Is Management an Art or a Science?

Well, I'm really happy reading your comments.

As for me, before I go further to state management as an art or science or a combination of both, let's see the words 'SCIENCE' and 'ART'. A science can be referred to as knowledge about the structure and behaviour of the natural and physical world, based on facts that you can prove. This can be done through experiments. Hence, predictions can be made from such experiments. ART on the other hand can be seen as a skillful way of doing things.

Before trying to see management as an art or science, we must first of all consider it's functions which are planning, organising, controlling and leading.

Planning: This have to do with the setting of goals and objectives and how to achieve them. Therefore, it forces managers to decide in advance on what to achieve and how to achieve them (this also involve prediction which is science).

Leading: This involve influencing, inspiring, directing and motivating others to do their best to achieve goals (Art).

Organising: This have to do with the determination of work activities and roles, and grouping them into suitable divisions and departments with clear lines of authority and responsibility (Art).

Control: This is the measurement of corporate performance and the analysis and correction of deviations from the expected results (combination of art and science).

Management as an art deals with the application of skills in the process of getting things done through people and available resources. On the other hand, as a science it deals with making decisions and implementing them based on the gathering of past and present data, analysing them and the correlation of such data in order to predict future occurrence.

To buttress my point, in the modern world, the budgets of various countries and organisations are made through the use of existing data which is one of the duties attached to management. Hence, in budgeting, prediction are made from past and present information which can be attributed to science.

Also, all over the world, we have laboratories that are specially designed to study the behavior, attitudes and the way of life of people in order to suggest the best ways of leading, controlling and relating with them in order to achieve desired goals from them.

Not only that, future productions and sales are also forecasted which are all related to science. Certain decisions are made through the use of statistical tools like the chi-square, regression equations, partial correlation, Mann-Whitney test and so on which are also known all over the world as scientific tools.

Hence from the above, I believe it is clear that management is a two sided coin with both science and art.

#Justus Muia Your interpretation of science is incorrect. Yes, management applies principles of statistics but it does not use biological methods for data collection. The statistical methods (data collection is part of this) used are tailored to those of social research - more in line with economics or sociology.

The difference between this type of application v.s.a science based statistical application is the emphasis on causality. In social research, establishing causality is extremely difficult as we often do not have the luxury of a well controlled experiment. Even when there is a well controlled experiment, humans act in inconsistent and irrational ways that make some research results difficult to replicate.

To account for these biases and variables, the statistical methods and treatment of data used is very different and often more complex than those used by science. You will see that many scientists formulate causality based on less than 10 sample observations whereas in social science, the number of sample used are often in excess of 1000 (provides more statistical power).

Furthermore, many universities have their department of statistics in the faculty of arts (along with mathematics) as this is a concept that is entirely man made. In many ways, it is like a language that is used to communicate information. Finally about management - this is an entirely man made concept. Managers often apply scientific methods (just like all Arts disciplines) but is studying human behaviour (or a collection of human behaviour -> company) so it is still considered an art.

Nowadays, neuro-scientists are attempting to bring "science" into management by looking into the brain and its neurotransmitters. However, much of the experiments are done in a laboratory setting and cannot be applied to someone in a normal social setting. This is why social science places less emphasis on the molecular level and more on the human level.

As to what differentiates between Science and Arts, it really is the what is being studied? 'Scientific methods' are applied to both disciplines but the specific methods vary because the challenges facing each are very different.

Fun fact: Philosophy is the highest level of academic thinking. Everything evolved from it including 'science' and the scientific methods. This is why regardless of which discipline you pursue, you end up with a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD).

Hi everyone!

In my opinion management is both science and art.

Science works on principles and which can be applied universally. As in management we follow the principles like ""one man, one boss" and this is applicable to all the organisations. These principles require observations and experimentation to obtain the certainty in science. Management also require observations and experimentation to get the satisfied work force.

Science establishes cause and effect relationship. Management principles also has a cause and effect relationship. For example good bonding between the employees with their boss at workplace results in good increased productivity and if they do not have good relationship with their boss it will result in bad performance and reduced productivity.

Now coming to management as art.

Every art requires practical knowledge therefore learning of theory is not sufficient. In management also a manager can not deal with difficult situations based on his theory knowledge he must have known how to apply the principles in that situation.

An artist must be creative to get the unique beautiful piece of art. Manager also need that creativity to get the best out of everything and which cam beat the other products in the market. He should always come up with new and creative ideas.

Personal skill is very important for every artist to make them different from others. They have their own way to create things. In management also you should have personal skill to manage the work in your style and make your organisation or business different from others and become the best eventually.

From above points it is clear that management is both the mixture of art and science.

Management is the art of leading people in order to achieve goals with maximum efficiency. How can dealing with human-beings ever be scientific? The so called social sciences have great difficulty in establishing causal relationships in their field and their predictive power is usually not better than mere chance. To even call them sciences is already a stretch of the concept. If management is a science it falls in the category of the social sciences therefore not very useful due to a serious lack of experimentally derived data coupled with reliable, logically derived explanations.

IMO management is to the economy what generalship is to the army: an art form informed by the technical aspects of the respective activities. How to be successful in both depends more on innate abilities and experience than theoretical study and research.

Today the great majority of managers still adhere to the 'business as warfare' maximum therefore trying to establish as great a share of the market as possible, economics has already proven this is the wrong approach yet the business world keeps persisting in its folly. If management was even remotely scientific surely everyone would see reason and abandon proven defective business strategies?

I don't get the whole 'organised body of knowledge' argument: if this is all that is needed to call something science theology and almost anything that is studied is a science too, regardless of whether it actually explains anything or merely fantasizes about possibilities.

Management is the oldest of arts and the youngest of sciences. This explains the changing nature of management.

As a science,

1. Management is a systematized body of knowledge and its principles have evolved on the basis of observation.

2. The kind of experimentation (as in natural sciences) cannot be accompanied in the area of management since management deals with the human element.

3. In management, it is not possible to define, analyse and measure phenomena by repeating the same conditions over and over again to obtain a proof.

As an Art, management has the following characteristics,

1. Management while performing the activities of getting things done by others is required to apply the knowledge of certain underlying principles which are necessary for every art.

2. Management gets perfection in the art of managing only through continuous practice.

3. Management implies capacity to apply accurately the knowledge to solve the problems, to face the situation and to realize the objectives fully and timely.

The science of management provides certain general principles which can guide the managers in their professional effort. The art of management consists in tackling every situation in an effective manner.

Management is both an art and a science. The above-mentioned points clearly reveal that management combines features of both sciences 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 teachers to 'know' and art teachers 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 the manager to first know the principles but he must also apply them in solving various managerial problems that are why, science and art are not mutually exclusive but they are complementary to each other (like tea and biscuit, bread and butter etc.).

Hi Everybody,

I think,

Management is both an art and a science. 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 well-judged combination 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'.

EG. 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. ). To conclude, we can say that science is the root and art is the fruit.

Hi every one!

In my own opinion management could be referred to as both art, science and profession. Management can be referred to an art in the sense that many scholars defined management as an art of getting things done through people and other resources. The artistic process is generally seen as having three (3) vital aspects; craft, vision and communication. The process of management qualifies as an form in all instances. Managers must have the tools (craft) to accomplish their task. They must posses vision in order to implement innovative strategies, and they must be able to communicate effectively in their work environment and elsewhere.

On the other hand, science is looked upon as a systematic study that leads to a general body of knowledge about a subject. Management has been the target of systematic study for centuries and that general principles or concepts have been derived from this efforts. This is why many scholars classify management as a developing science.

According to me, management is not a science it is an art. To prove this statement I would like to give two examples. In my eyes management is not a science because science requires experiments and they get the same results irrespective of situation like if you throw a ball, it will ultimately fall down because of gravitational force while in management it completely lacks because it is not sure that the management which is working best in one country might be possible of doing best in an another country.

And on the contrary, I believe management is an art because just like art requires practice and experience on a continuous basis, for example, an artist can be expert in his field by creating new paintings on a continuous basis. Similarly, art also requires practice and experience on a continuous basis through which a manager is expected to grasp all the opportunities and can exclude all the threats for efficient working in the business.

I think management has elements of both art and science. It may not be proper to term it as pure science or pure art. In fact, it is a science as well as an art because science and art are both complementary to each other. As cossa has said, "science requires art, art requires science, each being complementary to each other". It may be concluded that there is no hard and fast line between art and science of management.

The former(science) will have to solve problems and establish principles which might be applied with benefit to the latter(art). The present ratio is about 90% art and 10% science. Though a very great deal of developments are presently increasing that proportion which can properly be called science. I am willing to venture a guess that by the end of another generation the ratio will be 80% art and perhaps 20% science. ".