What’s the Difference? Market vs State Alignment in the Professional Consequences of Diversity
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7577/pp.6478Abstract
Across the UK and industrialised West, corporate law and medicine have diversified according to gender, yet their power has moved in opposite directions. This article asks what difference diversification makes to professions and the forms of power they exercise, with diversification defined here primarily as the increased representation of women and thus quantitative change. While mainstream accounts emphasise a ‘business case’ for diversity, which is expected to deliver organisational benefits such as productivity and performance, research on occupational segregation shows that demographic shifts can reduce occupational status even when outcomes remain equal. This paper brings related theories into dialogue with the sociology of the professions, using corporate law and medicine to argue that the effects of diversification vary by alignment: market-aligned law assimilates diversity as managed legitimacy to maintain power and hierarchy, while state-aligned medicine interprets or constructs feminisation as devaluation under audit and austerity. The paper advances a framework for understanding when diversity legitimises, destabilises, or enhances professions’ capacity to serve the public good.
Downloads
References
Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions: An essay on the division of expert labor. University of Chicago Press.
Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender & Society, 4(2), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124390004002002
Ahmed, S. (2012). On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. Duke University Press.
American Bar Association (ABA). (2024). ABA model diversity survey. American Bar Association. www.americanbar.org/groups/diversity/DiversityCommission/model-diversity-survey
Ashcraft, K. L. (2013). The glass slipper: “Incorporating” occupational identity in management studies. Academy of Management Review, 38(1), 6–31. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2010.0219
Ashcraft, K. L., Muhr, S. L., Rennstam, J., & Sullivan, K. R. (2012). Professionalization as a branding activity: Occupational identity and the dialectic of inclusivity–exclusivity. Gender, Work & Organization, 19(5), 467–488. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2012.00600.x
Ashley, L. (2022). Highly Discriminating: Why the City isn’t Fair and Diversity doesn’t Work. Bristol University Press.
Ashley, L., & Empson, L. (2017). Understanding social exclusion in elite professional service firms: Field level dynamics and the ‘professional project.’ Work, Employment and Society, 31(2), 211–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017015621480
Ashley, L., & Mcdonald, I. (2024). When the penny drops: Understanding how social class influences speciality careers in the UK medical profession. Social Science & Medicine, 348, 116747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.116747
Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education. University of Chicago Press.
Beduchaud, L., Celingant, E., Faure, C., Meunier, M., & Blanco-Cazeaux, I. (2024). Do international medical graduates’ recruitment policies help to overcome healthcare shortage areas in developed countries? A systematic review. Health Policy, 150, 105190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2024.105190
Beioley, K. (2020, January 2) Women still missing from top ranks of law firms. Financial Times.. www.ft.com/content/aa517372-14fa-11ea-8d73-6303645ac406
Bevan, G., & Hood, C. (2006). What’s measured is what matters: Targets and gaming in the English public health care system. Public Administration, 84(3), 517–538. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00600.x
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard University Press.
Bridge Group. (2018). Socio-economic background and early career progression in the law. www.thebridgegroup.org.uk/research-1/2018/9/3/career-progression-in-the-law [Accessed 15th December 2025]
Bridge Group. (2020). Socio-economic diversity and progression to partner in the law. www.thebridgegroup.org.uk/research-1/2020/9/25/pathways-to-partnership [Accessed 15th December 2025]
Busch, F. (2018). Occupational devaluation due to feminization? Causal mechanics, effect heterogeneity, and evidence from the United States, 1960 to 2010. Social Forces, 96(3), 1351–1376. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sox077
Charles, M., & Grusky, D. B. (2005). Occupational ghettos: The worldwide segregation of women and men (Vol. 200). Stanford University Press.
Cohen, P. N., & Huffman, M. L. (2003). Occupational segregation and the devaluation of women’s work across US labor markets. Social Forces, 81(3), 881–908. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2003.0027
Dobbin, F., & Kalev, A. (2022). Getting to diversity: What works and what doesn’t. Harvard University Press.
Dyer, C. (2023). GMC adopts 23 recommendations to stamp out bias against ethnic minority doctors. BMJ: British Medical Journal (Online), 380, p374. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.p374
Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A. (2001). Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(2), 229–273. https://doi.org/10.2307/2667087
Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A. (2023). Getting serious about diversity: Enough already with the business case. In B.S. Reiche, G.K. Stahl, M.E. Mendenhall, & G.R. Oddou (Eds.) Readings and cases in international human resource management (pp. 119–128). Routledge.
Evetts, J. (2003). The sociological analysis of professionalism. International Sociology, 18(2), 395–415. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580903018002005
Faulconbridge, J. R., & Muzio, D. (2012). Professions in a globalizing world: Towards a transnational sociology of the professions. International sociology, 27(1), 136–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580911423059
Faulconbridge, J. R., & Muzio, D. (2021). Valuation devices and the dynamic legitimacy-performativity nexus: The case of PEP in the English legal profession. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 91, 101224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2020.101224
Fevre, R. (1992). The sociology of labour markets. Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Fourcade, M., & Healy, K. (2017). Seeing like a market. Socio-Economic Review, 15(1), 9–29. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/jzy7k_v1
Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism: The third logic. University of Chicago Press.
Friedman, S., & Laurison, D. (2019). The class ceiling: Why it pays to be privileged. Policy Press.
Gabe, J., & Elston, M. A. (2022). Medical Autonomy, Dominance and Decline. In L Monaghan & J Gabe (Eds.) Key Concepts in Medical Sociology (pp 269-276) London: Sage.
General Medical Council. (2025). More female than male doctors for first time ever in the UK. www.gmc-uk.org/news/news-archive/more-female-than-male-doctors-for-first-time-ever-in-the-uk
Healey, S. J. R., Fakes, K., Malau-Aduli, B., Leigh, L., & Nair, B. R. (2025). Exploring experiences of work-related inequitable treatment among international medical graduates (IMGs): A sequential explanatory mixed methods study. PLoS One, 20(2), e0319230. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0319230
Karpik, L. (2010). Valuing the unique: The economics of singularities. Princeton University Press.
Kumwenda, B., Cleland, J., Prescott, G., Walker, K., & Johnston, P. (2019). Relationship between sociodemographic factors and specialty destination of UK trainee doctors: A national cohort study. BMJ Open, 9, Article e026961. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026961
Larson, M. S. (1977). The rise of professionalism: A sociological analysis. University of California Press.
Legal Cheek (2024, November 20). Law's high rollers: The firms turning their top lawyers into multi-millionaires. Legal Cheek. www.legalcheek.com/2024/11/laws-high-rollers-the-firms-turning-their-top-lawyers-into-multi-millionaires/
Levanon, A., England, P., & Allison, P. (2009). Occupational feminization and pay: Assessing causal dynamics using 1950–2000 U.S. census data. Social Forces, 88(2), 865–891. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.0.0264
Mazzucato, M. (2018). The value of everything: Making and taking in the global economy. Penguin.
McKinsey & Company. (2023). Diversity matters even more: The case for holistic impact. www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-matters-even-more-the-case-for-holistic-impact
Medical Schools Council. (2024). Fostering potential – 10 years on from Selecting for Excellence. Available at: www.medschools.ac.uk/latest/publications/fostering-potential-10-years-on-from-selecting-for-excellence/ [Accessed 15th December 2025]
Morgan, G., & Quack, S. (2005). Institutional legacies and firm dynamics: The growth and internationalisation of UK and German law firms. Organization Studies, 26(12), 1765–1785. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840605059156
Nelson, R. L. (2022). Partners with power: The social transformation of the large law firm. University of California Press.
Nettleton, S. (2020). The Sociology of Health and Illness (4th ed.). Polity Press.
Noon, M. (2007). The fatal flaws of diversity and the business case for ethnic minorities. Work, Employment and Society, 21(4), 773–784. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017007082886
Plaut, V. C. (2010). Diversity science: Why and how difference makes a difference. Psychological Inquiry, 21(2), 77–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/10478401003676501
Podolny, J. M. (2010). Status signals: A sociological study of market competition. Princeton University Press.
Power, M. (1997). The audit society: Rituals of verification. OUP Oxford.
Pringle, R. (1998). Sex and medicine: gender, power and authority in the medical profession. Cambridge University Press.
Progress Together. (2023). Shaping Our Economy: Senior roles in financial services and socio-economic diversity. Progress Together. https://www.progresstogether.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Shaping-the-Economy-Public-FINAL-Compressed.pdf
Prügl, Elisabeth. "“If Lehman Brothers had been Lehman Sisters…”: Gender and myth in the aftermath of the financial crisis." International Political Sociology, 6(1), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-5687.2011.00149.x
Reed, M. I. (2018). Elites, professions, and the neoliberal state: Critical points of intersection and contention. Journal of Professions and Organization, 5(3), 297–312. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpo/joy010
Reskin, B. F., & Roos, P. A. (1990). Job queues, gender queues: Explaining women’s inroads into male occupations. Temple University Press.
Ridgeway, C. L. (2011). Framed by gender: How gender inequality persists in the modern world. Oxford University Press.
Riska, E. (2010). Gender and medical careers. Maturitas, 65(2), 109–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2010.09.010
Ryan, A. (2024). The LB100 ranked by PEP: Firms push partner profits to new heights as associate pay debate rumbles on. Legal Business. https://www.legalbusiness.co.uk/law-firms/analysis/the-lb100-ranked-by-pep-firms-push-partner-profits-to-new-heights-as-associate-pay-debate-rumbles-on/
Saks, M. (2021). Professions: A key idea for business and society. Routledge.
Scott, W. R. (2013). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities (4th ed.). Sage.
Seabrooke, L., & Wigan, D. (2017). The governance of global wealth chains. Review of International Political Economy, 24(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2016.1268189
Solicitors Regulation Authority. (2025) Diversity in Law Firms. Available at: www.sra.org.uk/sra/equality-diversity/diversity-profession/diverse-legal-profession/ [Accessed on 8th September 2025]
Sommerlad, H. (2016). “A pit to put women in”: Professionalism, work intensification, sexualisation and work-life balance in the legal profession in England and Wales. International Journal of the Legal Profession, 23(1), 61–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/09695958.2016.1140945
Sommerlad, H., & Ashley, L. (2015). Diversity and inclusion in professional service firms. In L. Empson, D. Muzio, J. Broschak, & B. Hinings (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of professional service firms (pp. 484–506). Oxford University Press.
Stewart, J. (2008). The political economy of the British National Health Service, 1945–1975: Opportunities and constraints? Medical History, 52(4), 453–470. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025727300000181
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.2307/258788
Táíwò, O. (2022). Elite capture: How the powerful took over identity politics (and everything else). Pluto Press.
Tatli, A., Vassilopoulou, J., & Özbilgin, M. (2013). An unrequited affinity between talent shortages and untapped female potential: The relevance of gender quotas for talent management in high growth potential economies of the Asia Pacific region. International Business Review, 22(3), 539–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2012.07.005
The Lawyer. (2024). Top 100 UK law firms report. The Lawyer. www.thelawyer.com/mda/report/uk-200-2024-top-100-overview/
Vega, M., & Cunha, J. V. D. (2023). Commensuration of health-care quality standards through hospital accreditation: From measurement weapon to management tool?. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 19(4), 543–565. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAOC-12-2021-0190
Wallis, C. J. D., Jerath, A., Aminoltejari, K., Coburn, N., & Bhandari, M. (2023). Surgeon sex and long-term postoperative outcomes among patients undergoing common surgeries. JAMA Surgery, 158(11), 1185–1194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2023.3744
Waters, A. (2022, August 4). ‘We are solid’ - Pay award unites profession in appetite for industrial action. British Medical Association News. https://www.bma.org.uk
Weiss, D. (2024, January 10). For the first time, women make up majority of law firm associates, new NALP report says. American Bar Association. www.americanbar.org/groups/journal/articles/2024/for-the-first-time-women-make-up-a-majority-of-law-firm-associates-nalp-report-says/?utm
Willis, E. (2020). Medical dominance. Routledge.
Witz, A. (1992). Professions and patriarchy. Routledge.
Woolf, K. (2020). Differential attainment in medical education and training. BMJ, 368. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m339
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Louise Ashley
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Cited by
