Description: The term 'policy-makers' is commonly used to describe those figures involved in shaping discourse, policy and practice. In attributing such a label to these figures, the impact of their personal influence is perhaps masked. This paper explores the relationship between key figures' personal understandings of underpinning policy concepts and the potential impact on policy development. The particular context for this analysis is the development of a CPD framework for teachers in Scotland. In Scotland, as in many other countries throughout the world, there has been significant progress made recently towards the creation of a more systematic framework of CPD for teachers. In general terms this has been broadly welcomed, and key stakeholders have been positive about developments. However, what has not been made explicit is the rationale behind these developments, or the concepts underpinning it. Methodology: This paper draws on interview data from 16 interviews with elite figures in Scottish education which explored their understandings of, involvement with, and aspirations for, the developing CPD framework for teachers. Elite figures in any education system arguably have the power to shape discourse, policy and practice and therefore their views of the purpose of teaching and the role of the teacher will inform their contribution to this discourse. While the interviews sought to elicit interviewees' views on a wide range of aspects, the analysis reported here focuses on the extent to which interviewees appear to subscribe to either a technical-rationalist or a social democratic view of teaching and teacher professionalism. Broad parameters for the categorisation of technical-rationalist and social democratic conceptions of teaching and teacher professionalism are drawn from a range of contemporary literature including, for example, Bottery & Wright (2000) and Sachs (2001). The interviews were semi-structured, but two specific questions were asked of all interviewees, namely: 1. What should the CPD framework achieve? 2. What indicators should be used to identify its success? Responses to these two questions were analysed in terms of the extent to which they appeared to subscribe to, or reject, either a technical-rationalist or a social democratic view of teaching and teacher professionalism. Conclusions: As might have been predicted, the analysis did not reveal a wholesale subscription to either one of the conceptual viewpoints, but nonetheless did reveal a number of interesting points, including a general tendency for interviewees to subscribe to a technical-rationalist conception in relation to their views on what might constitute indicators of successful implementation, yet a more social democratic view of what they hoped it might achieve. Finally, questions are raised as to the extent to which interviewees' conceptual understandings influence policy, or whether the wider policy/political context influencing interviewees' personal understandings is of greater significance.