Towards the formulation of the problem of types of professional consciousness

Sorokina S.G.

Moscow State University named after. M.V. Lomonosov
Moscow, Russia
E-mail: lana40ina@mail.ru

Currently, the socioeconomic conditions for professional activity are changing. The forced mass transition to remote work due to the pandemic has inevitably impacted the nature of professional interactions among employees. The new COVID-19 reality is transforming the professional worldview [5], setting new priorities in the choice of forms, methods, and means of organizing joint activities in modern organizations.

The problem of identifying types of professional consciousness is becoming increasingly relevant, as modern workers cannot be considered successful without a commitment to self-development. This concept is the focus of the modern approach to human resource management [6]. The "activity-consciousness-personality" framework [3], traditional in fundamental psychology, provides a methodological guideline for uncovering the psychological mechanisms of professional self-development. Therefore, it can be assumed that optimal management of professional development is possible based on an understanding of the individual worker's consciousness as "embedded" in the collective consciousness of the entire workforce, serving as a psychological prerequisite for the success of joint professional activity.

Understanding the psychological characteristics of individual consciousness can be achieved by understanding the social relations in which a particular individual is involved [8].

When analyzing the psychological components of a team, categories such as activity, interaction, communication, relationships, and social relations are used [4]. Activity is defined as productive, while interaction refers to the distribution of responsibilities or the social organization of the team, which develops only through communication and the presence of a specific role and functional hierarchy among team members. Relationships constitute the psychological content of the communication process [Ibid., p. 29], conditioned by the social relations of the subject of the activity.

Analyzing the relationship between the manifestations of professional consciousness depending on the psychological components of the team, S.V. Myskin suggests distinguishing the following types of professional consciousness [Ibid.]:

– production consciousness, correlated with production activities and based on images and knowledge about the products of professional labor;

– organizational consciousness, formed in the process of professional socialization, therefore correlating with the categories of interaction, communication and relationships, and reflecting the employee’s ideas about the functioning of hierarchical relationships within the organization;

– labor consciousness, which is based on the employee’s awareness of the role and prospects of his professional activity in the hierarchical structure of society as a whole, in other words, the value of his existence as a representative of human society.

The identified types are represented differently in the structure of individual professional consciousness. Therefore, it seems necessary to analyze the hierarchy of these identified types of consciousness, as well as the factors that determine it.

Having mastered any professional activity, the subject recognizes his own belonging to the corresponding professional community. Images of the objects of professional activity, ideas about the methods and techniques of action with them, are the essence of the content of his production consciousness. It is these images of consciousness that determine the connection of an individual professional with others like him. The "self-image" of the subject in this context includes his ideas about himself as a bearer of specialized knowledge, abilities and skills, as well as their assessment. The professional self-concept is determined only by the personal identification of the subject with the professional community [1, p. 178]. The perception and assessment of a specialist as a representative of the professional community occurs en masse, using stereotypes and simplified clichés. For example: "«All psychologists are like cats – in critical situations they always fall on all fours.», «"Every sales manager is a manipulator and wants to sell you something."», «You lecture in every situation, and it's immediately obvious that teaching is in your blood."», «All these IT-shniks look the same"» etc.

At the same time, it is difficult for a professional to understand their place in this social structure, since the large size of the community does not allow for productive joint activity with each of its representatives. The social identity [10] of a professional develops precisely in the context of collective work in a specific organization. This is combined with the development of the employee's organizational consciousness, which allows them to define their professional position within the structure of direct socio-professional relationships with others. Now, the employee's professional "self-concept" includes both personal and social components. It is worth noting the marginal nature of organizational consciousness: the professional's membership in two social groups, some of whose norms and values sometimes conflict. For example, trust, mutual understanding, sensitivity to experiences, etc. are key norms and requirements in a psychologist's work with clients. However, managers often force staff psychologists to use their professional competencies to manipulate other employees for management purposes. Such work situations actualize cognitive dissonance in the employee, the resolution of which determines the hierarchy of types of professional consciousness.

The ideal model of the structure of professional consciousness can be described as follows (Figure 1).

Fig. 1. Model of the structure of professional consciousness

 

Production consciousness is the foundation that determines an employee's affiliation with a particular professional field. This type, on the one hand, unites people of the same profession, and on the other, draws a line between different work collectives. Production consciousness is decisive in the formation of an individual professional worldview, a kind of invariant in the structure of an employee's professional consciousness.

Organizational consciousness is variable and transforms depending on the employee's understanding of their role in the organization's social-hierarchical structure. It should be noted that these understandings cannot be based solely on the individual perceptions of individual team members. Such understandings arise and are reinforced in the employee's consciousness through communication, which unfolds on the basis of collective norms and values.

In turn, work consciousness is even less easily captured and even more variable, as it is based on the worker's professional self-definition and their perception of the significance of a given professional activity in the context of their entire life. We would suggest that the content of work consciousness varies not only horizontally—from team to team, from employee to employee—but also vertically—throughout the career development of an individual.

The above makes obvious the need to reveal the content of the invariant and variable components of professional consciousness.

A partial understanding of the structure of workers' consciousness, correlated with their attitude to work and priorities, comes from an analysis of the traditionally distinguished psychological types of workers: X, Y, Z [6]. Considering professional consciousness as a set of "fragments, each of which is conditioned by the operational goal and objectives of professional activity" [Ibid., p. 31], S.V. Myskin constructs a comparative classification of types of professional consciousness, identifying the dominant type of consciousness depending on the psychological type of workers [4]. In workers with psychological type X, who perceive work as a burdensome duty and are characterized by irresponsibility, organizational consciousness dominates, while production consciousness occupies an insignificant functional position. Conversely, in workers with psychological type Y, motivated and responsible employees, production consciousness prevails, while work consciousness manifests itself in rare situations. Finally, in employees with psychotype Z, who are self-motivated but prone to some disregard for established norms, work consciousness dominates, displacing organizational consciousness to the least significant positions.

Consequently, the images of "I-collective," "I-professional," and "I-organization," identified by S.V. Myskin [Ibid.], prove fluid in the professional consciousness of workers depending on their membership in psychotypes X, Y, and Z, respectively. Furthermore, this classification of professional consciousness types still leaves open the question of how invariant these dominant images are within the structure of consciousness.

Occupational psychology also offers other approaches to identifying types of professional consciousness. Thus, E.A. Klimov, using differences in a person's professional preferences when working with objects of labor, proposes his own typology of professional worldviews [2]. The author identifies five such types (Table 1).

 

Table 1

Typology of the professional image of the world E.A. Klimov

Type of professional image of the world	Types of subject-matter activities
man-to-man	education, training, and service to people
man-technology,	creation and operation of equipment
man is an artistic image	creation and study of artistic images
man-nature	study and transformation of nature
man-sign,	using sign systems

 

It is obvious that the relationship between the types of professional consciousness according to S.V. Myskin (production, organizational and labor) will be formed on the basis of other patterns, if we take into account the employee’s preferences when operating with objects of labor, as identified by E.A. Klimov.

Another classification of professions, RIASEC, created by the American psychologist J.L. Holland [9], is based on the following thesis: a person's choice of professional field is nothing more than an expression of their personality, and therefore, for successful work activity, a proper match between personality type and the type of professional environment is necessary. In his typology, J.L. Holland identifies six personality types: realistic, intellectual or investigative, artistic, social, enterprising, and conventional. Unfortunately, this typology, although based on an analysis of the worker's activities and communication, does not deeply examine the characteristics of professional consciousness.

Another classification deserves special attention: the typology of position, understood as the employee's way of realizing their core values in a professional environment. In Russian psychology, three such positions are distinguished: specialist, professional, and expert [8].

To carry out professional activities, a specialist simply needs to be proactive, independent, responsible, and possess the relevant competencies. In addition to knowledge of the subject matter and methods of working with it, a professional possesses the ability to build relationships with other community members and analyze their position within the professional community as a whole. Through genuine professional development, an expert acquires skills that go beyond specialized knowledge and simple membership in a professional community, namely, the ability to construct standards for activity systems in a given professional field [Ibid.].

The distinguishing characteristics of these positions include the ability to reflect, objectify, and delineate the boundaries of the subject matter of various professional fields. Applied to our research, this approach may have the following cognitive benefit. A change in professional position correlates with a change in professional consciousness. Identifying the psychological determinants of the transition from one position to another will allow us to identify the distinctive features of professional consciousness at any given stage.

The conducted analysis allows us to formulate the following brief conclusions:

– an analysis of existing literature shows that identifying types of professional consciousness is a relevant psychological and psycholinguistic task;

– within the framework of psychological and psycholinguistic research, the problem of defining and describing the characteristics of the formation and functioning of various types of professional consciousness comes to the fore;

– when creating a typology of professional consciousness, it is advisable to use the following criteria in combination: professional preferences, professional personality type, professional position of the subject;

– identifying the nature of the relationship between the employee’s psychotype and his professional preferences and professional position will allow us to determine the hierarchy of types of professional consciousness.

Literature

1. Andreeva G.M. Psychology of social cognition. Study guide. Moscow: Aspect-press, 2004. 288 p.
2. Klimov E.A. Psychology of the Professional. Series: Psychologists of the Fatherland. Moscow: Institute of Practical Psychology, 1996. 400 p.
3. Leontiev A.N. Activity. Consciousness. Personality: a textbook. 2nd edition, stereotypical. Moscow: Smysl: Academy, 2005. 352 p.
4. Myskin S.V. Organizational and psychological analysis of professional consciousness of employees of modern work collectives. Organizational psycholinguistics [Electronic resource]: electronic scientific journal / editor-in-chief S.V. Myskin. – Issue No. 1 (1). Electronic, text data (3.3 MB). Moscow: Agency for Social and Humanitarian Technologies, LLC, 2018. 1 electronic optical disc (CD-ROM). P. 21–38.
5. Myskin S.V. On the Problem of Uncertainty in the Professional Worldview // Professional Worldview. Methodology. Options. Practice. Collective Monograph / edited by S. V. Myskin, E. F. Tarasov. Moscow: Agency for Social and Humanitarian Technologies, 2020. pp. 35–57.

6. Newstrom D.V., Davis K. Organizational behavior: human behavior in the workplace; translated from English by Yu. N. Kapturovsky. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2000. 448 p.
7. Psychology of consciousness / Compiled and generally edited by L. V. Kulikov. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2001. 480 p.: ill.
8. Slobodchikov V.I. «"The Anthropological Meaning of Professional Education." Presentation at the International Scientific and Practical Conference "Cultural and Historical Trends in the Development of Professional Activity." December 18-19, 2020. https://psycholinguistic.ru/konferenczii/
9. Nauta MM. The Development, Evolution, and Status of Holland's Theory of Vocational Personalities: Reflections and Future Directions for Counseling Psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2010, Vol. 57, No. 1. R. 11–22
10. Tajfel H., Turner JC. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior // S. Worchel, W. G. Austin (eds). Psychology of intergroup relations. 2^and Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1985. pp. 7-24.

References

1. Andreeva GM. Psychology of social cognition. Study guide. Moscow: Aspekt-press, 2004. 288 p.
2. Klimov EA. Professional psychology. Series: Psihologi otechestva M. Institut prakticheskoj psihologii, 1996. 400 s.
3. Leont'ev AN. Activity. Consciousness. Personality: study guide. 2nd edition, stereotypical. Moscow: Smysl: Akademiya, 2005. 352 p.
4. Myskin SV. Organizational and psychological analysis of professional consciousness of employees of modern work collectives. Organizational psycholinguistics [Electronic resource]: electronic scientific journal / chief ed. SV Myskin. – Issue. No. 1 (1). Electronic, text data (3.3 MB). Moscow: OOO «Agency for Social and Humanitarian Technologies», 2018. 1 electronic opt. Disk (CD-ROM). P. 21–38.
5. Myskin SV. On the Problem of Uncertainty in the Professional Worldview // Professional Worldview. Methodology. Variants. Practice. Collective Monograph / edited by SV Myskina, EF Tarasova. Moscow: OOO «Agency for Social and Humanitarian Technologies», 2020. pp. 35–57. .
6. N'yustrom DV, Devis K. Organizational behavior: human behavior at the workplace; trans. from English. ed. by YU.N. Kapturevsky. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2000. 447 p. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2000. 448 p.
7. Psychology of Consciousness / Compiled and edited by L. V. Kulikov. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2001. 480 pp.: ill. (Series «Reader in Psychology»).
8. Slobodchikov VI. «"The Anthropological Meaning of Professional Education." Report at the International Scientific and Practical Conference "Cultural and Historical Trends in the Development of Professional Activity." December 18-19, 2020. https://psycholinguistic.ru/konferenczii/
9. Nauta MM. The Development, Evolution, and Status of Holland's Theory of Vocational Personalities: Reflections and Future Directions for Counseling Psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2010, Vol. 57, No. 1. pp. 11–22.
10. Tajfel H., Turner JC. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior // S. Worchel, W. G. Austin (eds). Psychology of intergroup relations. 2nd ed. Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1985. pp. 7-24.