Global Journal of Management and Business Research, A: Administration and Management, Volume 23 Issue 1

Administration: Science, Art or Technique? A Reflective Look at the Epistemological Status of the Administration 50 Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XXIII Issue I Version I Year 2023 ( ) A © 2023 Global Journals approaches of study have defined its epistemic status. Furthermore, some considerations are drawn about the characteristics of the discipline that are considered epistemic obstacles to its understanding. An interpretation emerges from the representation exposed here, which refers to a sense of creation and construction of knowledge in the administration. It is necessary to add that new controversies and unknowns may arise regarding the representation of administration as a theoretical-practical systemic epistemological framework that admits the complexity of the administrative phenomenon as science, art, and technique. II. C harting the A dministrative P henomenon Human beings have developed various forms since the primitive era of humanity. Modes or manners to dispose of resources have changed over the years, which helped to emerge the notion of administration. This category refers to an activity proper to the human being that practices and develops to take advantage of its resources, although in an intuitive and rudimentary way. In ancient Greece, it was attributed to the purpose of better allocating the resources obtained, to meet the proposed objectives, exercise authority, and delegate responsibility. Demographic expansion of man as the emergence of rationalist and subjectivist visions caused these forms to result in an essentially cooperative conception of administrative action (Mendoza, 2018). The industrial revolution brought with it the concern for productivity and it led to the need to professionalize their actions. However, it was until the beginning of the 20th century that it became an object of scientific study due to the Taylorian approach to administration as the origin and potential solution to industry problems. Taylor´s theory generated questions that led to multiple administrative schools: Scientific Approach (Taylor and Gilbreth), Classical - Functional Approach (with Fayol, Mooney, and Urwick, among others), Bureaucratic Approach (Weber, Selznick. Merton, Gouldner, etc.), Structuralist Approach (Etzioni, Bau & Scott, etc.), Humanist Approach (Mayo, Maslow, McGregor, among others), Participatory Approach (Barnard) –which replaces the traditional and dominant conception of managing organizations based on engineering designs-; Systemic Approach (Bertalanffy, Katz, and Rosenzweig, among others), Strategic Approach (Andrews, Steiner, Kaplan & Norton); Competitiveness Approach (Porter, Ohmae, Nonaka & Takeuchi, etc.) Behavioral Approach (March & Simon); Organizational Development (Lewin, McGregor, etc.), Contingency or Situational Approach (Burns, Slater, Woodward & Child, Chandler, Stalker, Lawrence & Lorsch, etc.); among others. It should be noted that the latter influenced the emergence of the field of Organizational Studies and breaks with the universalist current of administration (Stonner, Freeman, and Gilbert, 1995; Chiavenato, 2004; Rivas, 2009; and Barba, 2013). Administrative approaches are more or less concerned about the same thing: efficiency, efficacy, or effectiveness (depending on the theoretical perspective adopted). Therefore, the focus goes on whether the objectives of or in an organization are met. But, the orientation towards the tasks (techniques or procedures) or relationships (individual organization) varies between them. The postulates raised by the schools of administration define the object of study of the administration. Furthermore, they have established the methods used by the administration to give course to scientific inquiry and, it manages to validate the findings or results obtained, without neglecting the description and explanation of the discipline as a social practice. In this sense, the administration is the accumulated historical result of the contribution of scientists and authors in multiple disciplines (mainly engineering, psychology, and sociology) which, are essentially nourished by philosophy and science. These findings led to the systematization of new knowledge at the beginning of the century and the end of the last century resulting in the birth of administration as a discipline due to the need to want organizations to operate with optimal efficiency (Etzioni, 1979: 16). Under this discursive thread, the administration is understood, firstly, in the etymological sense of the word "administer", which comes from the Latin ad, which means "towards", "direction" or "tendency", and minister, related to subordination", "obedience" or "at the service of", recognized as an act of serving another, of taking care of the goods or resources of another in particular, of taking care of the affairs of another, and, by extension, administering also implies taking charge, caring, and Managing your affairs and resources. In the same way, managing also means to rule or govern, it means directing the destinations, paths, and pathways of an organization, company, community, city, or town, in such a way that its objectives or purposes and its progress and well-being are achieved. Fayol (1980) conceived the administration in two senses: one of a broad nature, related to the action of governing a company or organization towards the proposed end, and another of a restricted nature referring to the administrative action of foreseeing, organizing, command, coordinate, and control. Due to the above, the administration has traditionally been defined as the process of planning, organizing, directing, and controlling the use of resources to achieve organizational objectives (Chiavenato, 1995; Sallanave, 2002). Thus, the existing theoretical distinctions between management approaches generally correspond to the dimensions that are considered to address it as a phenomenon,