management as an art essay

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Is Management Really an Art?

• Henry M. Boettinger

If, as many have argued, management really is an art, if leadership entails more than analytic and statistical skills, it would make sense for businessmen to look at the creative and performing arts to learn something about their own endeavors. The author investigates what he sees as three indispensable aspects of the artistic process—craft, vision, […]

In sheer banality, few statements exceed the assertion that management is an art. Grizzled managerial veterans sometimes shout it to silence insolent or overeager newcomers who brandish shiny scientific methods during decision-making sessions. On happier occasions, appreciative observers use it to explain unexpected success, when chance and the probability of failure surrender to competence and nerve. And who could deny that such a platitude is in some way descriptive of experience? Surely no sensible person would say that management is not an art. Perhaps if one takes the comparison of management to art seriously, he will find that it has some important implications for modern managerial practice.

• HB Mr. Boettinger is director of corporate planning at the American Telephone & Telegraph Company.

Partner Center

Is Management an Art or a Science?

A clue in consilience.

Nicholas Peroff University of Missouri-Kansas City, USA

Introduction

Is effective management an art or a science? Can it be both? How, exactly, should we think about the management of an organization? For years now, an often spirited art-versusscience debate has ranged through an extensive body of literature on organizational management (Bohn, 1994; Calkins, 1959; Hubner, 1986; Mathur, 1994; Schiemann and Lingle, 1997; Shallenberger, 1960; Weick, 1996), and many subfields of management, including organizational behavior (Caminiti, 1995; Choo, 1995; Watkins, 1993) and leadership (Lester et al. , 1998, Pitcher, 1997a, b). 1

An art-versus-science dialogue flourishes in business administration (Ashkenas et al. , 1998; Bort, 1996; Gilad and Herring, 1996; Haslip, 1996; Lewis, 1997; Marullo, 1998; Mullin, 1994; “Outfitting an Office…”, 1997; Sexton and Smilor, 1986; Sherden, 1994; Smith, 1998; Timpe, 1986-9) and related areas such as banking (“Evasive Action…”, 1995; “Risk Management…”, 1997; Wray, 1996). The debate also continues in public administration (Beard, 1939; Lepawsky, 1949; Lynn, 1996; McDonough, 1998) and related areas such as health administration (Jeska and Rounds, 1996; Kay and Nuttall, 1995; Meszaros, 1997) and corrections (Bowker, 1982).

Edward O. Wilson is not known as a contributor to the literature on management. His early work is on the study of social insects, particularly ants. When he wrote Sociobiology: The New Synthesis (1975), he inaugurated the scientific study of animal societies and communication. All told, he is the author of 18 books, and two of them, On Human Nature (1978) and The Ants (1990, with Bert Holldobler), received the Pulitzer Prize. He is currently Pellegrino University Research Professor and Honorary Curator of Entomology of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard.

With the publication of his latest book, Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge (1998), Wilson entered the management as art versus science debate, simply because his book is about everything. Consilience means a “jumping together,” which is what Wilson wishes would happen with the natural and social sciences, the arts, politics, ethics, and every other form of human knowledge. He believes that all real phenomena, from galaxies and planets to people and subatomic particles, are based on material processes that are ultimately reducible to a small number of fundamental natural laws that explain everything. All explanations for everything are causal and all causes are material.

Wilson laments the increasingly complex, specialized, and fragmented state of human knowledge today and argues that the progress of science has always been a story of increasing consilience. Is management an art or a science? If Wilson's belief in a unified theory of everything is correct, maybe we should be asking a much larger question. Is a consilience of all of our ways of thinking about management feasible?

Wilson's description of science

Science is extraordinary. With the aid of science, we can visualize matter across 37 orders of magnitude, from the largest galactic cluster to the smallest known particle (Wilson, 1998a, p. 47). When science is done correctly, it can advise us in all of our day-to-day decisions and actions. Wilson only acknowledges one resource limitation on the pursuit of scientific knowledge, a lack of data.

Wilson is a natural scientist and, for him, science is not a philosophy or belief system. Science is science. It involves the expansion of sensory capacity by instruments, the classification of data, and the interpretation of data guided by theory. Scientific theories are falsifiable. They “are constructed specifically to be blown apart if proved wrong, and if so destined, the sooner the better” (1998a, p. 52).

Science is a method of doing things. It “is the organized, systematic enterprise that gathers knowledge about the world and condenses the knowledge into testable laws and principles ” (1998a, p. 53, author's emphasis). There are five “diagnostic features” that distinguish real science from pseudoscience. The first is the repeatability of research results, preferably by independent investigators. The second is a reporting of research as simply and elegantly as possible. Third, scientific findings are subject to universally accepted and unambiguous scales of measurement. Fourth, scientific research stimulates new learning and new knowledge. And finally, science is consilient. Research results can be connected and proved consistent with one another.

Astronomy, biomedicine, and physiological psychology possess all of the features of real science. Astrology, ufology, creation science, and Christian Science do not (Wilson, 1998a, p. 54). Wilson is silent on the matter, but there is certainly plenty of other support for placement of a science of management among the former and not the latter “sciences.”

Management as a science

The origin of a modern science of management can be traced to the work of Frederick Taylor (1911) and Luther Gulick (1937). However, when James D. Thompson helped launch the first issue of Administrative Science Quarterly , he remarked that “the possibility of a science of administration is only now coming to be taken seriously” (1956, p. 103). Thompson envisioned an applied science built from a combination of both deductive and inductive techniques for the development of logical, abstract, tested systems of thought. A science of administration would “be distinguished from administrative lore by the methods used to build that knowledge of administration” (1956, p. 104).

From its struggle to be taken seriously in the 1950s, the science of management and administration has become a principal component of management theory and practice in the 1990s. It is prominent in the academic literature (Assad et al. , 1992; Austin, 1993; Culbert, 1996; Mingers and Gill, 1997; Plane, 1994; Reisman, 1992; Sproull, 1997) 2 and in business school classrooms (e.g., Anderson et al. , 1996; Eppen et al. , 1998; Taylor, 1998). In public administration, a “new” science of administration (Daneke, 1990; Dennard, 1996; Kiel, 1994; Neumann, 1996; Overman, 1996) is establishing a presence with the literature of traditional administrative science (Dunsire, 1973; Lee, 1990; White, 1975).

Wilson's description of the arts

Wilson thinks that the creative arts and science are very different from one another (Lester, 1998). Scientific knowledge is useful to us because it provides us with objective, verifiable knowledge about the real world around us. The creative arts, broadly defined, are also beneficial, but in a different way. They are in tune with our underlying “human nature,” which Wilson says is an inborn ensemble of instinctive or “epigenetic rules” that govern our behavior (Lester, 1998).

Epigenetic rules are hereditary predispositions in our mental development that are anchored in neural pathways in our brain and are prescribed by our genes. Natural selection favors epigenetic rules for behaviors that foster our survival; for example, parental investment in children, territoriality, taboos against incest, and keeping contractual agreements. Taken together, these norms of behavior or action become the elements of human cultures.

Artistic expression, then, arises from and resonates with our human nature. Wilson argues that creativity, ethics, culture, in fact all products of the mind, are materially grounded in physiochemical activities of the brain in interaction with the human body. Emotions link artistic expression and human nature. If we see a movie that encourages or condones incest, it arouses a feeling of disgust because the images on the screen trigger a negative emotional response linked to one of the underlying epigenetic rules (the incest taboo) that define human nature. A knowledge of words, images, archetypes, and abstractions that resonate with our epigenetic rules helps us make decisions that support our survival as social beings.

Management as art

When viewed as an art, effective management is a remarkable, but natural, expression of human behavior. It is intuitive, creative, and flexible. Lee G. Bolman and Terrence E. Deal, authors of Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership, see managers as leaders and artists who are able to develop unique alternatives and novel ideas about their organizations' needs. They are attuned to people and events around them and learn to anticipate the turbulent twists and turns of organizational life: Artistry in management is neither exact nor precise. Artists interpret experience and express it in forms that can be felt, understood, and appreciated by others. Art allows for emotion, subtlety, ambiguity. An artist reframes the world so that others can see new possibilities. (Bolman and Deal, 1997, p. 17)

Modern organizations rely too little on art in their search for attributes like quality, commitment, and creativity. “The leader as artist relies on images as well as memos, poetry as well as policy, and reflection as well as command” (Bolman and Deal, 1997, p. 17). Artistic leaders and managers help us see beyond and improve collective performance.

Like management science, management as art is also well established in the general literature on management (Badaracco, 1998; Blaise, 1998; Goldberg and Sifonis, 1994; Morgan, 1993; Rabinovitch, 1997; Selznick, 1996; Smither, 1998; Tead, 1951) and leadership (Degree, 1989; Magill and Slocum, 1998; Wheatley, 1992). It is also prominent in business administration (Eden, 1997; Mann, 1971; Pascal and Amos, 1991; Thomas, 1994) and public administration (Baseman, 1993; Vickers, 1965).

A search for consilience à la Wilson

Wilson assumes that all phenomena are based on material processes that are causal and, “however long and tortuous the sequences,” ultimately reducible to the laws of physics (1998a, p. 266). A consilience of knowledge about the management of organizations would demand a vision capable of sweeping from whole societies to an individual human brain. It would involve both reduction and synthesis. To dissect something into its elements is consilience by reduction, and to reconstitute it is consilience by synthesis (1998a, p. 68).

Wilson offers an example of consilience in practice from his early research on ants (1998a, pp. 70-71). To explain communication within an ant colony (e.g., an internal alarm alerting an entire colony to an attack by a predator), Wilson and his associates studied an ant colony across four levels of organization, from superorganism (the whole colony), then reductively to organism (individual ants), to glands and sense organs, and finally to molecules (pheromones). He also worked in the opposite direction (synthesis) when he predicted the meanings of signals observed in the colony (e.g., “alarm, danger” versus “food, follow me”) by linking various signals to matching changes in the molecular composition and concentration of individual ant pheromones. The result was a comprehensive or “holistic” study of ant communication.

Follow the lead of Wilson, and the strategy in the search for consilience in management theory and practice would require the pursuit of coherent cause-and-effect explanations for all relevant phenomena across multiple levels of organization from society to neuron. The cutting edge of investigation would be reductionism. And dealing with increasing complexity from the brain, to an organization, to society as a whole would be the major challenge in the search for consilience in approaches to the management of organizations.

A more inclusive search for consilience

Wilson readily acknowledges the limited reach of conventional scientific thinking when he notes that “at each level of organization, especially at the living cell and above, phenomena exist that require new laws and principles, which still cannot be predicted from those at more general levels” (1998a, p. 55). Part of this limitation may be rooted in a reluctance to make a distinction between complex systems—between non-living systems, living systems, and living systems with people in them. They differ from one another. Probing the differences would open the door to new kinds of data and new ways to think about complex systems, especially complex human systems.

Although Wilson's search for consilience is courageous and sweeping, he is too confined to traditional theoretical perspectives from the physical sciences. Several years ago, Paul Diesing said that if we knew the whole truth our “predictions would always be correct; but since all existing theories (and approaches) are incomplete and partly false, it is better to bring together a variety of partial theories to better approximate the whole truth” (1962, p.179). Wilson unnecessarily limits his consideration of all of the ways we come to understand things.

Playwright Tom Stoppard contends that “science and art are nowadays beyond being like each other. Sometimes they seem to be each other” (Miller, 1997, p. 41). For Wilson, the arts were a necessary “prescientific” step in our evolutionary quest for knowledge (1998a, pp. 210-37). But he argues that, unlike science, the arts do not contribute anything truly concrete and verifiable to our knowledge of reality. In fact, he thinks that a future consilience of scientific knowledge may include an explanation of art. Wilson unnecessarily minimizes the ability of human imagination, like that commonly exhibited in the arts and in the sciences—in symbols, images, and metaphor—to contribute anything tangible to a consilience or “jumping together” of all the ways in which we come to understand and explain the world.

Managing human systems

When management is considered a science, the knowledge that a manager uses to keep an organization moving effectively in a given direction largely has its origin in rigorous scientific research acquired in strict adherence to the scientific method. When management is viewed as art, knowledge about how to keep an organization moving successfully in the right direction is in tune with primal human nature and springs from a manager's intuition, imagination, and creativity. It is apparent that inclusion of the wellestablished and enduring body of literature and research that addresses management as an art in a consilience with our accumulated knowledge about the scientific management of organizations will require a significant change of Wilson's rules for consilience.

While it is true that the great successes of the natural sciences have been achieved by reducing and explaining physical phenomena in terms of their constituent elements, organizations involve human perceptions, interactions, emotions and feelings—all things that cannot be dissected and reassembled to explain how an organization works. And while mathematics is the “natural language” of physics, it is not the natural language of organizations. If a consilience of the art and science of management is to happen, it will require a greater general willingness to think about organizations as complex, nonlinear human systems, and it will require an open-minded exploration of the as yet unproven explanatory power of metaphor as a theoretical concept.

New scientific theories evolving out of a variety of disciplines, including physics, biology, and computer science (see Dennard, 1996; Evans, 1996; Heylighen, 1998; Kirshbaum, 1998; Neumann, 1996), are generating new ways to think about organizations as living nonlinear human systems. Human systems possess the dynamism and other characteristics of non-living nonlinear systems (e.g., the weather) and the familiar features of other living systems, including the ability to grow, recreate themselves, and die. And, because human systems include people, the metaphor generated and used exclusively by people is a unique feature of all living human systems.

An organization, like all human systems, is made up of an extremely varied collection of “parts” that, taken together, form the organization's tangible or material basis of existence. The parts of a typical organization include managers, employees, offices, equipment, written policies and procedures, e-mail, logos, memos, and an almost infinite variety of other things. An organization exists as highly interactive and meaningful relations between all of the parts that constitute it in interaction with elements of its environment. An organization cannot be successfully reduced or dissected with the instruments of physics or chemistry, which are the sciences of matter. A living human organization is not entirely quantifiable or explainable by the methods of the conventional physical sciences.

The concept of emergent properties or behaviors is critical to understanding an organization as a complex, living nonlinear system. The emergent behavior of living systems may be expressed by the behavior of the elements of a system in interaction with one another and the environment, but the emergent behavior of a system is not a property of any individual element and it cannot be explained as a summation of the properties of those elements. Examples include behavior in such diverse nonlinear living systems as Wilson's ant colonies, the Department of Defense, traffic jams, and the Dow Jones composite stock market index.

Like all living organisms, organizations contain within themselves a way to control relationships between their parts and relationships between their parts and the environment. In a biological system, DNA is the instrument or plan that distributes the control of interactive relationships between the parts of the system to the parts themselves (Langton, l989). The resulting relationships between parts of the living system (muscle groups, nervous system, organs, etc.) then express life, the emergent behavior unique to all living organisms. The property of “aliveness” can be traced to an organism's DNA.

The corresponding mechanism or internal frame of reference that distributes control of interactive relationships to the elements or parts of an organization is a common body of metaphor (CBM). Through metaphor, our understanding of things is acquired, defined, and organized in terms of our existing knowledge of things already retained in our minds as remembered images, ideas, symbols, and stereotypes (Morgan, 1986; Morgan, 1993; Roher, 1997). We come to know things in terms of what is already known to us. Our understanding of ourselves and the world around us, in turn, guides our behavior. Acquired through shared experiences, an organization's unique CBM influences the way organization members characteristically interact with each other and with other people, and how they interact with elements of the physical environment.

In more conventional terms, an organization's CBM is comparable to its culture. “A culture may be conceived as a network of beliefs and purposes in which any string in the net pulls and is pulled by others, thus perpetually changing the configuration of the whole” (Barzun, 1989, p. 89). Like organizational cultures, a CBM defines and, at the same time, is defined in interactive relationships between the parts of an organization. Over time, the resultant interactive relationships between parts of an organization, in interaction with a CBM and with the features of the organization's environment, express the identity of an organization as a living human system.

Organizations are physical systems like the weather, Wilson's ant colonies, and other complex systems, but the vital presence of a common body of metaphor or CBM distinguishes human organizations from other complex systems. Wilson may be correct when he assumes that all tangible phenomena are based on material processes that are causal and, however long and tortuous the sequences, such phenomena are ultimately reducible to the laws of physics; but like it or not, an organization is more than physical phenomena and causal relationships. Certainly, in its early stages at least, a consilience of knowledge about the management of organizations will have to consider the inclusion of knowledge beyond that obtained exclusively from research grounded in the traditional sciences.

Complexity theory and metaphor

At first glance, complexity theory and the concept of metaphor seem particularly well suited to the task of developing new ways to think about organizations as complex human systems. However, Wilson thinks that the value of both the theory and the concept is, at best, very uncertain. If he is correct, they will contribute little if anything to a consilience of our knowledge about the management of organizations.

Wilson knows that all living systems are complex and he acknowledges the work of a group of computer-oriented “complexity theorists” who are searching for precise mathematical models or algorithms to explain the emergence of such phenomena as cells, ecosystems, and minds (see Kauffman, 1993; Langton, 1989; Morowitz, 1995). He writes that he is impressed by their sophistication and spirit, and his heart is with them, but his mind is not, “at least not yet” (1998a, p. 88).

Wilson thinks that, so far at least, complexity theorists lack data, their propositions need more detail, and their conclusions tell us little that is really new. His real concern, however, is that none of the elements of complexity theory has anything like the generality and adherence to factual detail that he would like to see in a true scientific theory. Living systems are complex, but after giving all due respect to complexity theory, Wilson still thinks that “the laws of physics and chemistry … are enough to do the job, given sufficient time and research funding” (1998a, p. 91).

If Wilson is skeptical about complexity theory, he sees even less scientific value in the concept of metaphor. This is curious, because he recognizes the importance of metaphor, especially in the creative arts (1998a, pp. 218-22). And when he writes about culture, he could easily be writing about a CBM or common body of metaphor. “Culture, rising from the productions of many minds that interlace and reinforce one another over many generations, expands like a growing organism into a universe of seemingly infinite possibility” (l998a, pp. 223). It “is historical; includes ideas, patterns, and values … is based upon symbols; and … each society creates culture and is created by it” (1998a, pp. 130-31).

The inborn ability to generate metaphors with ease and move them fluidly from one context to another is a special human adaptive power granted to the arts by the genetic evolution of the brain (1998a, p. 219). But Wilson argues that art is the antithesis of science because it has no scientific meaning or value (1998a, p. 218). Metaphor does not lend itself to reduction and cause-and-effect scientific analysis. Therefore, by its very nature, metaphor cannot precisely explain why anything occurs and cannot contribute anything meaningful to a consilience of factual knowledge about the management of organizations.

Is a consilience of the art and science of managing organizations possible? Maybe. Wilson believes that the search for a consilience of all scientific knowledge will provide coherent explanations for all relevant phenomena across multiple levels of complexity, from neuron and brain, to organization, and to society as a whole. He begins with the assumption that all tangible phenomena are based on material processes that are ultimately reducible to the laws of physics. All explanations are causal and all causes are material. Unfortunately, his beginning assumptions are far too restrictive to guide the formative stages of a consilience of our knowledge about organizations and other complex human systems.

Art and science both foster new and creative ways to understand organizations and communicate what we know about them. They both generate and employ metaphors of management that help us form our perceptions, assumptions, and new ideas about organizations. Both inspire our imagination. Research in the art and science of management will continue systematically to gather knowledge about the behavior of people in organizations and try to present that knowledge in new and testable theories, concepts, and hypotheses. But future research also must be pursued with enough flexibility to permit the emergence and investigation of entirely new knowledge about organizations and the way we manage them.

• The selection of literature on an art versus science of management is intended to be representative of an ongoing debate in the literature, and does not include a commensurate recognition of management as a craft and other portrayals of the management of organizations.
• In addition to the Administrative Science Quarterly (established in 1956), other journals to advance the science of management in business and public administration (with date of introduction) include the Journal of Applied Behavioral Science (1965), Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (1973), Management Science (1954), Marketing Science (1982), and Organization Science (1990).

Anderson, D. et al. (1996) An Introduction to Management Science, 8th edn, New York: West.

Ashkenas, R. et al. (1998) “Making the Deal Real: How GE Capital Integrates Acquisitions,” Harvard Business Review, 1 (January), 165.

Assad, A. et al. (eds) (1992) Excellence in Management Science Practice: A Readings Book, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Austin, L. (1993) Management Science for Decision Makers, Minneapolis. Paul: West Publishing Co.

Badaracco, J. (1998) “The Discipline of Building Character,” Harvard Business Review, 2 (March), 114-21.

Barzun, J. (1989) The Culture We Deserve, Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

Beard, C. (1939) Philosophy, Science and Art of Public Administration, Princeton, NJ: Governmental Research Association.

Blaise, Z. (1998) “Enterprise Computing: Art of Knowledge Management,” InfoWorld, 20, 9-11.

Bohn, R. (1994) “Measuring and Managing Technical Knowledge,” Sloan Management Review, 36, 61-73.

Bolman, L. and Deal, T. (1997) Reframing Oranizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bort, J. (1996) “Enterprise Computing: Data Mining's Midas Touch,” InfoWorld, 18, 79-82.

Bowker, L. (1982) Corrections, the Science and the Art, New York: Macmillan.

Calkins, R. (1959) The Art of Administration and the Art of Science, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Caminiti, S. (1995) “Managing: What Team Leaders Need to Know,” Fortune, February 20, 93-4.

Choo, C. (1995) Information Management for the Intelligent Organization: the Art of Scanning the Environment, Medford, NJ: Information Today.

Culbert, S. (1996) Mind-set Management: the Heart of Leadership, New York: Oxford University Press.

Daneke, G. (1990) “A Science of Public Administration,” Public Administration Review, 50, 383-92.

Dennard, L. (1996) “The New Paradigm in Science and Public Administration,” Public Administration Review, 56, 495-9.

Diesing, P (1962) Reason in Society: Five Types of Decisions and their Social Conditions, Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Dunsire, A. (1973) Administration: the Word and the Science, New York: Wiley.

Eppen, G. et al. (1998) Introductory Management Science, 5th edn, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Evans, K. (1996) “Chaos as Opportunity, Grounding a Positive Vision of Management and Society in the New Physics,” Public Administration Review, 56, 491-4.

”Evasive Action: British Banking” (1995), The Economist, 336, 70.

Gilad, B. and Herring, J. (eds) (1996) The Art and Science of Business Intelligence Analysis, Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.

Goldberg, B. and Sifonis, J. (1994) Dynamic Planning: the Art of Managing Beyond Tomorrow, New York: Oxford University Press.

Gulick, L. (1937) “Notes on the Theory of Organization,” in L Gulick and L. Urwick (eds), Papers on the Science of Administration, New York: Institute of Public Administration.

Haslip, N. (1996) “The Council of Logistics Management: a Professional Organization of Individuals,” Transportation and Distribution, 37, 82.

Heylighen, F (1998), “Web Dictionary of Cybernetics and Systems,” http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/ASC/IndexASC.html .

Hubner, H. (ed.) (1986) The Art and Science of Innovation Management: an International Perspective, New York: Elsevier.

Jeska, S. and Rounds, R. (1996) “Addressing the Human Side of Change: Career Development and Renewal,” Nursing Economics, 14, 339-46.

Kay, F and Nuttall, N. (1995) “Clinical Decision-Making: an Art or a Science?” British Dental Journal, 178, 229-33.

Kiel, L.D. (1994) Managing Chaos and Complexity in Government: a New Paradigm for Managing Change, Innovation, and Organizational Renewal, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kirshbaum, D. (1998) “Introduction to Complex Systems,” http: homepages.force9.net.htm.

Langton. C. (ed.) (1989) Artificial Life, Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley.

Lee, D. (1990) The Basis of Management in Public Organizations, New York: P. Lang.

Lepawsky, A. (1949) Administration: the Art and Science of Organization and Management, New York: A.A. Knopf.

Lester, R. et al. (1998) “Interpretive Management: What General Managers Can Learn From Design,” Harvard Business Review, 2 (March), 86.

Lester, T. (1998) “All for one, One for All” (interview with E.O. Wilson), Atlantic Unbound, http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/bookauth/ba980318.htm .

Lewis, H. (1997) Why Flip a Coin? The Art and Science of Good Decisions, New York: John Wiley.

Lynn, L. (1996) Public Management as Art, Science, and Profession, Chatham, NJ: Chatham House Publishers.

Marullo, G. (1998) “Selling your Business: a Preview of the Process,” Nations Business, 86, 25.

Mathur, K. (1994) Management Science: the Art of Decision Making, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

McDonough, K. (1998) “Public Finance: Constructive Financing,” American City and County, June, 1.

Meszaros, L. (1997) “Applying the Rules of Management to Medical Practices,” Ophthalmology Times, 15 (April), 65.

Miller, A. (1997) “Three Wise Men, Two Worlds, and One Idea,” Independent on Sunday, 23 February, 40-41.

Mingers, J. and Gill, A. (eds) (1997) Multimethodology: the Theory and Practice of Integrating Management Science Methodologies, ChichesterYork: Wiley.

Morgan, G. (1986) Images of Organization, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Morgan, G. (1993) Imaginization: the Art of Creative Management, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Mullin, R. (1994) “Consultants Pool Talents for Business Redesign: the Focus is Change Management,” Chemical Week, 174, 26-8.

Neuman, E. (speaker) (1993) Complexity and Chaos (Cassette Recording ISBN No. 1-56823-004-4), Nashville, Tennessee: Carmichael & Carmichael.

Neumann, F (1996) “What Makes Public Administration a Science, or, Are its 'Big Questions' Really Big,” Public Administration Review, 56, 409-15.

”Outfitting an Office Is an Art and a Science” (1997) Colorado Business Magazine, 24, 38-42.

Overman, E. (1996) “The New Sciences of Administration: Chaos and Quantum Theory,” Public Administration Review, 56, 487-90.

Pitcher, P (1997a) “Management Is a Craft, not an Art or Science,” Management Review, 86, 16-18.

Pitcher, P (1997b) The Drama of Leadership, New York: John Wiley.

Plane, D. (1994) Management Science: a Spreadsheet Approach, Danvers, MA: Boyd & Fraser.

Rabinovitch, E. (1997) “Outstanding Network Management,” Enterprise Systems Journal, 12, 48-50.

Reisman, A. (1992) Management Science Knowledge: its Creation, Generalization, and Consolidation, Westport, Conn.: Quorum Books.

”Risk Management Beware of Low Flying Banks” (1997) The Economist, 345, 11.

Rohrer, T. (1997) “Annotated Bibliography of Metaphor and Cognitive Science,”

http:metaphor. uoregon.edu.htm.

Schiemann, W. and Lingle, J. (1997) “Seven Greatest Myths of Measurement,” Management Review, 86, 21-4.

Selznick, P (1996) “Institutionalism 'Old' and 'New'”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 270-78.

Sexton, D. and Smilor, R. (eds) (1986) The Art and Science of Entrepreneurship, Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

Shallenberger, J. (1960) Organized Efforts to Advance the Art and Science of Managing in Selected Countries, Sydney: International Committee of Scientific Management.

Sherden, W. (1994) Market Ownership: the Art and Science of Becoming #1, New York: American Management Association.

Smith, S. (1998) “Grounds for Success” (interview with CEO Howard Schultz), Entrepreneur, 26, 120-27.

Smither, J. (ed.) (1998) Performance Appraisal: State of the Art in Practice, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Sproull, R. (1997) Scientist's Tools for Business: Metaphors and Modes of Thought, Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

Taylor, B. (1998) Introduction to Management Science, 8th edn, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Taylor, F (1911) The Principles of Scientific Management, New York: Norton.

Tead, O. (1951) The Art of Administration, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Thomas, A. (1994) “How to Lead a Revolution,” Fortune, November, 28, 48-52.

Thompson, J. (1956) “On Building an Administrative Science,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 1 (1), 102-11.

Timpe, D. (ed.) (1986-9) Art and Science of Business Management, Vol. 1-8, New York: Facts on File.

Watkins, K. (1993) Sculpting the Learning Organization: Lessons in the Art and Science of Systemic Change, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Weick, K. (1996) “Drop Your Tools: an Allegory for Organizational Studies,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 301-13.

Wheatley, M. (1992) Leadership and the New Science: Learning About Organization from an Orderly Universe, San Francisco, CA: Berrett- Koehler.

White, M. (1975) Management Science in Federal Agencies: the Adoption and Diffusion of a Socio-Technical Innovation, Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Wilson, E.O. (1975) Sociobiology: the New Synthesis, Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Wilson, E.O. (1978) On Human Nature, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wilson, E.O. (1990) The Ants, Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Wilson, E.O. (1998a) Consilience: the Unity of Knowledge, New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Wilson, E.O. (1998b) “Integrated Science and the Coming Century of the Environment,” Science, 279 (5359), 2048-9.

Wray, L. (1996) “Flying Swine: Appropriate Targets and Goals of Monetary Policy,” Journal of Economic Issues, 30, 545-53.

• Management Basics
• Management as an Art

Art implies application of knowledge & skill to trying about desired results. An art may be defined as personalized application of general theoretical principles for achieving best possible results. Art has the following characters -

A manager can never be successful just by obtaining degree or diploma in management; he must have also know how to apply various principles in real situations by functioning in capacity of manager.

Every manager has his own way of managing things based on his knowledge, experience and personality, that is why some managers are known as good managers (like Aditya Birla, Rahul Bajaj) whereas others as bad.

Management is also creative in nature like any other art. It combines human and non-human resources in useful way so as to achieve desired results. It tries to produce sweet music by combining chords in an efficient manner.

Thus, we can say that management is an art therefore it requires application of certain principles rather it is an art of highest order because it deals with moulding the attitude and behavior of people at work towards desired goals.

Management as both Science and Art

Management is both an art and a science . The above mentioned points clearly reveals that management combines features of both science as well as art.

It is considered as a science because it has an organized body of knowledge which contains certain universal truth. It is called an art because managing requires certain skills which are personal possessions of managers.

Science provides the knowledge & art deals with the application of knowledge and skills .

A manager to be successful in his profession must acquire the knowledge of science & the art of applying it. Therefore management is a judicious blend of science as well as an art because it proves the principles and the way these principles are applied is a matter of art.

Science teaches to ’know’ and art teaches to ’do’. E.g. a person cannot become a good singer unless he has knowledge about various ragas & he also applies his personal skill in the art of singing. Same way it is not sufficient for manager to first know the principles but he must also apply them in solving various managerial problems that is why, science and art are not mutually exclusive but they are complementary to each other (like tea and biscuit, bread and butter etc.).

The old saying that “Manager are Born” has been rejected in favor of “Managers are Made” . It has been aptly remarked that management is the oldest of art and youngest of science. To conclude, we can say that science is the root and art is the fruit.

  Related Articles

• Management as a Discipline
• Management as a Group
• Management as a Science
• Management as a Profession
• Features of Management

View All Articles

Authorship/Referencing - About the Author(s)

The article is Written By “Prachi Juneja” and Reviewed By Management Study Guide Content Team . MSG Content Team comprises experienced Faculty Member, Professionals and Subject Matter Experts. We are a ISO 2001:2015 Certified Education Provider . To Know more, click on About Us . The use of this material is free for learning and education purpose. Please reference authorship of content used, including link(s) to ManagementStudyGuide.com and the content page url.

• What is Management ?
• Management as a Process
• Management as an Activity
• Levels of Management
• Objectives of Management
• Importance of Management
• Management and Administration
• Functions of Management
• Co-ordination - Introduction
• Co-ordination and Co-operation
• Management Principles
• Management Principles - Features
• Importance of Management Principles
• How Management Functions are Performed at Coca Cola
• Scientific Management - Introduction
• Principles of Scientific Management
• Techniques of Scientific Management
• Criticism of Scientific Management
• Taylor and Fayol

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Management; Art or Science?

Related Papers

IAEME Publication

Management, over the years, is widely debated as being Art as well as Science. Art implies application of knowledge and skills whereas Science is concerned with developing and applying models and concepts that help to illuminate management issues and solve managerial problems This paper is of the view that Management, as a function, is getting influenced by more sophisticated techniques nowadays in order to arrive at a decision. These management techniques apply in the domain of marketing, finance, production, human resources etc. Consequently, Management is now to be considered more as a Science than Art. Art form of Management is getting diminished gradually with more and more techniques developing. The paper also tries to elaborate the implications of Management as a Science

Patil Ranjithreddy

Alexandra Cook

salman rahman

Chrstina Alazar

British Journal of Management

Haridimos Tsoukas

Introducing Management in a Global Context

Kevin D O'Gorman

Question, question and question once again. Take nothing at face value, and come to your own evidenced, considered, and reflected upon conclusions. Push at boundaries when you encounter them, and don’t worry about leaving your comfort zones. Reflect upon the story of the traveller, who when walking past some elephants in a park suddenly stopped. He had noticed that these huge and beautiful animals were being held by only a small rope tied to their front leg. No chains, no cages, only a rope no thicker than a finger. It was obvious that the elephants could, at any time, break away and escape, but for some reason, they did not. The traveller asked why they simply stood there and made no attempt to get away. “Well,” their keeper said, “when they are very young and much smaller we use the same size rope to tie them and, at that age, it’s enough to hold them. As they grow up, they are conditioned to believe they cannot break away. They believe the rope can still hold them, so they never try to break free.” Amazing. These animals could at any time break free from their bonds but because they believed they couldn’t, they were stuck right where they were. Like the elephants, many of us go through life hanging onto a belief that we cannot do something, simply because we failed at it once before. In the Social Sciences (management is probably a Social Science but more about that later) we are intrinsically more concerned with the intangible, soft and fuzzy aspects of life. There is a paradox in Social Sciences. Given the apparent fluidity between intangible concepts, you might expect interdisciplinary work to flourish. However, that is not the case. The reality is that in order to protect identity, many disciplines enter into a form of rhetorical and theoretical protectionism. Fields of study erect imaginary boundaries around their areas of enquiry, attempting to quarantine other research areas in case they reveal that, god forbid, they are all actually talking about the same thing!

Abdallah Hamis

Morena TheSecond

RELATED PAPERS

Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja

Alen Jugovic

Nursyiva Irsalinda

Brazilian Journal of Development

Luis Pingueiro

Byron Rodríguez Palacios

2010 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology

Michel Klein

Journal of Solution Chemistry

Prof. Dr. Mohamed Abdel Salam

Disability, CBR & Inclusive Development

Cheong Jan Chan

Richard Edema

Cornell University - arXiv

Mark Sundberg

The South African Journal of Industrial Engineering

Tinus Pretorius

Journal of environmental biology / Academy of Environmental Biology, India

monica sankhwar

Functional Analysis and Its Applications

Jasmina Veta Buralieva

Computers & Operations Research

Ilaria Giordani

Isadora Junqueira , Diandra Machado

Journal of Nepal Geological Society

Binod Maharjan

Cadernos EBAPE.BR

Luciano Andrenacci

Nargiza Achilova

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)

Luzia Castañeda

Jurnal AGRISEP

gita mulyasari

The Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology

Paula Moreno

Experimental Cell Research

arXiv (Cornell University)

Angelo Ranaldo

FEBS Letters

Suzanne Mills

See More Documents Like This

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Academic Essay Writers
• Article Review
• Article Writing
• Annotated Bibliography
• Application Essay
• Argumentative Essay
• Argumentative Essay Help
• Article Critique
• Book Report
• Book Review
• Blog Article
• BSN Capstone Project
• Business Plan
• Buy Essay Online
• Buy PowerPoint Poster
• Buy PDF Poster
• Case Brief Writing
• Cause and Effect Essay
• Capstone Project
• Cheap Custom Essay
• Cheap Essay
• College Essay
• College Essays to Buy
• College Essay Writers
• College Papers
• Classification Essay
• Criminal Justice Essay
• Buy Our Custom Essay Help from Pros
• Buy Custom Essays of Unmatched Quality from Our Team
• Custom Essay Writing Services
• Custom Essays Writing
• Custom Essay Writing Service
• Custom Paper Writing
• Custom Term Paper Writing
• Deductive Essay Online
• Discussion Board Post
• Dissertation
• Do My Essay Paper
• DNP Capstone Project
• EBP in Nursing
• Editing Service
• Essay Buy Online
• Essay Editing
• Essays for Sale
• Essay Order
• Essay Outline
• Essay Paper
• Essay Papers for Sale
• Essay Papers Online
• Essay Papers to Buy
• Essay Topic for Your Paper
• Essay Writers for Hire
• Essay Writer for Hire
• Essay Writing Service
• Essay Writing Online Guide
• Formatting Service
• Freelance Essay Writing
• Good Essay Writing
• Grade My College Essay
• Hire Grant Writer
• How to Write a Research Essay
• How to Write an Original Essay
• IB Extended Essay
• Interview Essay
• Learn How to Write an Essay
• Letter Writing Service
• Literary Analysis
• Literature Review
• Math Problems
• Marketing Plan
• Excel Assignment Help
• Motivation Letter
• Movie Critique
• Movie Review
• MSN Capstone Project
• Non-Plagiarized Essay Writing
• Nursing Care Plan
• Nursing Coursework
• Nursing Concept Map
• Nursing Informatics
• Nursing Paper Writing
• Nursing PICO Questions
• Nursing Soap Note
• Online Essay Paper Help
• Online Essay Writing Service
• Online Research Paper
• Online Term Paper
• Online Test
• Online Writing
• Order Custom Essays Online
• Paper Writing Service
• Pay for Essay
• Personal Essay Paper
• Personal Narrative Essay
• Personal Statement
• Poem Writing Service
• Problem Solution Essay
• Proofreading and Editing
• Questionnaire
• Report Writing
• Research Paper Help
• Research Paper Online
• Research Paper Services
• Research Proposal
• Response Essay
• Scholarship Essay
• Short Answer Questions
• Speech Writing
• SPSS Homework
• Thesis Proposal
• Types of Essays You Need
• White Paper
• Write My Essays
• Write My Paper for Cheap
• How it Works

Management: an Art or a Science?

Many scientists, experts, and just common people have been investigating the role of management in our everyday life. Many people play the role of a manager in different situations: at the workplace, at home, at the hospital, or anywhere else. Some people are born to be leaders, but for others, it requires hard and persistent work to become a good specialist. The growth and survival of any business are highly dependent on the competence and skills of its management. Management is in charge of the efficient utilization of limited resources. It is a creative force that transforms the resources of production into output and predetermines the success or failure of an organization. So, is management an art or a science? Does it require a person to possess just some kind of talent or profound knowledge?

Get a price quote

First order only 15% off

In fact, some authors consider management to be a science because there is a range of well-based principles of management and an organized body of knowledge. Besides, leadership requires a lot of statistical and analytical skills. Moreover, managers of different levels widely use data provided by such sciences as sociology, economics, finance, and even psychology. Other experts believe that management is a kind of art because it requires a lot of practice, skills, and creativity to achieve perfect results. Frankly speaking, the most appropriate answer here is that management is both a science and an art; it is a synthesis of these two notions.

Management: An Art or a Science?

To find the answers to the above questions, the notion of management itself should be defined. Management means directing the actions of other people to achieve objectives in the most efficient manner; it is a process of achieving organizational goals with the help of people and organizational resources. In general, experts state that managers should possess the following skills. First of all, these include specific subject related skills. Then, they should definitely possess interpersonal skills, such as skills related to communicating with others, leading and/or motivating them. Furthermore, managers require conceptual skills that are revealed in the ability to see the whole picture and to recognize important factors that can lead to company’s failure or success. In other words, managers act as decision-makers, leaders, team members, and analysts (Needle 2010). Among major functions of managers, one can single out the following: leading, planning, organizing, coordinating, assessing, controlling, and staffing.

New to BestWritingHelp?

Get your 15% OFF the first order! Code firstorder

Management enables efficient use of scarce resources, eliminating wastages, and introducing discipline to a workplace. In business, good knowledge of management is essential for the generation of profits. The productivity of a business is largely dependent on the quality and competence of its managers (Thomas 1993). In fact, managerial knowledge shows characteristics of both a science and an art; they just supplement each other. Management may be regarded as an art due to the following reasons:

· Like other arts, the knowledge of management has practical application. Management is applied to specific situations with the purpose of achieving the best results. In different situations, managers try to solve issues or reach the target with minimum resources and efforts.

· Application of management requires a creative approach and out-of-box thinking. A manager usually uses his/her analytical abilities and managerial knowledge along with creativity in an attempt to discover new ideas or more efficient ways of doing business.

· As a rule, theoretical knowledge may not be adequate or appropriate for solving the arising problems. In this case, a leader should use his/her experience, judgment or intuition. Sometimes a manager should use a little bit of creativity and perhaps pieces of advice from subordinates to restructure the problem and find the solution.

· In due course, a manager, who is constantly working and making managerial decisions, gains experience that becomes his/her personal possession. Thus, managers who have more experience become more efficient, meaning that they develop greater abilities in order to put their theoretical knowledge into practice (Price 2004).

Just as artists need to master their crafts, business managers need to improve their skills in dealing with people and expressing themselves verbally; just as artists need visions and passion to realize them, managers need imagination and audacity to redesign their organizations; and just as great masters communicate their visions, great leaders inspire those who work for them. To complete this process, managers as well as artists require constructive criticism and models to emulate. (Boettinger 1975)

Boettinger (1975) draws a parallel between art and management, comparing artists who create immortal masterpieces and managers who guide and inspire their “followers”. The author concludes that one of the responsibilities of top management should be teaching, guiding, and nurturing the executives. Just like an artist, a manager should have not only the vision he/she wants to share but also the skills or talent to do that. Good artists and, consequently, good managers possess two qualities: well-developed imagination (the ability to produce vision in one’s mind) and competence or technical skills to put the vision into practice. If a leader manages to combine these two qualities, he/she will be able to communicate their visions and find support in the audience.

Our affiliate program!

Earn a 10% commission on the orders made by your friends. The more friends you invite, the more money you earn!

Nevertheless, great talent requires hard work and persistence. In the field of art, an amateur without practice, even if he/she possesses all necessary tools, will never use them properly. Every artist may once break his/her instincts through discipline, and improved practical methods by trial and error. To better understand this idea, the following example should be presented: no one will be glad to see an unprepared practitioner operating an airplane or leading a multinational corporation, and the major reason for that is the lack of practice.

All artists use tools and materials, the nature of which they know very well. This knowledge ensures that an artist will do his/her best to produce a masterpiece. The materials of managers are their employees’ talents and their own abilities. Therefore, his/her major responsibility is to organize others’ talents and achieve goals through the use of human efforts. To gain profound knowledge about his/her materials, a manager should thoroughly study their nature and potential. Leaders should not look at their subordinates as if they were a homogeneous mass that can take any form; otherwise this way of thinking will deadlock all their initiatives. Moreover, this type of motivation is quite primitive (Thomas 1993).

In this context, diversity should be mentioned. If executives promote and encourage diverse labour force within their organization, it means that they understand the fact that a team of workers from different backgrounds can be more efficient. Every person has his/her own strong and weak points, and he/she is talented in their own way. An organization can use this to fulfil its objectives.

Diversity can directly affect the company’s prosperity and help build its competitive advantage. Researchers say that, first of all, diverse workforce can improve employees’ productivity and inspire them in their work at all levels. Secondly, executives have a great chance to find out the needs and desires of their customers. It is also important for them to understand that all people regardless their race, as well as political, sexual, and religious views are equal and have different talents, so that each of them can enrich the company’s experience and help achieve organizational success. It is crucial to find mutual understanding and establish fruitful cooperation through active communication with employees and their participation in the decision-making process (Harvey & Allard 2012).

Today, workplace diversity along with employee inclusion appears to be the major managerial tool. Small firms, as well as huge multinational corporations try to use diverse workforce to the fullest. The understanding and encouragement of diversity at a workplace can bring much more benefits, than new recruitment or retention strategies. When people are heard and when their cultural backgrounds are something they are proud of, they can freely use all their knowledge, skills and enthusiasm. It is essential for managers not just to manage, but to unite, inspire, and motivate employees, while the successful accomplishment of these tasks is a real art (Leviticus n.d.). Workplace diversity appears to be a significant managerial tool when businesses want to penetrate foreign markets. Employees with different cultural backgrounds can help a company adjust to the entirely new environment (Mayhew n.d.).

It is also an art to combine the strategy of the company with its current human resources management (that is to create strategic human resources management) and to wisely combine the organizational culture with business performance (Farnham 2005). Managers, like artists, should be able to communicate their vision to others, infect them with their enthusiasm and make sure that their vision will be realized through the use of human resources as efficiently as possible (Wright & McMahan 1992).

As a science, management has the following characteristics:

· It has a systematic body of knowledge that consists of principles, concepts, and approaches which are to be applied in real-time situations. This knowledge enables managers to understand the process of management itself and problems which may arise.

· A systematic body of knowledge that management possesses has been developed with the help of universal scientific methods such as observation, analysis, research, and experimentation similarly to other sciences.

· Management principles are systematized and based on the cause-and-effect relationship like in other sciences being universally applicable. It means that they can be used in all kinds of organizations and provide general guidelines for managers in different industries.

One of the major features of a science is that it consists of the exact principles, the validity of which can be easily verified at any time. Every time they are tested, the same results will be displayed. Consequently, future events or outcomes can also be predicted with the help of scientific principles. Only some of management principles can be tested for validity. Though management has some characteristics of science, it is not as exact as other sciences such as mathematics or physics. This is because management deals with people and it is extremely difficult to precisely predict their actions. Management can also be called a flexible science because its principles and theories may produce different outcomes in different situations according to the variables involved.

There is also a new notion in the sphere of management; it is a management science, which is a study of decision making and problem solving processes with strong links to other sciences such as economics, engineering, psychology, and others. It uses analytical methods, scientific-based principles, and strategies to make sound decisions and find optimal solutions to complex problems. Management science widely uses algorithms, formulas, statistics, and mathematical modelling. In fact, the techniques of management science can be applied not only to the business sphere but also to public and medical administration, community groups, and the military. The study of management science can be conducted on three levels. The first level is fundamental, and it uses the theories of optimization, probability and dynamical systems. The second level is called a modelling level, which includes gathering and analysing information, as well as building and implementing models. The third level is an application level, which uses findings of two previous levels to make practical contributions.

Over the past few decades, many experts have perceived management as a science and in this regard, Aaron Buchko (2013) says in his article: “Research findings became the basis for managerial practices—Six Sigma, leadership models, motivation theories, organizational behaviour studies, and the accompanying measures and metrics became the standards that drove managerial behaviour.” Consequently, there appeared a lot of models and theories, which nowadays help organizations measure almost everything and evaluate lots of data with the help of computer-based analytics. Though there are a lot of methods, tools, and techniques, many models, and many managerial data, the results of some organizations have not been so great. There are cases of a great organizational success, but there are many examples when businesses have failed to achieve success, or when managers could not produce the results expected by their companies.

There arises a paradox: there is much knowledge about the practice of management, but there are still many failures among organizations. Aaron Buchko (2013) has made a very important observation:

… knowledge about management is not sufficient, because management is not a scientific discipline; it is a profession. And what is a profession? A profession is “a combination of disciplines, the practice of which is an art.” Therein lies the key—management is based on and grounded in practice. The only reason organizations need management is because there are practical matters that must be addressed. And fortunately … a lot of those practical matters have to be addressed by people … since, by definition, management is “getting things done through people.”

Your order will be assigned to the most experienced writer in the relevant discipline. The highly demanded expert, one of our top 10 writers with the highest rate among the customers.

Having analyzed all the aspects and characteristics of management, one can say that management is both an art and a science. It is an art to make one’s employees work more efficiently than they would do without one’s assistance, and science lies in how to achieve that. Science provides common cases and common examples as for what usually takes place, what usually most employees do or what most successful organizations do. But managers do not work in most organizations and do not manage most people; they work in a specific firm during a specific period of time using their own resources and employees. Science can only offer general clues, but it is unable to solve a specific issue. In management, theoretical knowledge of financial systems, employee motivation, or laws of the market is undoubtedly useful, but it cannot make an employee work overtime in order to create a new concept of the next iPhone or close a deal. For this reason, businesses should draw strength in the art of management that can be defined as the ability to combine and coordinate theoretical knowledge with practical skills in a specific set of conditions to produce desired outcomes.

If an organization wants to be successful, its managers should, first of all, understand the basic concepts of management and disciplines of economics, finance, accounting, marketing, etc., which refers to the scientific field. Secondly, leaders should learn and follow the ideas of such great managers as, for example, Steve Jobs, in terms of how to make sound managerial decisions. Thirdly, they should also analyze the context, in which those great managers have been working, as well as evaluate and understand the decisions they have made, which is a practical part. Only in this way, executives will be able to apply all gathered data to their own circumstances in the relevant organizations and industries. Therefore, management is a synergy of art and a science, so that it cannot be regarded as merely one or another because successful management requires not only excellent theoretical knowledge but also intuition and practical skills.

• List of Commerce Articles
• Management As An Art Science Profession

Management as an Art, Science and Profession

To decide whether management is science, art or profession, one has to comprehend the characteristics and definitions of science, art and profession and associate them with management definition and traits.

Management as an Art:

Art is the experienced and personal utilisation of subsisting information to accomplish solicited outcomes. It can be procured via education, research and practice. As art is involved with the personal utilisation of data some kind of inventiveness and creativity is needed to follow the fundamental systems acquired. The essential characteristics of art are as follows:

• The presence of theoretical knowledge : Art assumes the presence of specific academic knowledge. Specialists in their particular fields have obtained specific elementary postulates which are appropriate to a specific sort of art. For instance, the literature on public speaking, acting or music, dancing is publicly acknowledged.
• Personalised application : The application of this primary information differs from person to person. Art, hence, is a highly personalised notion.
• Based on custom and creativity : Art is practical. Art includes the creative practice of subsisting intellectual knowledge. We know that music is based on 7 notes. However, what makes the style of a musician different or distinctive is his performance of these notes in an artistic way that is uniquely his own solution.

Also Explore: Class 12 Business Studies Syllabus

Management as a Science:

Science is an organised collection of knowledge that emphasises definite universal truths or the action of comprehensive laws. The central characteristics of science are as follows:

• The organised body of knowledge : Science is a precise entity of knowledge. Its systems are based on a purpose and consequence association.
• Universal validity : Scientific conventions have global genuineness and application.
• Systems based on experimentation : Scientific conventions are originally formed via research and then tested via repeated trial and error under the regulated situations.

Management as a Profession:

The profession can be described as an occupation upheld by specific education and practice, in which entry is limited. A profession has the following features:

• The well-defined theory of knowledge : All services are based on a well-defined form of education that can be procured through education.
• Restricted entry : The entrance to a profession is defined through an examination or through obtaining an educational degree. For instance, to become a chartered accountant in India an aspirant has to clear a detailed examination regulated by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI).
• Professional community : All professions are affiliated to a professional association which controls entry, presents a certificate of training and expresses and supports a system of government. To be qualified to study in India, lawyers have to become members of the Bar Council which monitors and regulates their actions.

Management as an Art

The above mentioned is the concept, that is elucidated in detail about the Management as an Art, Science, and Profession for the class 12 Commerce students. To know more, stay tuned to BYJU’S.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

• Share Share

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.