Is Management a Science or an Art? Science has a body of theory, operational definitions, systematic data

Science has a body of theory, operational definitions, systematic data

collection, and objective analysis. Scientists attempt to leave a clear re-

cord of their progress and methodology so that others can “climb on

their shoulders” to probe still farther into the unknown. Art, on the oth-

er hand, is more subjective than science: artists rely more on impulse,

intuition than do scientists.

The question here is, does the practice of management demand the

objective rationality of the scientist or the subjective feelings of the artist?

Management as a science. There are those who firmly believe that

management is a science. In fact, the word science has been in the man-

agement vocabulary for a long time. Briefly, scientific management was

an early twentieth-century school of management thought based in part

126

on systematic time and motion studies. Early proponents of scientific

management boasted that their approach replaced subjectivity, intu-

ition, and seat-of-the-pants management with objectivity and scien-

tific methodology. In defense of the scientific position, one writer said,

“Management is already a field of knowledge, and is becoming a science

because the interrelationships involved are being explained systemati-

cally and the emerging theories are being tested and improved by logic

and the facts of life.”

Management as an art. Those who practise management on a daily

basis often claim that management is an art. Advocates of this position

contend that good management is based on common sense and intui-

tive “gut” feelings. One manager argued: Without that clear vision that

underlies all good art, the manager’s components are merely isolated bits

and pieces. As with the other arts, there are no objective criteria by which

the manager can judge whether one arrangement is superior to another. The

criteria he uses to select a configuration are subjective.

A compromise view. Both sides present convincing arguments. Man-

agers can learn from both scientists and artists. A continuum with pure

art on one end and pure science on the other end helps underscore the

value of a compromise. In regard to the day-to-day practice of manage-

ment, each extreme has its shortcomings. Visionaries may lose touch

with practical considerations while pursuing ideals; technicians may

become so preoccupied with detail and methodology that they fail to

put things in the proper perspective. Recognizing that the practice of

management is both an art and a science, the successful manager strikes

a workable balance by relying on subjective feelings or on objective sci-

entific techniques and data as the situation warrants. For example, all

the management science techniques available today may prove useless

in the face of a personality conflict. In contrast, guesswork is no match

for statistical quality control techniques. Only through experience can

effective managers learn when to use scientific objectivity and when to

rely on their judgement or intuition.

Text 2

Read the following text and be ready to discuss each managerial function.