IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v241y2015i3p583-595.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Operational research from Taylorism to Terabytes: A research agenda for the analytics age

Author

Listed:
  • Mortenson, Michael J.
  • Doherty, Neil F.
  • Robinson, Stewart

Abstract

The growing attention and prominence afforded to analytics presents a genuine challenge for the operational research community. Many in the community have recognised this growth and sought to align themselves with analytics. For instance, the US operational research society INFORMS now offers analytics related conferences, certification and a magazine. However, as shown in this research, the volume of analytics-orientated studies in journals associated with operational research is comparatively low. This paper seeks to address this paradox by seeking to better understand what analytics is, and how operational research is related to it. To do so literature from a range of academic disciplines is analysed, in what is conceived as concurrent histories in the shared tradition of a management paradigm spread over the last 100 years. The findings of this analysis reveal new insights as to how operational research exists within an ecosystem shared with several other disciplines, and how interactions and ripple effects diffuse knowledge and ideas between each. Whilst this ecosystem is developed and evolved through interdisciplinary collaborations, individual disciplines are cast into competition for the attention of the same business users. These findings are further explored by discussing the implication this has for operational research, as well as considering what directions future research may take to maximise the potential value of these relationships.

Suggested Citation

  • Mortenson, Michael J. & Doherty, Neil F. & Robinson, Stewart, 2015. "Operational research from Taylorism to Terabytes: A research agenda for the analytics age," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 241(3), pages 583-595.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:241:y:2015:i:3:p:583-595
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2014.08.029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037722171400664X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2014.08.029?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert L. Ferguson & Curtis H. Jones, 1969. "A Computer Aided Decision System," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(10), pages 550-561, June.
    2. Emek Basker, 2012. "Raising the Barcode Scanner: Technology and Productivity in the Retail Sector," NBER Chapters, in: Standards, Patents and Innovations, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Jing Yang & Frank Tipton & Jiatao Li, 2011. "A review of foreign business management in China," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 627-659, September.
    4. Warren B. Powell & Arun Marar & Jack Gelfand & Steve Bowers, 2002. "Implementing Real-Time Optimization Models: A Case Application From The Motor Carrier Industry," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 50(4), pages 571-581, August.
    5. John T. Buchanan & Erez J. Henig & Mordecai I. Henig, 1998. "Objectivity and subjectivity in thedecision making process," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 80(0), pages 333-345, January.
    6. Matthew Liberatore & Wenhong Luo, 2011. "INFORMS and the Analytics Movement: The View of the Membership," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 41(6), pages 578-589, December.
    7. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    8. Matthew J. Liberatore & Wenhong Luo, 2010. "The Analytics Movement: Implications for Operations Research," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 313-324, August.
    9. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Luoma, Jukka & Saarinen, Esa, 2013. "On the importance of behavioral operational research: The case of understanding and communicating about dynamic systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(3), pages 623-634.
    10. Adriza & Popy, 2012. "A Conceptual Model of Predictors in Decision Making," Working Papers in Business, Management and Finance 201203, Department of Management and Business, Padjadjaran University, revised Dec 2012.
    11. Smil, Vaclav, 2005. "Creating the Twentieth Century: Technical Innovations of 1867-1914 and Their Lasting Impact," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195168747.
    12. Michael Pidd, 1999. "Just Modeling Through: A Rough Guide to Modeling," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 118-132, April.
    13. Ghosh, Suvankar & Troutt, Marvin D., 2012. "Complex compound option models – Can practitioners truly operationalize them?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 222(3), pages 542-552.
    14. Telford, P. G. & Browne, B. A. & Collinge, E. J. & Fulcher, P. & Johnson, B. E. & Little, W. & Lu, J. L. C. & Nurse, J. M. & Smith, D. W. & Zhang, F., 2011. "Developments in the Management of Annuity Business," British Actuarial Journal, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(03), pages 471-551, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Merrick, James H. & Weyant, John P., 2019. "On choosing the resolution of normative models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 279(2), pages 511-523.
    2. Benjamin T. Hazen & Joseph B. Skipper & Christopher A. Boone & Raymond R. Hill, 2018. "Back in business: operations research in support of big data analytics for operations and supply chain management," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 270(1), pages 201-211, November.
    3. Tom Pape, 2020. "Prioritising data items for business analytics: Framework and application to human resources," Papers 2012.13813, arXiv.org.
    4. Michael F. Gorman, 2017. "Interfaces Editor’s Statement," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 1-3, February.
    5. Johnson, Michael P. & Midgley, Gerald & Chichirau, George, 2018. "Emerging trends and new frontiers in community operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1178-1191.
    6. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Lahtinen, Tuomas J., 2016. "Path dependence in Operational Research—How the modeling process can influence the results," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 3(C), pages 14-20.
    7. Amy Poh Ai Ling & Mohamad Nasir Saludin & Masao Mukaidono, 2012. "Deriving consensus rankings via multicriteria decision making methodology," Papers 1201.1604, arXiv.org.
    8. Ranyard, J.C. & Fildes, R. & Hu, Tun-I, 2015. "Reassessing the scope of OR practice: The Influences of Problem Structuring Methods and the Analytics Movement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(1), pages 1-13.
    9. Jiri Mazurek & Radomír Perzina & Dominik Strzałka & Bartosz Kowal & Paweł Kuraś & Barbora Petrů Puhrová & Robert Rajs, 2024. "Is the best–worst method path dependent? Evidence from an empirical study," 4OR, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 387-409, September.
    10. Käki, Anssi & Kemppainen, Katariina & Liesiö, Juuso, 2019. "What to do when decision-makers deviate from model recommendations? Empirical evidence from hydropower industry," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(3), pages 869-882.
    11. Sasaki, Yasuo, 2023. "Strategic manipulation in group decisions with pairwise comparisons: A game theoretical perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 304(3), pages 1133-1139.
    12. Matthew Liberatore & Wenhong Luo, 2013. "ASP, The Art and Science of Practice: A Comparison of Technical and Soft Skill Requirements for Analytics and OR Professionals," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 43(2), pages 194-197, April.
    13. Alina Cristea, 2015. "HOW WE CAN RESTORE THE BALANCE IN THE ROMANIAN ENERGY MARKET (International Conference "Recent Advances in Economic and Social Research", 13-14 mai 2015, București)," Institute for Economic Forecasting Conference Proceedings 151201, Institute for Economic Forecasting.
    14. Atalay, Yasemin & Kalfagianni, Agni & Pattberg, Philipp, 2017. "Renewable energy support mechanisms in the Gulf Cooperation Council states: Analyzing the feasibility of feed-in tariffs and auction mechanisms," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 723-733.
    15. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    16. Coslovich, Luca & Pesenti, Raffaele & Ukovich, Walter, 2006. "Minimizing fleet operating costs for a container transportation company," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(3), pages 776-786, June.
    17. Fatih Yiğit & Şakir Esnaf, 2021. "A new Fuzzy C-Means and AHP-based three-phased approach for multiple criteria ABC inventory classification," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 1517-1528, August.
    18. Rachele Corticelli & Margherita Pazzini & Cecilia Mazzoli & Claudio Lantieri & Annarita Ferrante & Valeria Vignali, 2022. "Urban Regeneration and Soft Mobility: The Case Study of the Rimini Canal Port in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-27, November.
    19. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    20. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:241:y:2015:i:3:p:583-595. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.