There are clear signature patterns that indicate whether an initiative will succeed or fail. An experienced change agent who recognizes and properly addresses them can greatly influence a project’s outcome:

• The characteristics of success can be infused into the implementation process from the beginning and encouraged throughout execution.
• The dynamics and behaviors associated with failure can be avoided altogether—or at least anticipated, detected, and mitigated as much as possible when signs begin to surface.

Change agents who practice their craft with the proper balance of art and science foster success patterns and minimize failure patterns. In doing so, they bring to bear a powerful competitive advantage for their clients.

However, finding that balance is a challenge.

Professional change facilitation resides on a continuum, with “art” and “science” at the poles. Our “craft” is represented by a sliding point that can reside at any position between the two extremes. Movement toward or away from either end of the continuum shouldn’t be based on our comfort with or prejudice for one or the other. Instead, we should practice our craft as circumstances dictate…sometimes skewed toward the science of our work, sometimes reflecting more of the artful aspects. Our work should demonstrate a shifting center of gravity governed by such variables as the Degree of Difficulty of an initiative, the client’s experience and skills, and the limits of our capabilities.

If you’re like most practitioners, your tendency to apply either aspects of the continuum in proper proportion is often affected by your bias toward structure and flexibility. If you are predisposed toward structure, you might rely too often on the logical, linear application of tools and techniques and sometimes appear to be a “paint-by-numbers” practitioner. If inclined toward flexibility, you might rely too frequently on hunches and inklings and sometimes come across as “making it up as you go.” Too much science can make clients feel that you are unaware of or insensitive to the reality of their circumstances. Too much art can leave them feeling that you don’t have enough experience to handle certain situations.

The proper blend of the two at any one moment in time is not accomplished by reaching a negotiated settlement somewhere in the middle. Clearly, there are distinctions, but because they reflect different ends of the same continuum, science and art also overlap. More to the point, they are embedded in each other, although one is often more prominent under particular circumstances.

Mastery in any field is accomplished when both scientific and artful perspectives forge an interdependent bond:

• Leonardo daVinci was a consummate painter/sculpture because he relied on his interest and knowledge of physiology and anatomy to inspire his creations.
• Twyla Tharp’s groundbreaking dance innovations were a reflection of her creative interpretations of bodily movement and basic principles of biology and physics.
• Einstein’s genius resulted from both an unprecedented depth of knowledge about physics, and his ability to see what was beyond the limits of logic and explore the unfathomable.
• Apple Computer owes its success to the blending of technical sophistication with design elegance.

Successful change execution comes about through the blending of both ends of the science/art spectrum (e.g., rigorous attention to selection of the right diagnostic tool, while also attending to the energy flow of a situation and gently guiding the process with your instincts).

The skillful practice of our craft isn’t about determining whether a situation calls for science or art—it’s about establishing the correct hybrid of the two for each circumstance while remaining unbiased about what the appropriate mix will be the next time.

Next: The Constantly Shifting Emphasis Between Science and Art

Go to the beginning of this series.