The transformational processes in working life are closely studied by social researchers. The sociologists of professions describe some of these processes in terms of occupational professionalization and deprofessionalization. Generally, the conceptualization of such terms begins with the definition of what a profession is; however, the sociologists of professions have not yet reached a consensus on this issue. Meanwhile, despite the conceptual diversity in the sociology of professions, there are points of intersection between different approaches of this branch of sociological knowledge in defining its basic concept and its derivatives. Namely, the sociologists of professions single out exclusive knowledge, the service ideal, and work autonomy as the elements of a professional complex; and they use these three attributes-dimensions to examine different occupations for their professionalization and deprofessionalization. Moreover, they assume that the work autonomy of professionals derives from the two other elements of a professional complex. Applying this analytical scheme of professionalism to the empirical world of occupations turns out to be difficult in the situation of the spread of formal structures such as markets and bureaucracies. This article reveals the problematic areas of matching this scheme with the contemporary realities of a professional world, in particular in the sociological study of occupations from the point of their professionalization and deprofessionalization. Moreover, occupational professionalization and deprofessionalization as analytical categories are characterized by empirical insensitivity. These categories obscure the variability of transformations with the knowledge base, the logic of acting in an institutional office and the scope of work autonomy of particular specialists in the changing social environment.