Some say management is a science because like other scientific pursuits, there are predictable patterns that we can see, touch, and feel. Perhaps most important of all, it can be proven wrong – which is the hallmark of science. Like finding the nth digit to the question of pie (p), the pursuit of perfection of scientific law is ever progressive. But others say management is an art. Like other arts such as poetry, painting, or photograph, there are aspects of basic science. For example rhythms and rhymes are beautiful to our ears just as light and its reflections are crucial to a beautiful portrait or photo.

“Yet, without the ability to bring it all together in a sensible, artistic, and in business professional ways, each element while important and scientific are disconnected from the whole.”

Thus, the practice of management is far more of an art than science. My view is that management as a science is often too specific and too micro. As a science, it may be able to explain and predict (which is its true value to management professionals) how people or organizations behave under a very limited and restrictive set of conditions. But it is largely impractical in messy situations when managers are confronting interpersonal clashes, genuine disagreement on priorities, confusion over processes, misunderstandings, etc. Sadly, “messy” is far more typical of our real world today. Still, management as a science does bring sanity by giving us the ability to explain what happened and make educated guesses as to the outcome. Thus, I am going to take the middle road – 50/50. When it comes to “getting things done” in organizations today, large programs and projects are complex and difficult. As professionals, if we are able to bring together the understanding of science with the wonders and creativity of art, then perhaps finding optimal solutions can be well within our grasps. What’s your take?