Advertisement

Engaging with Behavioral Operational Research: On Methods, Actors and Praxis

  • L. Alberto Franco
  • Raimo P. Hämäläinen
Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter, we highlight the importance of the behavioural perspective to advance the discipline of operational research (OR). The power of this perspective lies in its ability to identify the conditions under which the impact of OR-supported processes is enhanced or hindered by behavioural factors, with a view to developing more effective OR practice. To help organise and guide the conduct of empirical studies in the sub-discipline of behavioural OR (BOR), we draw on practice theories from the social and organizational sciences to propose an integrative framework based on the three central concepts of OR methods, OR actors and OR praxis. In discussing these concepts, we refer to the developing empirical BOR literature to highlight alternative analytical foci. We end the chapter by discussing the implications of the behavioural perspective for advancing the OR discipline, particularly with regards to foregrounding OR praxis in academic papers, attending to a wide diversity of OR actors, developing OR competences, and the role of theory and research methodology.

Keywords

Behavioural OR Practice Impact Empirical research Theory 

References

  1. Ackermann, F., and C. Eden. 2011. Negotiation in strategy making teams: Group support systems and the process of cognitive change. Group Decision and Negotiation 20: 293–314.Google Scholar
  2. Ackermann, F., D.F. Andersen, C. Eden, and G.P. Richardson. 2011. ScriptsMap: A tool for designing multi-method policy-making workshops. Omega 39: 427–434.Google Scholar
  3. Ackoff, R. 1977. Optimization + objectivity = opt out. European Journal of Operational Research 1: 1–7.Google Scholar
  4. Ahmed, R., and S. Robinson. 2013. Modeling and simulation in business and industry: Insights into the processes and practices of expert modellers. Journal of the Operational Research Society 65: 660–672.Google Scholar
  5. Amini, M., T. Wakolbinger, M. Racer, and M.G. Nejad. 2012. Alternative supply chain production-sales policies for new product diffusion: An agent-based modeling and simulation approach. European Journal of Operational Research 216: 301–311.Google Scholar
  6. Bakken, B., J. Gould, and D. Kim. 1992. Experimentation in learning organizations: A management flight simulator approach. European Journal of Operational Research 59: 167–182.Google Scholar
  7. Bendoly, E., W. Van Wezel, and D.G. Bachrach (eds.). 2015. The handbook of behavioral operations management: Social and psychological dynamics in production and service settings. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Birnberg, J.G., J. Luft, and M.D. Shields. 2007. Psychology theory in management accounting research. In Handbook of management accounting research, ed. C.S. Chapman and A.G. Hopwood, 113–135. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  9. Brailsford, S.C., and B. Schmidt. 2003. Towards incorporating human behaviour in models of health care systems: An approach using discrete event eimulation. European Journal of Operational Research 150: 19–31.Google Scholar
  10. Brailsford, S.C., P. Harper, and D. Shaw. 2009. Milestones in OR. Journal of the Operational Research Society 60: S1–S4.Google Scholar
  11. Brailsford, S.C., P.R. Harper, and J. Sykes. 2012. Incorporating human behaviour in simulation models of screening for breast cancer. European Journal of Operational Research 219: 491–507.Google Scholar
  12. Brailsford, S.C., T.B. Bolt, G. Bucci, T.M. Chaussalet, N.A. Connell, P.R. Harper, J.H. Klein, M. Pitt, and M. Taylor. 2013. Overcoming the barriers: A qualitative study of simulation adoption in the NHS. Journal of the Operational Research Society 64: 157–168.Google Scholar
  13. Brocklesby, J. 2016. The what, the why and the how of behavioural operational research: An invitation to potential sceptics. European Journal of Operational Research 249: 796–805.Google Scholar
  14. Bruce, B. (ed.). 2010. Handbook of behavioral finance. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  15. Camerer, C.F. 2003. Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Camerer, C.F., and G. Lowenstein (eds.). 2003. Advances in behavioral economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Capelo, C., and J.F. Dias. 2009. A system dynamics-based simulation experiment for testing mental model and performance effects of using the balanced scorecard. System Dynamics Review 25: 1–34.Google Scholar
  18. Carlson, K.A., and S.D. Bond. 2006. Improving preference assessment: Limiting the effect of context through pre-exposure to attribute levels. Management Science 52: 410–421.Google Scholar
  19. Chung, Q., T. Willemain, and R. O’Keefe. 2000. Influence of model management systems on decision making: Empirical evidence and implications. Journal of the Operational Research Society 51: 936–948.Google Scholar
  20. Churchman, C.W. 1970. Operations research as a profession. Management Science 17: 37–53.Google Scholar
  21. Connell, N. 2001. Evaluating soft OR: Some reflections on an apparently ‘unsuccessful’ implementation using a soft systems methodology (SSM) based approach. Journal of Operational Research Society 52: 150–160.Google Scholar
  22. Cropper, S. 1990. Variety, formality and style: Choosing amongst decision-support methods. In Tackling strategic problems: The role of group decision support, ed. C. Eden and J. Radford, 92–98. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Dutton, J.M., and R.E. Walton. 1964. Operational research and the behavioural sciences. Operational Research Quarterly 15: 207–217.Google Scholar
  24. Eden, C., and F. Ackermann. 2004. Use of ‘soft OR’ methods by clients, what do they want from them? In Systems modeling: Theory and practice, ed. M. Pidd, 146–163. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  25. Ellspermann, S.J., G.W. Evans, and M. Basadur. 2007. The impact of training on the formulation of ill-structured problems. Omega 35: 221–236.Google Scholar
  26. Fasolo, B., and C.A. Bana e Costa. 2014. Tailoring value elicitation to decision makers’ numeracy and fluency: Expressing value judgments in numbers or words. Omega 44: 83–90.Google Scholar
  27. Feldman, M.S., and W.J. Orlikowski. 2011. Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science 22(5): 1240–1253.Google Scholar
  28. Fortuin, L., and M. Zijlstra. 2000. Operational research in practice: Consultancy in industry revisited. European Journal of Operational Research 120: 1–13.Google Scholar
  29. Franco, L.A. 2013. Rethinking soft OR interventions: Models as boundary objects. European Journal of Operational Research 231: 720–733.Google Scholar
  30. Franco, L.A., and R.P. Hämäläinen. 2016. Behavioural operational research: Returning to the roots of the OR profession. European Journal of Operational Research 249: 791–795.Google Scholar
  31. Franco, L.A., and E. Lord. 2011. Understanding multi-methodology: Evaluating the perceived impact of mixing methods for group budgetary decisions. Omega 39: 362–372.Google Scholar
  32. Franco, L.A., and M. Meadows. 2007. Exploring new directions in problem structuring methods research: On the role of cognitive style. Journal of the Operational Research Society 58: 1621–1629.Google Scholar
  33. Franco, L.A., and G. Montibeller. 2010. Facilitated modeling in operational research. European Journal of Operational Research 205: 489–500.Google Scholar
  34. Franco, L.A., and E.A. Rouwette. 2011. Decision development in facilitated modeling workshops. European Journal of Operational Research 212: 164–178.Google Scholar
  35. Franco, L.A., M. Cushman, and J. Rosenhead. 2004. Project review and learning in the UK construction industry: Embedding a problem structuring method within a partnership context. European Journal of Operational Research 152: 586–601.Google Scholar
  36. Franco, L.A., E.A. Rouwette, and H. Korzilius. 2016. Different paths to consensus? The impact of need for closure on model-supported group conflict management. European Journal of Operational Research 249: 878–889.Google Scholar
  37. French, S., J. Maule, and N. Papamichail. 2009. Decision behaviour, analysis and support. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Graham, A.K., J.D.W. Morecroft, P.M. Senge, and J.D. Sterman. 1992. Model-supported case studies for management education. European Journal of Operational Research 59: 151–166.Google Scholar
  39. Hämäläinen, R.P. 2015. Behavioural issues in environmental modeling: The missing perspective. Environmental Modeling and Software 73: 244–253.Google Scholar
  40. Hämäläinen, R.P., J. Mustajoki, and M. Marttunen. 2010. Web-based decision support: Creating a culture of applying multi-criteria decision analysis and web supported participation in environmental decision making. In e-Democracy: A group decision and negotiation perspective, ed. D. Rios-Insua and S. French, 201–221. Dordrecht: Springer Science and Business Media B.V.Google Scholar
  41. Hämäläinen, R.P., J. Luoma, and E. Saarinen. 2013. On the importance of behavioral operational research: The case of understanding and communicating about dynamic systems. European Journal of Operational Research 228: 623–634.Google Scholar
  42. Hartley, D.A., P.V. Johnson, A. Fitzsimons, J. Lovell, B. Chippendale, and J.K. Clayton. 1979. A case study on the development of the home defence training game HOT SEAT. Journal of the Operational Research Society 30: 861–871.Google Scholar
  43. Horlick-Jones, T., and J. Rosenhead. 2007. The uses of observation: Combining problem structuring methods and ethnography. Journal of the Operational Research Society 58: 588–601.Google Scholar
  44. Hovmand, P.S., D.F. Andersen, E. Rouwette, G.P. Richardson, K. Rux, and A. Calhoun. 2012. Group model-building ‘scripts’ as a collaborative planning tool. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 29: 179–193.Google Scholar
  45. Howick, S., and F. Ackermann. 2011. Mixing OR methods in practice: Past, present and future directions. European Journal of Operational Research 215: 503–511.Google Scholar
  46. Huxham, C., and S. Cropper. 1994. From many to one—And back. An exploration of some components of facilitation. Omega 22: 1–11.Google Scholar
  47. Jackson, M.C., P. Keys, and S.A. Cropper (eds.). 1989. OR and the social sciences. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  48. Jarzabkowski, P., J. Balogun, and D. Seidl. 2007. Strategizing: The challenges of a practice perspective. Human Relations 60: 5–27.Google Scholar
  49. Keys, P. 2006. On becoming expert in the use of problem structuring methods. Journal of the Operational Research Society 57: 822–829.Google Scholar
  50. Kunc, M. 2012. Teaching strategic thinking using system dynamics: Lessons from a strategic development course. System Dynamics Review 28: 28–45.Google Scholar
  51. Lahtinen, T.J., and R.P. Hämäläinen. 2016. Path dependence and biases in the even swaps decision analysis method. European Journal of Operational Research 249: 890–898.Google Scholar
  52. Lane, D.C. 1995. On a resurgence of management simulations and games. Journal of the Operational Research Society 46: 604–625.Google Scholar
  53. Lawrence, J.E. (ed.). 1966. Operational research and the social sciences. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar
  54. Le Menestrel, M., and L.N. Van Wassenhove. 2004. Ethics outside, within or beyond OR models? European Journal of Operational Research 153: 477–484.Google Scholar
  55. Le Menestrel, M., and L.N. Van Wassenhove. 2009. Ethics in operations research and management sciences: A never-ending effort to combine rigor and passion. Omega 37: 1039–1043.Google Scholar
  56. Luhmann, N. 1995. Social systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Mingers, J., and J. Rosenhead. 2012. Introduction to the special issue: Teaching soft O.R., problem structuring methods, and multimethodology. INFORMS Transactions on Education 12: 1–3.Google Scholar
  58. Mitchell, G. 1993. The practice of operational research. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  59. Montibeller, G., and D. Von Winterfeldt. 2015. Cognitive and motivational biases in decision and risk analysis. Risk Analysis 35: 1230–1251.Google Scholar
  60. Montibeller, G., L.A. Franco, E. Lord, and A. Iglesias. 2009. Structuring resource allocation decisions: A framework for building multi-criteria portfolio models with area-grouped projects. European Journal of Operational Research 199: 846–856.Google Scholar
  61. Morecroft, J.D. 1988. System dynamics and microworlds for policymakers. European Journal of Operational Research 35: 301–320.Google Scholar
  62. Morton, A., and B. Fasolo. 2009. Behavioural decision theory for multi-criteria decision analysis: A guided tour. Journal of the Operational Research Society 60: 268–275.Google Scholar
  63. Nicolini, D. 2012. Practice theory, work and organization: An introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  64. O’Brien, F.A. 2004. Scenario planning: Lessons for practice from teaching and learning. European Journal of Operational Research 154: 709–722.Google Scholar
  65. O’Brien, F.A. 2011. Supporting the strategy process: A survey of UK OR/MS practitioners. Journal of the Operational Research Society 62: 900–920.Google Scholar
  66. O’Brien, F.A. 2015. On the roles of OR/MS practitioners in supporting strategy. Journal of the Operational Research Society 66: 202–218.Google Scholar
  67. O’Keefe, R.M. 2016. Experimental behavioural research in operational research: What we know and what we might come to know. European Journal of Operational Research 249: 899–907.Google Scholar
  68. Ormerod, R.J. 2008. The transformation competence perspective. Journal of the Operational Research Society 59: 1435–1448.Google Scholar
  69. Ormerod, R.J. 2014a. The mangle of OR practice: Towards more informative case studies of ‘technical’ projects. Journal of the Operational Research Society 65: 1245–1260.Google Scholar
  70. Ormerod, R.J. 2014b. OR competences: The demands of problem structuring methods. EURO Journal on Decision Processes 2: 313–340.Google Scholar
  71. Ormerod, R.J., and W. Ulrich. 2013. Operational research and ethics: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research 228: 291–307.Google Scholar
  72. Papamichail, K.N., G. Alves, S. French, J.B. Yang, and R. Snowdon. 2007. Facilitation practices in decision workshops. Journal of the Operational Research Society 58: 614–632.Google Scholar
  73. Petropoulos, F., R. Fildes, and P. Goodwin. 2016. Do ‘big losses’ in judgmental adjustments to statistical forecasts affect experts’ behaviour? European Journal of Operational Research 249: 842–852.Google Scholar
  74. Pickering, A. 1995. The mangle of practice: Time, agency and science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  75. Pierre Brans, J., and C. Macharis. 1997. Play theatre a new way to teach O.R. European Journal of Operational Research 99: 241–247.Google Scholar
  76. Poole, M.S. 2004. Generalization in process theories of communication. Communication Methods and Measures 1: 181–190.Google Scholar
  77. Powell, S.G., and T.R. Willemain. 2007. How novices formulate models. Part I: Qualitative insights and implications for teaching. Journal of the Operational Research Society 58: 983–995.Google Scholar
  78. Powell, T.C., D. Lovallo, and C.R. Fox. 2011. Behavioral strategy. Strategic Management Journal 32: 1369–1386.Google Scholar
  79. Ranyard, J.C., R. Fildes, and T.-I. Hu. 2015. Reassessing the scope of OR practice: The influences of problem structuring methods and the analytics movement. European Journal of Operational Research 245: 1–13.Google Scholar
  80. Reckwitz, A. 2002. Towards a theory of social practices: A development in cultural theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory 5: 243–263.Google Scholar
  81. Robinson, S., C. Worthington, N. Burgess, and Z.J. Radnor. 2013. Facilitated modeling with discrete-event simulation: Reality or myth? European Journal of Operational Research 234: 231–240.Google Scholar
  82. Rouwette, E.A.J.A., J.A.M. Vennix, and T. Van Mullekom. 2002. Group model building effectiveness. A review of assessment studies. System Dynamics Review 18: 5–45.Google Scholar
  83. Rouwette, E.A.J.A., H. Korzilius, J.A.M. Vennix, and E. Jacobs. 2011. Modeling as persuasion: The impact of group model building on attitudes and behavior. System Dynamics Review 27: 1–21.Google Scholar
  84. Schatzki, T.R., K. Knorr-Cetina, and E. Von Savigny (eds.). 2001. The practice turn in contermporary theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  85. Schilling, M.S., N. Oeser, and C. Schaub. 2007. How effective are decision analyses? Assessing decision process and group alignment effects. Decision Analysis 4: 227–242.Google Scholar
  86. Scott, R.J., R.Y. Cavana, and D. Cameron. 2013. Evaluating immediate and long-term impacts of qualitative group model building workshops on participants’ mental models. System Dynamics Review 29: 216–236.Google Scholar
  87. Scott, R.J., R.Y. Cavana, and D. Cameron. 2016. Recent evidence on the effectiveness of group model building. European Journal of Operational Research 249: 908–918.Google Scholar
  88. Senge, P.M., and J.D. Sterman. 1992. Systems thinking and organizational learning: Acting locally and thinking globally in the organization of the future. European Journal of Operational Research 59: 137–150.Google Scholar
  89. Shaw, D., F. Ackermann, and C. Eden. 2003. Approaches to sharing knowledge in group problem structuring. Journal of the Operational Research Society 54: 936–948.Google Scholar
  90. Sterman, J.D. 2000. Business dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  91. Syntetos, A.A., I. Kholidasari, and M.M. Naim. 2016. The effects of integrating management judgement into OUT levels: In or out of context? European Journal of Operational Research 249: 853–863.Google Scholar
  92. Tako, A.A. 2014. Exploring the model development process in discrete-event simulation: Insights from six expert modellers. Journal of the Operational Research Society 66: 747–760.Google Scholar
  93. Tako, A.A., and S. Robinson. 2010. Model development in discrete-event simulation and system dynamics: An empirical study of expert modellers. European Journal of Operational Research 207: 784–794.Google Scholar
  94. Tavella, E., and T. Papadopoulos. 2015a. Expert and novice facilitated modeling: A case of a viable system model workshop in a local food network. Journal of the Operational Research Society 66: 247–264.Google Scholar
  95. Tavella, E., and T. Papadopoulos. 2015b. Novice facilitators and the use of scripts for managing facilitated modeling workshops. Journal of the Operational Research Society 66: 1967–1988.Google Scholar
  96. Turner, S. 1994. The social theory of practices. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  97. Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman. 1974. Judgment under uncertainty. Heuristics and biases. Science 185: 1124–1131.Google Scholar
  98. Velez-Castiblanco, J., J. Brocklesby, and G. Midgley. 2016. Boundary games: How teams of OR practitioners explore the boundaries of intervention. European Journal of Operational Research 249: 968–982.Google Scholar
  99. Von Winterfeldt, D., and W. Edwards. 1986. Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  100. Waisel, L., W. Wallace, and T. Willemain. 2008. Visualization and model formulation: An analysis of the sketches of expert modellers. Journal of the Operational Research Society 59: 353–361.Google Scholar
  101. Wein, L.M. 2002. Introduction to the 50th anniversary issue of operations research. Operations Research 50: iii-iii.Google Scholar
  102. White, L. 2009. Understanding problem structuring methods interventions. European Journal of Operational Research 99: 823–833.Google Scholar
  103. White, L. 2016. Behavioural operational research: Towards a framework for understanding behaviour in OR interventions. European Journal of Operational Research 249: 827–841.Google Scholar
  104. White, L., K. Burger, and M. Yearworth. 2016. Understanding behaviour in problem structuring methods interventions with activity theory. European Journal of Operational Research 249: 983–1004.Google Scholar
  105. Whittington, R. 2003. The work of strategizing and organizing: For a practice perspective. Strategic Organization 1: 117–125.Google Scholar
  106. Whittington, R. 2006. Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organization Studies 27: 613–634.Google Scholar
  107. Whittington, R. 2011. The practice turn in organization research: Towards a disciplined transdisciplinarity. Accounting, Organizations and Society 36: 183–186.Google Scholar
  108. Willemain, T.R. 1994. Insights on modeling from a dozen experts. Operations Research 42: 213–222.Google Scholar
  109. Willemain, T.R. 1995. Model formulation: What experts think about and when. Operations Research 43: 916–932.Google Scholar
  110. Willemain, T.R., and S.G. Powell. 2007. How novices formulate models. Part II: A quantitative description of behaviour. Journal of the Operational Research Society 58: 1271–1283.Google Scholar
  111. Wright, G and Bolger, F. 1992. Expertise and decision support. New York: Springer Science and Business Media.Google Scholar
  112. Wright, G., G. Cairns, and P. Goodwin. 2009. Teaching scenario planning: Lessons from practice in academe and business. European Journal of Operational Research 194: 323–335.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Open Access This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License, which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Alberto Franco
    • 1
  • Raimo P. Hämäläinen
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Business and EconomicsLoughborough UniversityLoughboroughUK
  2. 2.Systems Analysis LaboratoryAalto UniversityAaltoFinland

Personalised recommendations