scholarly journals Anatomy of the Edelman: Measuring the World’s Best Analytics Projects

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (6) ◽  
pp. 373-386
Author(s):  
Michael F. Gorman ◽  
Lakshminarayana Nittala ◽  
Jeffrey M. Alden
Keyword(s):  
Operations Research ◽  
Predictive Models ◽  
Predictive Analytics ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Management Science ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Research Management ◽  
Predictive Success ◽  
The Impact

Each year, the INFORMS Edelman Award celebrates the best and most impactful implementations of operations research, management science, and analytics. As the Edelman Award approaches its 50-year mark, we provide a history and characterization of the award’s finalists and winners. We provide some basic descriptive analytics about the participating organizations and authors, the impact of their work, and the methods they employed. We also conduct predictive analytics on finalist submissions, gauging contributors to success in establishing winning entries. We find that predicting Edelman winners a priori is extremely difficult; however, given a set of finalists, predictive models based on monetary impact could have predicted the winner over half the time in recent years, but would have had less predictive success in the early years of the competition. We suggest that, by characterizing the finalists, we can give future entrants a better picture of what it takes to compete for the Edelman Award.

scholarly journals Operations Research/Management Science Research in Europe: A Bibliometric Overview

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Canser Bilir ◽  
Cengiz Güngör ◽  
Özgür Kökalan
Keyword(s):  
Bibliometric Analysis ◽  
Operations Research ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Management Science ◽  
Research Management ◽  
General Picture ◽  
Current State ◽  
Citation Statistics ◽  
The Impact

This paper provides a bibliometric analysis of the articles in the field of operations research or management science (OR/MS) published in the years 1980–2018 by European researchers. The analysis’s objective is to identify and examine the current state of OR/MS studies in Europe, which publishes about 38% of the papers published worldwide. The analysis was based on the data from the Web of Science (WoS) databases. We found a total of 65,352 papers in 148 different journals in the OR/MS field. The results provide a general picture of the studies, which are classified according to the most influential authors, institutions, papers, and journals. The study revealed that the ratio of OR/MS studies having at least one European author has steadily increased over the decades from 28.27% in the 1980 s to 41.29% in the 2010 s. The analysis also provides citation statistics of the European OR/MS articles. The study concluded that the impact of European publications is less than the impact of U.S. publications. The bibliometric analysis of the studies showed that only a small portion of the countries/regions, institutions, and even authors published a substantial portion of the papers, as indicated by the Pareto rule. The research trends have been identified through an analysis of keyword usage over the years. In keyword analysis, which subcategories are studied together is also identified. In the paper, collaboration among countries and institutions is also identified and depicted by using VOS viewer.

scholarly journals BIBLIOMETRIC OVERVIEW OF OPERATIONS RESEARCH/MANAGEMENT SCIENCE RESEARCH IN ASIA

2008 ◽  
Vol 25 (02) ◽  
pp. 217-241 ◽  
Author(s):  
PAO-LONG CHANG ◽  
PAO-NUAN HSIEH
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Hong Kong ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Operations Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
The United States ◽  
Management Science ◽  
Research Management ◽  
Institute Of Technology ◽  
The Impact

This paper evaluates the distribution of papers published by Asian authors in Operations Research and Management Science (OR/MS) journals from 1968 to 2006. The impact of OR/MS research in Asia is compared with that of the United States and the World, and research trends are highlighted through an analysis of keywords. From 1968 to 2006, 89,293 papers were published in 60 OR/MS journals. Of these, 41.4% came from USA and 16.6% came from seven Asian countries/regions. The contribution of different countries/regions is as follows: Japan 3.7%, Taiwan 3.2%, India 2.3%, Hong Kong 2.2%, South Korea 2.1%, People's Republic of China (PRC) 1.9%, and Singapore 1.2%. Among all the articles analyzed, 20% have a single author, and 9% have more than three authors; additionally, 22 papers have been cited more than 100 times and 29% have never been cited. Most articles originating in Japan, Taiwan, India, South Korea, PRC, and Singapore are produced in collaboration with local scholars, followed by authors from the United States. Hong Kong is a notable exception, 73% of articles from Hong Kong are produced in cooperation with the PRC, followed by local scholars. The five most productive institutions are as follows: The Indian Institute of Technology, the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, the National University of Singapore, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, and the National Chiao-Tung University (Taiwan).

How to Market OR/MS Decision Support

2010 ◽  
pp. 157-172
Author(s):  
Masayuki Ueda
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Decision Maker ◽  
Operations Research ◽  
Management Science ◽  
Research Management ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Research Groups ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Communication Gap

This research examines what to do to have decision makers more utilize OR/MS decision support. We investigate OR/MS decision support from a new viewpoint of service. Firstly, based on the fact that what is provided by OR/MS decision support is information to aid in decision making, we show that OR/MS decision support shares characteristics with service, hence can be considered as a kind of service. Next, we analyze OR/MS decision support from the viewpoint of what is necessary for service of high quality, and we clarify the issue of communication gaps. If we investigate preceding research in OR/MS (Operations Research/Management Science), it turns out that there is surely a problem with communication gap between decision makers and decision supporters. Finally, we show that it is effective to utilize problem specification, which is a decision-maker-friendly description of problems proposed by research groups including the author, as one approach to bridge the communication gap.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document