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 51 Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XXIII Issue I Version I Year 2023 ( ) A © 2023 Global Journals process, action, discipline, or praxis (conception of the individual-worker-participant, the environment or internal-external context, the organizational climate, organizational culture, among others). The general purpose of the administration is inferred. The organization, regardless of its nature (business, social, public, private, producer of goods or services); and the specific object of study of the administration, the administrative action, that is, the processes or functions (planning, coordination, execution, control, and evaluation) is established by the main purpose of the organization. For example, from the classical Fayolian approach, the orientation goes in terms of processes, and from Drucker's neoclassical approach, the emphasis is the functions. Nevertheless, both approaches imply the achievement of the organization's objectives. In addition to this, the ultimate goal of the discipline is productivity, in terms of generating products, profits, or value. III. E pistemic S tatus of A dministration S cience, A rt or T echnique? The epistemological status of administration has become an unfinished discussion about its admission as a science, technique, or art, qualities that are generally mutually exclusive. This idea is relevant because it offers a context in which the concern to understand the epistemological status of administration arises. The discussion begins with the question: what is the adjective that accompanies it? The focus is on whether it should be considered a science, art, or technique. Therefore, another question arises: what is its object and method of study? This is to deepen the knowledge bases on administration. Furthermore, it validates a single body of the experience of professionals in the area. The epistemic status of administration can be delved into when it is observed the way it is presented in our mind and consciousness: What is the appearance of this object like? What is its shape? This object is undoubtedly made up of some elements that we know and, we can define it abstractly as part of human activity. It is the result of an expression in the decision- making process and resource management through the processes of planning, organization, direction, coordination, and control. More specifically, the element that configures the administrative phenomenon under study is a specific human activity that consists of planning, organizing, directing, coordinating, and controlling, in other words, the resources of an organization. Considering this, what we call administrative science aims to study the phenomenon that could be observed as a man acting. However, it is not any action, but what refers to planning, organizing, directing, coordinating, and controlling activities or functions known in classical theory as administrative processes. Therefore, understanding the way of generating knowledge of the administrative process can be glimpsed from two perspectives: a rational one and a relative one. From the rational or objective perspective, the first question adjective appears: science can be conceived as the knowledge resulting from making use of a certain method to achieve an expected end. According to Bunge (2005), science corresponds to a growing body of ideas characterized as rational, systematic, exact, verifiable knowledge, through scientific research, and therefore fallible. In other words, it consists of creating theories, models, or structures to represent the meanings of the reality that surrounds us. Science must be classified according to its object of study, with social science being in charge of addressing the behavior and qualities of the Human Being. In this way, since the administration is an activity proper to the human being, it can be conceived as a social science. Nevertheless, science adheres to the episteme, the logos, the demonstration-explanation, the empirical, technical thought, rational and logical, as well as to the method based on the observation, deduction, and demonstration of hypotheses elaborated around a specific, tangible, and intelligible phenomenon or object of study (Abbagnano, 1951; Bunge, 1986). So, given the nature of the administration, this is the multiplicity or complexity of its object of study, the heterogeneity of its theoretical postulates, as well as the indisputable inherence of the context-phenomenon of study. Bunge (1986), states that administration does not comply with the analytical, precise, verifiable, legal, or universal precepts typical of scientific knowledge to be properly considered a science, conceiving it instead as a sociotechnical, in terms of administrative or technical (second adjective in question). Furthermore, Bunge (1980) establishes that the technique has reached such a high level that it is sometimes difficult to differentiate science from social science. So, it aims to understand a part of reality, showing the relation between cause-consequence or cause-effect relationship in terms of research. Technique aspires to put this knowledge obtained into action through the creation or design of devices, action plans, or control models (in the case of administration) on what is known by science closely linked to the context in which it is proposed to apply or develop a design. This is how the denomination of administratécnia (mentioned previously) arises, as a characterization of the system of disciplines that study the administrative phenomenon. It uses the scientific method to understand and transform some of its aspects (tasks or activities, operation, relationships individual-organization, or the management of all of the above in terms of efficacy, efficiency, or effectiveness,