|
OR/MS Today - February 2006 The State of Operations Research New editor in chief re-visits mission, scope and coverage areas of profession's "flagship journal." By David Simchi-Levi The introduction of a new editorial board is a unique opportunity to evaluate the reputation, stature and health of the journal. It is also an opportunity to examine its mission, scope and coverage areas, the types of papers submitted and published, as well as the level of satisfaction of authors and readers. Indeed, this is the time to identify what works well, what needs to be improved and what requires significant change in direction and emphasis. Similarly, it is an opportunity to reflect on changes in the profession and society that should influence the journal. This is exactly the objective of my editorial. To help in this process, I reviewed the results of a Web-based survey of subscribers to Operations Research conducted by INFORMS, and I complemented this data with interviews and discussions with numerous people in academia and industry. The message I received is consistent and unambiguous: Operations Research is, and has been for more than 50 years, the flagship journal of the profession. The journal has an excellent reputation for publishing high quality papers and, together with Management Science, has served as the primary outlet for scientific research in the field of operations research. Nevertheless, important challenges exist. In the early days of the field, the focus was mostly on the development of quantitative methods to solve operational and managerial problems. More recently, the field has matured and while new or more effective methods are still of interest, the emphasis of current research has shifted toward solving more relevant problems. This shift entails expanding the scope and coverage of the journal so that it reflects and possibly influences the evolution of the profession. At the same time, we have seen the proliferation of scientific journals focused on quantitative models and methods in various, often more specialized, operations and management areas. Many of these journals have been introduced by INFORMS in the last three decades: they include INFORMS Journal on Computing, Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, Mathematics of Operations Research, Marketing Science and Transportation Science. Other O.R. journals, such as Mathematical Programming, Operations Research Letters, Naval Research Logistics and Networks, compete in a similar marketplace. While this proliferation creates opportunities for authors, it demands the clarification of the scope and mission of Operations Research, the flagship INFORMS journal. Thus, the scope of Operations Research must be broad enough to cover both methodology and applications, yet restricted to high quality, truly insightful papers. This is clearly an important distinction between Operations Research and other more focused journals sponsored by INFORMS or its subdivisions. Indeed, with the exception of Management Science, all other journals published by INFORMS attract papers that are of interest to a specific community. This is not the case for Operations Research as it has always emphasized the publication of papers that are of interest to more than a small portion of the society. Evidently, such a broad scope does not distinguish Operations Research from another important journal in the field, namely Management Science. However, in the last few years, Management Science has emphasized "research motivated by strategic issues," as well as research important to a practicing manager. By contrast, I believe Operations Research should attract and publish papers focusing on the science and engineering of operations. Specifically, the science of operations refers not only to contribution to theory and the development of new methods, but also to analytical frameworks, quantitative relationships and mathematical models, some of which may provide only insights into various problems not necessarily specific numerical solutions. Two good examples in this category include the celebrated Little's Law from queueing theory and the more recent literature on supply contracts illustrating the impact of risk sharing between suppliers and buyers. By the same token, the engineering of operations focuses on solving specific operational problems and hence requires real data and demands the development of computationally tractable algorithms. Examples here include algorithms for the design of telecommunications networks or for the design and operations of supply chains. In this case, the emphasis is on a new solution methodology that is practical and effective in solving real-world problems. The implications of the previous statements are clear. I would like to see Operations Research attracting and publishing high quality managerial or technical papers that are based on rigorous mathematical models. Such papers should demonstrate potential impact on practice. Thus, the journal is interested in papers that focus on one or more of the following dimensions:
At the same time, the journal is looking for papers that are of interest to the entire community. These include:
Areas of Coverage The perception of the journal in the community obviously affects the type and breadth of papers submitted. At present, there seems to be some perception that Operations Research is too focused on technical contributions and that some areas of interest to the community are not covered by the journal. My objective is thus to broaden the journal content, and consequently the field, by publishing material that covers the entire spectrum of problems of interest to the community and by identifying new and emerging areas. In fact, Larry Wein, the former editor in chief, started this process by introducing the area of Financial Engineering. The new editorial board will continue in that direction by introducing two new areas, Revenue Management and Marketing Science. Both areas have a long tradition in the field and use rigorous mathematical models to improve decision-making. It is true that even without the existence of these two areas, papers in revenue management and marketing science have been submitted and published in the journal. However, by providing these two areas with a more visible place on the editorial board, and by selecting first-class researchers to lead the areas, the journal will encourage more submissions in these domains. The second initiative is to reposition and broaden some of the existing areas of the journal. For example, "O.R. Chronicle" is now replaced by "O.R. Forum," an area long abandoned by the journal. Re-introducing the O.R. Forum will allow the journal to expand its horizon and attract not only historical essays, but also thoughtful and substantive position papers that may suggest new research directions for the profession or reflect on current trends. With the introduction of the Web-based discussion forum (see below), I envision a lively and important interaction between the journal's readers reflecting various points of views. Similarly, the board is expanding the military area so that it also covers the growing literature that applies operations research techniques to homeland security. This is of course reflected by the area title, Military and Homeland Security. Thus, while the area is still interested in papers that address classical military problems as well as current defense issues, it encourages authors to submit papers focusing on the war on terror or on large-scale disasters such as earthquakes and hurricanes. Finally, the board is repositioning the area of Computing and Decision Technology that for many years served as an interface with the computer science community. The area, now titled Computing and Information Technologies, is to encompass research of a computational nature that lies at the boundaries between operations research and fields not obviously covered by the journal's other areas. Thus, the area is not only interested in advances in computational approaches for solving complex problems, and associated decision support interfaces, but also in the application of operations research approaches and techniques to computational biology, information system design, learning theories, nanotechnology and complex systems analysis. To summarize, the journal now has the following 16 areas:
Taken together, these areas span the entire spectrum of research in our community. They build on areas where the journal has already had significant strengths such as Decision Analysis, Optimization, Stochastic Models, and Manufacturing, Service and Supply Chain Operations. At the same time, they are designed to stimulate research and submissions in emerging areas such as Financial Engineering, Revenue Management and the application of operations research to other sciences through Computing and Information Technologies. Of course, the challenge is to provide a vehicle that helps to attract new research areas. For this purpose I am planning three activities: 1. Publish special issues and surveys that will serve as a source for defining and highlighting the state of the art in emerging areas. 2. Invite experts from other fields to submit review articles on the use of rigorous mathematical models in their respective domains. The objective is to expose the operations research community to non-traditional applications and thus stimulate our own research and broaden the field. 3. Develop a Web-based discussion forum that will feature an important paper and facilitate comments from readers of the journal. The editor will screen comments before they are published on the Web site. The new discussion forum is scheduled for release together with the new journal Web site at the beginning of the year. The high standards that Operations Research strives for need to be clearly articulated to the community. This will help eliminate false expectations, reduce pressure on the review process, and ultimately improve the experience that authors and readers have. For this purpose, the new board has identified the basic questions that every paper in the journal should address. These include:
At the same time, like many other scientific journals, every paper should stand the test of questions such as:
Of course, even with these criteria, there is significant room for interpretation. Hence, maintaining uniform standards across all areas, perhaps with the exception of O.R. Practice and O.R. Forum, will not be easy to achieve. Thus, the new board has agreed to hold quarterly meetings to review the status of the journal and to identify new initiatives that the journal should take. In parallel, the board has agreed on quarterly updates to all associate editors so they are aware of the journal status and standards. These updates will include information on submission rates to the various areas, rejection rates and most importantly, the review cycle times. The data will allow area editors and associate editors to measure their performance against the review cycle times of others. Finally, I am complementing the editorial board with a new advisory board whose objective is to discuss major issues important to the journal, for example, new areas of coverage or the impact of the Internet on the journal. I am pleased to report that the following distinguished members of the community have accepted my invitation to serve on the board: Patrick T. Harker, Hau L. Lee, Thomas L. Magnanti, George L. Nemhauser, William P. Pierskalla, Donald H. Ratliff and Ward Whitt. Evidently, the review of submitted papers is subjective, and its quality depends on the referees, the associate editors and the editorial board. Unfortunately, rejecting papers on purely technical ground is straightforward and is considered a sign of high standards, while identifying big-impact papers is very difficult. My objective is thus to make sure that in our efforts to maintain and increase the quality of the journal, Operations Research will not lose opportunities to publish papers that make a difference. To help identify and publish these papers, I am offering the following guidelines: Reducing and Managing Delays and Backlog One important concern of many authors is the review cycle time and the backlog of accepted papers. I strongly believe that shortening the review process is possible, but requires the editorial board to closely monitor this process and recognize the work of exceptional associate editors and referees. It also requires penalizing consistently delinquent referees and associate editors. The stated objective of Operations Research is to complete the review process within four months. The area editor can, however, make exceptions to this four-month cycle time for papers that he or she deems too long or complex. Such papers may require more time for careful reviewing. Thus, our goal is not rapid turnaround, which can always be achieved with short and uninformative reviews. Rather, the goal of Operations Research is to provide authors with high-quality reviews of their papers in a timely fashion. To achieve this goal, we plan to use Manuscript Central for online submission and peer review. My experience with this system, which has been recently launched by the journal, is that it will help to significantly increase the number of submitted papers and significantly decrease the review cycle time. Indeed, Manuscript Central will help the area editors and the editor in chief track the review process, alert the associate editor and the area editor when a paper has been with a referee for a long time, and supply various statistics to the editorial board. In parallel, Operations Research is going to limit the number of published pages. Anything beyond the page limit will be published online. Thus, while there will be no limit on the length of a submitted paper, there will be a limit on the number of pages published in the printed version. This limit, not including graphs and tables, is 30 pages in length, double-spaced with one-inch margins on all four sides of the page and with text in 11-point font. If a paper is accepted, all submitted material beyond this limit will be published in the online supplement of the journal. This initiative is designed to force authors to focus on shorter, concise and well-written articles that appear in print. Such articles are easier to review which helps reduce the review cycle time. Similarly, this limit will help reduce the publication backlog. The length of the publication backlog is an important concern. On one hand, having a healthy backlog guarantees a smooth production and publication process. On the other hand, when the backlog is too long, and currently it takes 12 months from acceptance to publication, it may deter authors from submitting papers. In addition, the combined delay associated with the review process and the publication backlog, while not acceptable in general, is not appropriate in particular for topics such as energy, policy modeling or homeland security. INFORMS has agreed to increase the page count of the journal by 20 percent in the next two years, which will hopefully reduce the publication backlog to six months. OR/MS Today copyright © 2006 by the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences. All rights reserved. Lionheart Publishing, Inc. 506 Roswell Rd., Suite 220, Marietta, GA 30060 USA Phone: 770-431-0867 | Fax: 770-432-6969 E-mail: lpi@lionhrtpub.com URL: http://www.lionhrtpub.com Web Site © Copyright 2006 by Lionheart Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. |