing cases, career rewards – client retention

and becoming more well known for making money for the firm; and

high evaluation associated with monetary reward (Lamont, 2012:

211).

Since TEF became an ABS references to projective logics are

becoming more frequent, often in opposition to market logics. The

participants grammar is characteristic of those in “professional

occupations” where knowledge is power, giving them leverage over

others (Foucault, 1986b). Justificatory regimes provide lawyers

with a grammar to counter opposing logics and motivate them by

immersing lawyers within cases (B&T, 2006). Both market and

projective ideologies legitimate a spirit of capitalism within the firm

where lawyers mobilise a sense of justice to confront indignation,

simultaneously giving them the resources to maximise the firms’

43

profit through capital accumulation. These common justifications

keep the participants engaged in their work as they internalise a

spirit compatible with values of autonomy, fairness, excitement,

security, and adaptability (B&C, 2005a: 21, 2005b: 164).

The compromise between market and projective orders is

consolidated by a common justification depending on the situation

(Jagd, 2011: 347). The universality of individual positions is

qualified through consistent logics, the compromise between

market and projective logics is relatively stable as it co-ordinates

action by appealing to a common good where actors can

reconstruct uncertainty (Lamont, 2012: 208). Besides monetary

reward this case study identified five justifications that provide

TEF’s lawyers with argumentative resources to work in

employment law: excitement, expertise, justice, the client

relationship, and profit-creation for the firm. These justifications

encapsulate the essence of what makes employment law at TEF an

attractive vocation and they converge on either market or projective

principles. The participants generally identified money as the

qualifier of equivalence, as individuals are evaluated based on how

much profit they make for TEF as opposed to knowledge or loyalty

(B&T, 1999: 361-5).

Work at TEF is increasingly being organised around cases that

are expressions of projective logics (B&C, 2005a: 136), seen as

exciting and personally fulfilling by workers (ibid: 96). However, the

market order is more dominant in TEF as B&C suspected of British

institutions (2005b: 178). The vocation of seeking justice must be

morally oriented towards a common good that is seen as

acceptable (ibid: 173). Therefore, lawyers incorporate social critique

directed at the specific interests and indignations – such as

exploitation – they oppose in the search for justice (Bourdieu,

1986: 834; Chiapello, 2013: 66). The projective order provides

principles of justice that allow lawyers to denounce exploitation

44

(B&C, 2005a: 346), yet the workers of TEF must still contend

against the principles of the market order that create workplace

contradictions and tensions.

This single snapshot case study aimed to introduce FP to the

study of the legal profession and provide an overview of a specific

department. However, there are interesting avenues open for future

research that sociologists can build upon and develop further:

Firstly, the validity of the findings can be tested through repeated

analysis of other Employment Law firms and departments in

Southwest England and might indicate a larger trend in the wake

of solicitors firms becoming ABS’s. Secondly, the plurality of

justificatory regimes in different organisations provides a novel way

of encapsulating the rationales of workers towards particular

vocations (Jagd, 2011). Thirdly, FP offers a general overview of the

tensions and compromises that exist within organisations –

especially the legal profession, which is oriented towards justice –

and the agreements that promote concrete action within a

professional environment. If sociological thought has a role to play

within the workplace, then future case studies will benefit by

introducing FP into their theoretical framework to come up with

novel findings that explain the diversity of meanings, motivations,

and justifications within these complex institutions.

45

APPENDIX

TABLE 1: TABLE OF INTERVIEW PARTICIPANTS (ordered Alphabetically)

Name Age Gender Job Status University Degree

Time Working at Current Job

Jack 22 Male Employment Litigation Assistant

Temp Law 1 Year

Ronald 28 Male Employment Litigator

Non-Qualified Fee Earner

Law 3.5 Years

Rose 31 Female Employment Litigator

Non-Qualified Fee Earner

Criminology 3 Years

Susan 30 Female Tenant Barrister

Self-Employed History 8 Years

TABLE 2: LIST OF DATA SOURCES FOR DISCOURSE ANALYSIS The SRA Code of Conduct (2011), Introduction and Chapters One to Six: http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/handbook/code/part5/content.page The Law Society Guide, Becoming a Solicitor (2014): http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/careers/becoming-a-solicitor/ The Law Society, Supervision Practice Note (2011): http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/advice/practice-notes/supervision/ TEF Advertising Leaflet: “TEF First for Justice” (2013) TEF Law Website (2014):

• About Us Page (2014) • Environmental Policy Page (2014) • Our Values Page (2014) • TEF Law in the Community Page (2014) • Employment Page (2014) • Customer Care Page (2014) • Business Partners Page (2014) • Testimonials Page (2014)

46

TABLE 3: ORDER OF WORTH FRAMEWORK

Industrial Order

Market Order

Inspired Order

Domestic Order Civic Order

Order of Fame

Projective Order

Higher Common Principle

The efficiency and productivity of systems to highly predictable standards

The desire to possess the same goods and competition of the marketplace

The outpouring of inspiration

Engenderment according to tradition

The pre-eminence of collectives and civic duty

The reality of public opinion

Involvement in activities that generates projects and the expansion of networks

Reference Values

Efficiency, Science, Production of Material Goods

Competition, Rivalry

Inspiration, Creation, Imagination, Inner Self, Creativity, Artistic Self

Tradition, Family, Hierarchy, Generation

Community, Democracy, Associations

Reputation, Fame, Public Esteem, Visibility, Success

Activities, Projects, Network Expansion, Proliferation of connections

Worth (What is measured) Price

Productivity, Efficiency

Grace, nonconformity, creativeness, intuition

Esteem, Reputation

Collective Interest

Renown, Fame

Activity, Projects

Relation/ Qualification

Functional link/ Professional competency, expertise, control

Exchange and Possession of Valuable objects/ Desire, Purchasing Power

Passion and Uniqueness/ Creativity, Ingenuity, Genius, Independence

Truth, Respect, and Responsibility/ Authority, Subordination, Respectability, Honour, Shame

Solidarity, Relation of Delegation/ Equality, Representation, Membership, Expression

Recognition/ Celebrity, Identification, Strength

Personal Experience, Talent, Communication Skills

State of Worthiness/ Manifestations and Characteristics Valued

Efficient/ Performance, Reliability, Functionality, Scientific Validity, Measurability

Desirability/ Exchange Value, The "wins", Good being valued as "sellable"

Inexpressible and Ethereal/ Bizarre, Unusual, Unspeakable, Enriching, Fascinating, Passion, Wonderful, Spontaneity, Emotion

Hierarchical Superiority/ Benevolence, Propriety, Wisdom, Discretion, Trust, Distinguished, Discretion, Loyalty, Faithfulness

Rule governed and representative/ Solidarity, Equity, Freedom, Unitary, Representativeness, Free, Authorised

Fame/ Visibility, Fashion, Being Noticed, Being Successful

The need to connect/ Enthusiasm, Involved, Adaptable, Flexibility, Connection to others, Autonomy, Employability, Engaging, Vision, Charisma

Devalued Characteristics

Unproductive, Inefficient

Defeat, Undesirability, Un-Competitiveness

The Usual, Trapping, Realism

Rudeness, Vulgarity, Treachery, Novelty

Division, Individualism, Arbitrariness, Illegality

Banality, Indifference, Misunderstood, Obsolesce

Un-employability, Stiffness, Lack of Flexibility, Immobility, Safety, Authority, Not inspiring confidence, Immobile, Rooted, Rigid, Fixed

47

Subjects

The Expert, The Professional Operator, Specialist

The Businessman, The Salesman, Buyers and Sellers, The client, Independent Worker

Artists, I, Children, Spirits, Crazy, Genius, Illuminated, Creativity Consultant

The Father, The King, The Boss, The "Old", Family, Leaders, Bosses

The Party, The Elected, Representatives, Delegates, The Elected Official

The Star, The Communications officer, The People, Journalists, Stars, Opinion Leader, PR Agent

Coach, Mediator, Project Leader, Innovator, Project Head, Expert, Customer, Supplier

Model/ Objects

Scientific Proof/ Scientific Test, Embodiment, Tools, Methods, Criteria, Figures, Graphs

Accumulation of Wealth/ Luxury items, The Market, The conclusion of a sale, Opportunism, Competitive Relationships

The Waking Dream/ Creating from a blank sheet, Inner Adventure, Mind Wandering

The Rules of Etiquette/ Family Ceremonies, Receptions, Gifts, Houses, Titles, Estates, Good Manners, Deference

Legal Forms/ Rights, Legislation, Code, Criterion, Slogan, Headquarters, Procedure, Order, Broacher, Measure, Election, The Event

Being Recognised and Identified/ The eyes of others about an event, Press Releases, Booklets, Brand, Message, Atmosphere, Setting

Transition and succession from one project to another/ New technologies, informal relations, Relations of trust, Partnership, Agreements, Subcontracting, Projects

Table adapted from Boltanski and Thevenot (2006: 159-212), and Boltanski and Chiapello (2005a: 107-28).

48

BIBLIOGRAPHY Abel, R.L. (1988) The Making of the English Legal Profession: 1800-1988, Washington, DC: Beard. Ackroyd, S., and Muzio, D. (2007) ‘The Reconstructed Professional Firm: Explaining Change in English Legal Practices’, Organizational Studies, 28 (5): 729-747. Althusser, L. (1971) ‘Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses’, in Althusser, L. (ed.), Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays, London: Verso, pp. 127-186. Annisette, M. and Richardson, A. J. (2011) ‘Justification and accounting: applying sociology of worth to accounting research’, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 24 (2): 229–249. Bauman, Z. (2000) Liquid Modernity, London: Polity Press. Bourdieu, P. (1986) ‘The Force of Law: Toward a Sociology of the Juridical Field’, Hastings Law Journal, 38 (5): 814-853. Bourdieu, P. (1990) The Logic of Practice, Cambridge: Polity Press. Bourdieu, P. (1991) Language and Symbolic Power, Cambridge: Polity Press (translated by Thompson, J.B., Raymond, G, and Adamson, M.). Blokker, P. (2011) ‘Pragmatic sociology: Theoretical evolvement and empirical application’, European Journal of Social Theory, 14 (3): 251-261. Boivin, C., and Roch, J. (2006) ‘Dominant organisation logic as an impediment to collaboration’. Management Decision, 44 (3): 409-422. Boltanski, L. and Chiapello, E. (2005a [1999]) The New Spirit of Capitalism, London: Verso (translated by Elliot, Gregory.).

49

Boltanski, L. and Chiapello, E. (2005b) ‘The New Spirit of Capitalism’, International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society, 18 (3): 161-188. Boltanski, L., and Thevenot, L. (1989) (eds) Justesse et justice dans le travail, Paris: C.E.E. et Presses Universitaires de France. Boltanski, L., and Thevenot, L. (1999) ‘The Sociology of Critical Capacity’, European Journal of Social Theory, 2 (3): 359-377. Boltanski, L. and Thevenot, L. (2006 [1991]) On Justification: Economies of Worth, Princeton: Princeton University Press (translated by Porter, Catherine.). Bryman, A. (2008) Social Research Methods (third edition), Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bugden, S. (2000) ‘A New ‘Spirit of Capitalism’, New Left Review, 1: 149-156. Burt, R.S. (2000) ‘The Network Structure of Social Capital’, Research in Organisational Behaviour, 22: 345-423. Castells, M. (2000 [1996]) The Rise of the Network (second edition), Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Chiapello, E. (2003) ‘Reconciling the Two Principle Meanings of the Notion of Ideology: The Example of the Concept of the ‘Spirit of Capitalism’’, European Journal of Social Theory, 6 (2): 155-171. Chiapello, E. (2013) ‘Capitalism and Its Criticisms’, in du Gay, P., and Morgan, G. (eds), New Spirits of Capitalism? Crises, Justifications, and Dynamics, Oxford: University Press, pp. 60-81. Cloutier, C. and Langley, A. (2013) ‘The Logic of Institutional Logics: Insights From French Pragmatist Sociology’, Journal of Management Inquiry, 22 (4): 360-380. Cotterrell, R. (2006) Law, Culture and Society: Legal Ideas in the Mirror of Social Theory, Aldershot: Ashgate.

50

De Tocqueville, A. (2000 [1835]) ‘On what Tempers the Tyranny of the Majority in the United States’, in Mansfield, H.C. and Winthrop, D. (eds), Democracy in America, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 250-264. Diaz-Bone, R. (2011) ‘The methodological standpoint of the “économie des conventions”’, Historical Social Research, 36 (4): 43-63. Dumont, L. (1977) Homo Aequalis: Genese et epanouissement de l’ideologie economique, Paris: Gallimard. Fleming, P., and Sturdy, A. (2009) ‘”Just be yourself!” Towards neo-normative control in organisations?’, Employee Relations, 31 (6): 569-583. Flood, J. (1981) ‘Middlemen of the Law: An Ethnographic Inquiry into the English Legal Profession’, Law and Society Inquiry, 6 (2): 377-405. Flood, J. (1983) Barristers’ clerks: The law’s middlemen, Manchester: Manchester University Press. Forstenlechner, I., and Lettice, F. (2008) ‘Well paid but undervalued and overworked: The highs and lows of being a junior lawyer in a leading law firm’, Employee Relations, 30 (6): 640-652. Foucault, M. (1986a) ‘Body/Power’, in Gordon, C. (ed.), Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, New York, NY: Vintage Books, pp. 55-62. Foucault, M. (1986b) ‘Truth and Power’, in Gordon, C. (ed.), Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, New York, NY: Vintage Books, pp. 109-133. Francis, A., and Sommerlad, H. (2009) ‘Access to legal work experience and its role in the (re)production of legal professional identity’, International Journal of the Legal Profession, 16 (1): 63-86.

51

Friedman, L.M. (1989) ‘Lawyers in Cross-Cultural Perspective’, in Abel, R.L., and Lewis, P.S.C. (eds) Lawyers in Society: Comparative Theories, Berkeley, LA: University of California Press, pp. 1-26. Fuller, C. (2013) ‘Urban politics and the social practices of critique and justification: Conceptual insights from French Pragmatism’, Progress in Human Geography, 37 (5): 639-657. Galanter, M., and Roberts, S. (2008) ‘From kinship to magic circle: The London commercial law firm in the twentieth century’, International Journal of the Legal Profession, 15 (3): 143-178. Geertz, C. (1973) ‘Ideology as a Cultural System’, in Geertz, C. (ed.), The Interpretation of Cultures, New York: Basic Books, pp. 193-233. George, A.L., and Bennett, A. (2005) Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Goffman, E. (1967) The Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behaviour, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Gramsci, A. (1971) Selections from the Prison Notebooks, London: Lawrence and Wilshart (translated and edited by Hoare, Q., and Nowell-Smith, P.). Granovetter, M. (1973) ‘The Strength of Weak Ties’, American Journal of Sociology, 78 (6): 1360-1380. Greenwood, R., and Suddaby, R. (2006) ‘Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms’, Academy of Management Journal, 49 (1): 27-48. Hanlon, G. (1997) ‘A Profession in Transition? Lawyers, The Market and Significant Others’, The Modern Law Review, 60 (6): 798-822. Henriques, G. (2011) A New Unified Theory of Psychology, New York: Springer. Horrigan, B. (2003) Adventures in law and justice: Exploring big legal questions in everyday life, Sydney, Australia: University of New South Wales Press.

52

Hirschman, A.O. (1977) The Passions and the Interests: Political Arguments for Capitalism before its Triumph, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Hunt, A., and Wickham, G. (1994) Foucault and Law: Towards a Sociology of Law as Governance, London: Pluto Press. Jagd, S. (2011) ‘Pragmatic sociology and competing orders of worth in organizations’, European Journal of Social Theory, 14 (3): 343-359. Kostiner, I. (2003) ‘Evaluating Legality: Toward a Cultural Approach to the Study of Law and Social Change’, Law and Society Review, 37 (2): 323-368. Kuhn, T.S. (2012 [1962]) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (50th Anniversary Edition), Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Lamont, M. (2012) ‘Toward a Comparative Sociology of Valuation and Evaluation’, Annual Review of Sociology, 38: 201-221. Larson, M.S. (2013 [1977]) The Rise of Professionalism: Monopolies of Competence and Sheltered Markets, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Law Society (2010a), Obstacles and barriers to the career development of woman solicitors, Oxford: Law Society. Law Society (2010b), Ethnic diversity in law firms: Understanding the barriers, Oxford: Law Society. Law Society (2012), Trends in the solicitors’ profession: Annual statistical report 2012, ASR 2012, London: Law Society Strategic Research Unit. Lukacs, G. (1968) History and Class Consciousness, London: Merlin.

53

Lyotard, J.F. (1984 [1979]) The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Manchester: Manchester University Press (translated by Bennington, Geoff, and Massumi, Brian.). Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1998 [1846]) The German Ideology, London: ElecBooks (translated by Arthur, C.J.). McInerney, P.B. (2008) ‘Showdown at Kykuit: field-configuring events as loci for conventionalizing accounts’, Journal of Management Studies, 45 (6): 1089-1116. McKinlay, A. and Starkey, K. (1998) ‘Managing Foucault: Foucault Management and Organisation Theory’, in McKinlay, A., and Starkey, K. (eds), Foucault, Management and Organisation Theory, London: SAGE Publications, pp. 1-13. Muzio, D. (2004) ‘The professional project and the contemporary organisation of the legal profession in England and Wales’, International Journal of the Legal Profession, 11 (1-2): 33-50. Nicolson, D. (2006) ‘Affirmative Action in the Legal Profession’, Journal of Law and Society, 33 (1): 109-125. Parker, M (2008) ‘Book Review: The Seventh City’, Organisation, 15 (4): 610-614. Parsons, T. (1954a [1939]) ‘The Professions and Social Structure’, in Parsons, T. (ed.), Essays in Sociological Theory (revised edition), New York, NY: The Free Press, pp. 34-49. Parsons, T. (1954b [1952]) ‘A Sociologist Looks at the Legal Profession’, in Parsons, T. (ed.), Essays in Sociological Theory (revised edition), New York, NY: The Free Press, pp. 370-385. Patriotta, G., Gond, J.P., and Schultz, F. (2011) ‘Maintaining Legitimacy: Controversies, Orders of Worth, and Public Justifications’, Journal of Management Studies, 48 (8): 1804-1836. Peräkylä, A. (1997) ‘Reliability and Validity in Research based on Tapes and Transcripts’, in Silverman, D. (ed.) Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice, London: SAGE Publications.

54

Perälä, R., Hellman, M., and Leppo, A. (2013) ‘Behind the Scenes: The Justifications for Opioid Maintenance in Finland’, Substance Use and Misuse, 48 (11): 954-965. Pink, D. H. (2009) Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us, New York, NY: Penguin Books. Ramirez, C. (2013) ‘‘We are being Pilloried for Something, We Did Not Even Know We Had Done Wrong!’ Quality Control and Orders of Worth in the British Audit Profession’, Journal of Management Studies, 50 (5): 845-869. Rawls, J. (1971) A Theory of Justice, Harvard: University Press. Reinecke, J. (2010) ‘Beyond a subjective theory of value and towards a ‘fair price’: an organizational ä spective on Fairtrade minimum price setting’, Organization, 17 (5): 563-581. Ritzer, G. (2009) Enchanting a Disenchated World (third edition), London: Sage Publications. Rolandsson, B., Bergquist, M., and Ljunberg, J. ‘Open source in the firm: Opening up professional practices of software development’, Research Policy, 40 (4): 576-587. Rueschemeyer, D. (1964) ‘Lawyers and Doctors: A Comparison of Two Professions’, Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 1 (1): 17-30. Rueschemeyer, D. (1986) ‘Comparing Legal Professions Cross-Nationally: From a Professions-Centered Approach to a State-Centered Approach’, American Bar Foundation Research Journal, 3: 415-446. Sarat, A., and Felstiner, W.L.F. (1989) ‘Lawyers and Legal Consciousness: Law Talk in the Divorce Lawyer’s Office’, The Yale Law Journal, 98 (8): 1663-1688. Sommerlad, H., Webley, L., Muzio, D., Tomlinson, J. and Duff, L. (2010), Diversity in the legal profession in England and Wales: a

55

qualitative study of barriers and individual choices, London: Legal Services Board. Timberlake, S. (2005) ‘Social capital and gender in the workplace’, Journal of Management Development, 24 (1): 34-44. Thevenot, L., Moody, M., and Lafaye, C. (2000) ‘Forms of valuing nature: arguments and modes of justification in French and American environmental disputes’, in Lamont, M., and Thevenot, L. (eds) Rethinking Comparative Cultural Sociology: Repertoires of Evaluation in France and the United States, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 229-272. Thevenot, L. (2001) ‘Organised complexity: conventions of coordination and the composition of economic arrangements’, European Journal of Social Theory, 4 (4): 405-425. Thomas, G. (2011) ‘A Typology for the Case Study in Social Science Following a Review of Definition, Discourse, and Structure’, Qualitative Inquiry, 17 (6): 511-521. Travers, M. (1993) ‘Putting Sociology Back into the Sociology of Law’, Journal of Law and Society, 20 (4): 438-451. Travers, M. (2001) ‘Sociology of Law in Britain’, The American Sociologist, 32 (2): 26-40. Vaisey, S. (2009) ‘Motivation and Justification: A Dual-Process Model of Culture in Action’, American Journal of Sociology, 114 (6): 1675-1715. Wagner, P. (2001) ‘Modernity, Capitalism and Critique’, Thesis Eleven, 66 (1): 1-31. Wagner, P. (2008) Modernity as Experience and Interpretation: A New Sociology of Modernity, Cambridge: Polity. Walzer, M. (1983) Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality, New York. NY: Basic Books.

56

Weber, M. (1978 [1922]) ‘The Role of the Law Specialists’, in Roth, G. and Wittich, C. (eds), Economy and Society, Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press, pp. 775-807. Weber, M. (2002 [1930]) The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge Classics (translated by Parsons, Talcott.). Yin, R. K. (2009) Case Study Research: Design and Methods (fourth edition), London: SAGE Publications.