Annual Meeting of the Society. Cleveland, Ohio, May 15-16, 1953Source: Journal of the Operations Research Society of America, Vol. 1, No. 4 (Aug., 1953), pp.246-251Published by: INFORMSStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/166589 .

Accessed: 08/05/2014 19:29

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

INFORMS is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the OperationsResearch Society of America.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 19:29:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ANNUAL MEETING OF THE SOCIETY

Cleveland, Ohio, May 15-16, 1953

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY

The membership of the Society has grown from the 73 present at the Founding Meeting at Arden House, New York, on May 25, 1952, to 560 on April 30, 1953. Of these, about 150 represent the military operations-research groups, some 275 are from business and industry, and the balance are from other government agencies, universities, etc. Of the total, 58 were Fellows, 296 were Members, and 206 were Associate or Student Associate Members. About 50 others had been elected to, but not yet accepted, membership.

During the same period, 180 subscriptions to the JOURNAL were received, of which 45 were from universities or their libraries, 58 from industrial firms, and 36 from government agencies. An arrangement with the Operational Research Club of London resulted in several overseas subscriptions to the JOURNAL and the availability of the Operational Research Quarterly through the Secretary of ORSA.

During the fiscal year ending April 30, 1953, the Secretary received and turned over to the Treasurer $9,396.69. Of this, $1,812.50 represented 1952 dues; $5,055.00, 1953 dues; $1,674.29, subscriptions and Journal advertising; and $854.90, receipts from the Formation Committee, registration fees at meetings, etc.

The Certificate of Incorporation of the Society as a nonprofit corporation in the District of Columbia was recorded on August 20, 1952.

Meetings of the Society were held in Washington on November 17 and 18, 1952, and in Cleveland on May 15 and 16, 1953. About 400 registered at the first of these, and 26 papers were presented. In Cleveland, where 35 papers were given, the registration was some 300. Further meetings are planned in Cambridge on November 23 and 24, 1953, and in Chicago during May, 1954.

At the business meeting on May 15, 1953, the election of Society officers for the year ending with the 1954 annual meeting, and Council Members for 3-year terms was announced as follows:

President: Robert F. Rinehart Treasurer: Alfred N. Watson Vice President: Jacinto Steinhardt Council Member: Thornton Page Secretary: John B. Lathrop Council Member: Lloyd A. Young

May 15, 1953 JOHN B. LATHROP Secretary

REPORT OF THE TREASURER

(Year ending April 30, 1953)

Income and Expense

Income Membership dues ................... $7520.00* Journal subscriptions and singles. .. 1545.89* Journal advertising ................ 306.00 Meetings, net surplus ........ ...... 834.40 Miscellaneous ...................... 20.50 $10226.79

* Includes accounts receivable shown on balance sheet.

246

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 19:29:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORT OF THE TREASURER 247

Expense Stationery and Postage ............ $511.29 Journal Publication ......... 1289.41 Secretarial Service ........... 195.94 Miscellaneous . ..................... 56.99 Anticipated Credit Losses .......... 100.00 2153.63

Net Income $8073.16

Balance Sheet-April 30, 1953 Assets (Cash)

Harvard Trust Co. .............. $6095.84 Checks for deposit . ..... ..... 1234.67 Petty cash, Editor ................. 50.00 Petty cash, Secretary .............. 25.00 Advances, 1953 meeting ............ 150.00 $7555.51

Accounts Receivable ............. * 835.10 Less, reserve bad debts ............. 100.00 735.10

8290.61 Liabilities

Accounts payable . .......... 212.45 Overpayment of dues ........ ...... 5.00 217.45

Net worth . .8073.16

$8290.61

Cash Reconciliation-April 30, 1953 Income-Per Income Statement ...... $10,226.79

Less: Accounts Receivable ......... -835.10 $9391.69

Add: Overpayment of Dues 5.00

Total Received from Secretary 9396.69

Expenses Paid ......... 2,053.63 Less: Checks Outstanding .......... -212.45 1841.18

Cash on Hand Per Balance Sheet $7555.51

ALFRED N. WATSON Treasurer

REPORT OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE At the request of the President we have examined the records of the Secretary

and the Treasurer and are satisfied that the above statements fairly represent the activities of the Society during the past fiscal year and its financial status as of April 30, 1953.

Cambridge, Massachusetts THOMAS MV. HILL June 29, 1953 GEORGE P. WADSWORTH

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 19:29:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

248 ANNUAL MEETING

REPORT OF THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE

On January 22, 1953, the Education Committee of the Operations Research Society of America mailed a questionnaire to 36 educational institutions in the United States. These institutions were chosen because, according to information available to the Committee, each has or had on its faculty at least one person interested in operations research.

To date, replies have been received from 31 of the 36 institutions. To date no replies have been received from Columbia University, Rutgers University, and the Universities of Delaware, Michigan, and Minnesota. Of these, the absence of a reply from Columbia is the most distressing in that several distinguished members of the Operations Research Society are associated in the work in operations research there. The replies received fall into four general categories:

NO INTEREST OR ACTIVITY REPORTED

Replies indicating little or no interest in or knowledge of operations research were received from:

Florida State University University of Notre Dame Lawrence College University of Pennsylvania (Wharton School) Rice Institute Yale University

INTEREST, BUT NO ACTIVITY REPORTED

The following institutions report no activity in operations-research education but do indicate an active interest, at least in watching developments in the field:

Kent State University University of Illinois Princeton University University of Kansas University of Chicago University of Tennessee

CLOSELY RELATED ACTIVITY REPORTED

Replies from the following institutions report no courses or curricula in operations research but do report activities related to training in this field. In some cases the report of related activities suggests a lack of understanding on the part of the respondent as to the meaning of operations research:

California Institute of Technology. Reports that work on design of experiments is included in statistics courses taught by a man experienced in World War II opera- tions research.

Carnegie Institute of Technology. The report deserves quotation at length: "We inaugurated last year a new graduate program which we call Mathematical and Industrial Economics.... It is our feeling . . that the field of 'operations research' actually consists for the most part in application to various types of problems of certain basic tools-mathematics, statistics, scientific method in general, and (we believe) social science. Thus, we have felt that a somewhat broader training than is often encompassed in 'operations research' is optimal. . . . We believe that a good grasp of fundamental knowledge and analytical tools in economics and business is one basic part of the training of a man who would go into the industrial world to do 'operations research.' " The curriculum mentioned above is in the Graduate School of Industrial Administration.

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 19:29:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORT OF THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE 249

Cornell University. Reports no work on the campus and no immediate prospect of introducing courses or curricula. However, there is an operations analysis group at the Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory in Buffalo.

Harvard University (Graduate School of Business Administration). Reports that the questionnaire is difficult to answer because of "its assumption that we have developed a set of courses in connection with this single area of knowledge," and continues to say that "there is the additional problem that our objective is directed toward questions involving managerial decisions rather than skills in handling technical details."

Illinois Institute of Technology. Reports plans to offer a first course starting in September 1953. Reports also that "ORSA could offer a great deal of assistance if we decide to establish a curriculum in OR."

Purdue University. Reports no courses but states that "Some contract work of an operational research nature is being carried out in the Statistical Laboratory of the University. . .

Stanford University. Because of work with RAND and in Washington, graduate work in science has been reoriented somewhat in the direction of operations research, especially toward theory. The Business School and the Committee on Industrial Engineering are interested and report that it "would be very useful if the Society could assemble detailed case studies of industrial problems handled by operations analysis techniques. . . These case studies might serve to define the field more closely and to differentiate it from other aspects of industrial organization and management. According to our interested faculty, the JOURNAL of your organization has so far been oriented toward the science group."

University of California. Reports no courses as such but offers such courses as probability theory and scientific methodology, in addition to a graduate course called Business Investigations and Methodology, which includes "exploratory research, development research, and operational research," in about equal parts.

Consolidated University of North Carolina (Institute of Statistics). Reports no courses or curricula in operations research but has a contract with the Air Force "to recruit, train, and maintain a Standby Operations Analysis unit." Training is informal and "consists largely of studying Operations Research reports and other pertinent published material." The Institute offers courses in statistics that are pertinent to operations research. (Questionnaires were mailed to both North Carolina State and the University of North Carolina.)

Iowa State University. Has a contract with the Air Force to recruit, train, and maintain a standby operations analysis unit. No other significant activity is reported.

University of Washington. Reports no formal courses, but states that mathemati- cal statistics and the theory of games are included in curricula. One staff member is "doing research on the operations of this institution in a form which might be of interest to your organization."

Wayne University. Department of Mathematics reports courses in probability and statistics and plans for courses in game theory and decision theory. The opinion is offered, by Benjamin Epstein, that "it is difficult, if not impossible, to teach operations research as such. How to do operations research is not something which can be taught in a course. Consequently, working on a research project and seminar discussions are essential. Some source of live operations research problems has to be present. It is my personal view that emphasis on pure mathematics, statistics, and probability, and related subjects plus solid research will prepare a man very

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 19:29:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

250 ANNUAL MEETING

well for a career in operations research. Exposure to live operations-research problems is desirable."

COURSES OR CURRICULA IN OPERATIONS RESEARCH

Replies from six of the respondents contain information on courses currently being offered in the field of operations research. Two of the institutions involved have curricula:

Case Institute-of Technology. Reports a curriculum leading to a master's degree in the field; this is based on five key courses, including an introductory seminar, readings and laboratory work, sampling methods, survey methods, and scientific method. In addition, short courses, lecture series, and on-the-job training are available. Concurrently the Operations Research Group of the Engineering Ad- ministration Department carries on both basic and applied research in the field and supports a program of conferences and publications.

The Johns Hopkins University. During the current academic year an informal seminar in operations research is being -offered. Plans are being made to offer a second course starting in September 1953.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Two courses are offered during the academic year, in addition to a summer course. No curriculum or degree in operations research as such is offered, but an Interdepartmental Committee has been established to coordinate work in related fields and to make possible specialization in operations research for the master's and doctor's degrees.

Naval Postgraduate School. No report received, but informal information indicates a two-year curriculum emphasizing mathematics and physics in addition to analysis of classified military case histories.

Pennsylvania State College. Reports one course in the School of Engineering called Methods of Industrial Operations, in which the basic text is in statistical analysis.

Tufts College. Reports a curriculum in the Department of Systems Analysis (to be moved from Washington to Medford next year) leading to the degree of Master of Science in Systems Analysis. Courses in scientific method, mathematical methods, research techniques, systems engineering, computer techniques, human factors in systems, theoretical approaches to group behavior, and experimental methods in group research are planned. Of these, the first three and the last have been organized to date.

DISCUSSION

Consideration of the replies received to date reveals that the survey of education in operations research is of considerable value to the Society and to its members.

The paucity of courses and curricula in operations research may be a com- mentary on the relatively short time that has been available since the end of World War II to introduce courses and curricula. One must take into account the normal conservatism of university facilities in admitting new disciplines. But one must also take into account the difficulties which have yet to be overcome in defining a distinct academic field to which the label 'operations research' may properly be applied: To the extent that operations research must be interdisciplinary, the difficulty of defining it as one discipline is compounded by the traditional structure of science and of scientific faculties. To the extent that it involves team research, it runs counter to the normal individual grading systems in effect at most institu- tions. On the other hand there is the danger that operations-research education

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 19:29:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORT OF THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE 251

may follow the pattern found in schools of education, where emphasis on method- ology has subordinated content to a degree that alarms many. There is also the danger of defeating the desires of most organizations who are recruiting operations analysts if the strong fields of specialization that have lent themselves to work in operations research are diluted in the direction of producing jacks-of-all-trades-and- masters-of-none.

There is a second problem of definition that emerges from the questionnaires. This is the distinction between operations research and the work that goes by such generic names as industrial engineering and business management. The Committee is of the opinion that most experienced operations research scientists believe that there is a qualitative difference between their approach to problems and the ap- proaches used by these other 'problem solvers.' To insist that operations research is more 'sophisticated' implies that the difference is one of degree, rather than of kind, and imputes a snobbery to operations research that is to be avoided. The Committee believes that it is of fundamental importance that the Society give careful thought to this whole matter and then take such action as may be necessary to clarify it in the minds of all concerned.

The questionnaires also indicate that the institutions that have gone farthest in formalizing operations-research education have compromised. Thus the work at Case is oriented strongly to statistics; that at the Naval Postgraduate school, to physics; and that at Tufts, to the still ill-defined field of human engineering. To a considerable extent this compromise is to be commended, rather than criticized, for it avoids the all-method-and-no-content Scylla and the jack-of-all-trades-and- master-of-none Charybdis.

Special comment should be made on the multiple approach to the problem of operations-research education that has been followed at Case Institute of Tech- nology. It points up the need for practical-example-filled nontheoretical work to carry the message of operations research to the potential customer and to the other problem solvers discussed above. It also points up the need for courses emphasizing theory, in conjunction with exemplification, in order to interest the promising arts-and-sciences graduate student in the field and orient his thinking to the types of research required on decision-making processes.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations are submitted for consideration by the Council in instructing the Education Committee for the coming year:

1. That certain unfinished parts of the work done to date be completed. 2. That a questionnaire to be sent to important and experienced employers of OR

scientists- to determine what kind of basic and specialized training these employers consider most important in developing OR scientists.

3. That OR education as it is and as employers consider it to be should be com- pared so that the Society may be in a position to provide guidance to institutions offering OR education.

Cleveland, Ohio GLEN D. CAMP, Chairman May 14, 1953 RUSSELL L. ACKOFF

WROE ALDERSON MARTIN L. ERNST GEORGE E. NICHOLSON, JR. GEORGE P. WADSWORTH

JOSEPH F. MCCLOSKEY

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 19:29:42 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions