Abstract
This paper adds to earlier reviews by the author of the changing roles and identities of
contemporary professional staff in UK higher education (Whitchurch, 2004; 2006a;
2006b), and builds on a categorisation of professional staff identities as having
bounded, cross-boundary, and unbounded characteristics (Whitchurch, 2008,
forthcoming). Drawing on a study of fifty-four professional managers in the United
Kingdom, Australia and the United States, it describes a further category of blended
professionals, who have mixed backgrounds and portfolios, comprising elements of
both professional and academic activity. The paper goes on to introduce the concept
of third space as an emergent territory between academic and professional domains,
which is colonised primarily by less bounded forms of professional. The implications
of these developments for institutions and for individuals are considered, and some
international comparisons drawn. Finally, it is suggested that third space working
may be indicative of future trends in professional identities, which may increasingly
coalesce with those of academic colleagues who undertake project- and management-
oriented roles, so that new forms of third space professional are likely to continue to
emerge.
Introduction
As higher education institutions have expanded and diversified to meet the demands
of contemporary environments, so too have their workforces, and in particular their
professional staff (Gordon and Whitchurch, 2007). Traditionally, activity in higher
education institutions has been viewed in binary terms: of an academic domain, and
an administrative or management domain that supports this. In the pre-1992 sector,
management roles have been undertaken by academic staff on a rotational and part-
time basis, in positions such as head of department, dean or pro-vice-chancellor.
While some academic staff retain a balanced teaching and research portfolio, others
focus on one or the other, and the emergence of the full-time manager academic has
also been noted, with consequences for academic careers (Deem and Johnson, 2000).
The ‘support’ side has consisted traditionally of full-time professional staff in both
specialist and generalist roles, the specialists in functions such as finance, human
resources and estates, and the generalists primarily in student services and secretariat
roles. However, this division, reflected in language such as ‘academic’ and ‘non-
academic’ staff, and ‘us’ and ‘them’ attitudes (Dobson, 2000; Prichard, 2000;
Szekeres, 2004; McInnis, 1998), is no longer clear-cut. Although there has begun to
be recognition in the literature of movements within and across academic and
management domains (Rhoades, 1996; 1998; 2005; Rhoades and Sporn; 2002;
Gornitzka and Larsen, 2004; Stensaker, Kyvik and Gornitzka, 2005; Whitchurch
2006b), there has, hitherto, been little empirical work on crossovers that are
occurring, the coalescence of activity that is taking place, or new forms of
institutional space that are being created.