Around here we read a lot of marketing-and-culture theory, because at its best it's about communications, culture, prosperity, economics, and amusement. Ideas being batted around now include "markets are conversations," "total experience marketing," niche marketing, viral marketing, cool hunters, BzzAgents, even alchemy. All ways of looking at emerging groundswells of attitude and practice.
Here is a lifestyle trend that seems important. The Pro-Am Revolution: How enthusiasts are changing our economy and society*, by Charles Leadbeater and Paul Miller. It comes from a study group in the UK, and the policy suggestions -- create commissions and spend public money -- is where I turned right and got a manicure. But the pattern itself, parallel or in succession to cover-the-nut careers, is worth noticing. The discussion in the report is mostly about the personal satisfaction of pursuing excellence; that excellence will shade over into offering their skills in the market, as well as create new markets.
Professional-level amateurs may not have a piece of paper issued by a designated agency
that says they're good. Often it doesn't matter. There is a
difference between access to tools, and skill in using them. Vide discussions of journalism and the blogosphere.
Professional barriers are not likely to fall in some areas, law,
medicine, skyscraper construction, because there actually is a bright line between
mastering the conceptual material and being trained in the algorithms,
the physical rhythms, the steeling of nerves, and the obscure professional
agreements that are regarded as ethics in those fields. Apprenticeship is required, and controlled. In fact, the
best professionals will always set the standard. And in many cases,
where much is at stake and the gatekeepers are reliable (ah, there's
the question...) it makes sense to require professional credentials, when it's an organ transplant or a patent.
But gardening, software design, anywhere the proof is in the result and there is not a high threshhold of abracadabra--nothing keeps others, talented and self-taught, from doing it as
well or better. Mostly for their own enjoyment.
That is the sea change that's happening. A credential is good. But its absence does not mean an absence
of skill and knowledge. And the fall-out, or ooze, from this, will be that those "ethics" requirements that are simply anti-competitive will be scrutinized in a new way, once the world gets used to looking directly for skill, not taking the word of the anointed scribes. New gatekeepers, communities of practice, consumer reports, will arise, evaluating skill in fine-tuned ways that professional licensing agencies are unwilling to do. (Just try asking your Bar Referral Service for "the best real estate lawyer.") A free-for-all at the margins, and distributed intelligence to rate performance.
The fourth maxim in the wonderful little book, The Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz, is Always Do Your Best. What happens when enthusiastic people do something they love, and do their best, is, they get darn good at it, and enjoy it even more.
Via Instapundit.
(*Trouble loading the pdf? save it to your desktop and doubleclick that or open in Acrobat.)