Ethics beyond the model: How social dynamics can interfere with ethical practice in operational research/management science

Responding to a call for more attention to be given to ethics within operational research, Marc Le Menestrel and Luk Van Wassenhove have recently outlined a perspective on the relationship between OR models and ethics that squarely ties ethical engagement to daily practice and, more specifically, to the manner in which a practitioner uses a model or other technique in a particular setting. They refer to this approach as “ethics beyond OR models”.This paper seeks to extend the debate on this topic by examining some of the difficulties of ethical action when it is defined in these terms. Specifically the paper seeks to show how the social dynamics that circumscribe much professional practice can easily override good intentions on the part of the people concerned. Ethical practice dictates that those involved in OR/MS practice should seriously contemplate their own involvement in the process of knowledge production and be fully aware of the wider ramifications of employing particular modelling techniques and other tools. However, this is not always easy since the complex social dynamics that surround an inquiry can surreptitiously undermine these intentions. In extreme cases, these processes can create an ethical trap that those involved may not be fully recognise until after the event.In exploring such a disjuncture between ethical intentionality and outcomes the paper re-examines and reflects upon a major consulting assignment which was led by the author and subsequently published through a leading journal and text.     

Soft OR comes of age—but not everywhere!

Over the last forty years, new methods and methodologies have been developed to deal with wicked problems or “messes”. They are structured and rigorous but non-mathematical. Prime examples are: soft systems methodology (SSM), cognitive mapping/SODA and the strategic choice approach (SCA). Collectively they are known as Soft OR, Soft Systems, or Problem Structuring Methods (PSMs). Soft OR has now come of age in terms of both dealing with complex practical situations and having a presence in the academic literature. However, Soft OR is not recognized, or even seen as a legitimate part of an OR, everywhere and this is especially so in the US, where top journals such as Operations Research and Management Science do not publish Soft OR papers. The purpose of this paper is to generate an informed discussion and debate, which may lead to a greater recognition of the contribution of Soft OR, and to it being seen to be a proper part of the OR discipline worldwide. In order to achieve this, the first section outlines the nature of Soft OR and describes briefly some of the main methods. The second section demonstrates that Soft OR has been successful both in practice and within the academic literature. The third section documents the invisibility of Soft OR within important sections of the OR literature, and the final section then suggests some explanations for this, and also proposes practical actions to try and alleviate the problem. It is not suggested that Soft OR is an alternative to traditional, mathematical OR but, rather, a complement.     

Does the best practice of rational-style model-based policy analysis already include ethical considerations?,

This paper deals with ethics in the context of the real-world practice of operations research (OR), once an analyst has taken on the responsibility of carrying out a rational-style model-based policy study for a client. OR models are often used by policy analysts to assist decisionmakers in choosing a good course of action based on multiple (and competing) criteria from among a variety of alternatives under uncertain conditions as part of the policy analysis process. The paper suggests that if applied operations researchers (acting as rational-style model-based policy analysts, and not as policy analysts playing a different role or as policy advocates) use the scientific method and apply the generally accepted best practices of their profession, they will be acting in an ethical manner. It, therefore, describes the steps of a typical rational-style model-based policy analysis study, and specifies the tenets of good practice in each step. It also provides a list of questions and statements that the analyst and those evaluating an analyst's work (both internally and externally) can use to help make sure that the study adheres to the tenets of good practice for rational-style model-based policy analysis and remains within ethical bounds.     

Challenge of Research Ethics Committees to the nature of operations research

This article is concerned with operational research (OR) practice in light of growing concerns about ethical conduct. It asks whether OR, in the context of increasing regulation through Research Ethics Committees, should consider whether there are certain ethical issues that are affected by the specific context of OR. The article sets out some of the central concerns about Research Ethics Committees and the nature of OR.     

On operations research and value conflicts

The paper addresses the question of how operations research (OR) ought to handle decision problems that involve value conflicts. First, we note that early OR was considered essentially value free within the OR community, with a mechanistic systems perspective, although some voiced concern that an analyst should not detach herself from the consequences of her work. Then we propose a value conflict scale, which we use to assess the conflict levels in a small sample of OR applications. We then turn to value identification. In practise, organizational value statements include many kinds of values, and we discuss how values can be sorted out according to ethical categories, which helps in identifying consequentialistic decision criteria. The next question is how values can be enacted in a decision process. We review findings in neuroscience, which indicate that intra-personal decision-making takes place in a field of tension between deliberation and affect. The implication is that low level conflicts may leave decision-makers too cold for values to be enacted and therefore want infusion of emotion. On the other hand, emotions in high-level conflicts may run too high to give reason a chance. Emotions, therefore, need to be tempered and this can be achieved through at least two strategies: a focus on consequences rather than virtues and rules and discourse ethics. These are the subjects of the two last parts of the paper. We conclude by proposing five ethical rules for OR analysis of value conflicts. An analyst should not regard herself as being detached from the decision that are made, should be conscious that good decision-making requires temperate emotions that balance affect and deliberation, should promote focus on consequences, should promote the view that stakeholders have intrinsic value; they should not be treated instrumentally and should encourage fair processes to identify stakeholder values.     

Mapping the changes in management science: A review of ‘soft’ OR/MS articles published in Omega (1973–2008)

The paper proposes a framework to map the development of management science (MS) and uses it to survey the MS literature published in Omega, the International Journal of Management Science. The management science discourse over the last 35 years is mapped in four paradigms: (1) optimisation/normative; (2) interpretative/learning; (3) critical; and (4) a post-modern management science approach. Using a set of keywords and authors’ names associated with the main features of each MS discourse, articles published between 1973 and 2008 are grouped. Results seem to suggest that Omega, a US-based journal, has been mainly developing publications under the optimisation paradigm; only very few papers adhering to the interpretative/learning and critical paradigms have been given space in Omega. The handful of papers from the interpretative paradigm are seen as attempts of UK-based academics to open some space for ‘soft’ operational research (OR) or ‘problem structuring methods’ in a positivistic outlook that seems to pervade US management science practice. Results of the survey and features of MS literature published in Omega are discussed. The paper aims to raise awareness amongst management scientist, systems and operational researchers of the differences between the MS/OR practice in both countries.     

Modelling complex ethical decision problems with operations research

This paper discusses the practical contribution of operations research (OR) techniques to modelling decision-making problems with ethical dimensions. Such problems are frequent in the global world: they frequently appear today in sustainability issues, e.g., in conflicts in the triangle of society, economy and environment. We show that the prerequisites for ethical problem-modelling are: the definition of moral principles, the evaluation of the decision context, the participation of stakeholders, the multidisciplinary collection of data, and the understanding of systemic interconnections. Classical OR instruments, mainly used in logistics and optimisation problems, are not entirely satisfactory for coping with the new ethical dimensions of sustainability. It is recommended to use and to develop more advanced, or combined instruments from the multi-criteria/multi-stakeholder and systemic streams of OR. It is argued that an important added value of using OR techniques for modelling today ethical issues lies at least as much in the discovery of open questions as in finding closed-form solutions.     

Community operational research: Its context and its future

Three years ago the Community OR initiative was launched by the OR Society with the aim of providing OR for non-traditional groups such as community and voluntary organizations. There is now a Community OR Unit, a Centre at Hull University and a network for interested members. This paper explores the historical context of Community OR and, following a number of current examples, discusses important practical issues and problems which need to be tackled if the initiative is to succeed.     

The theory of constraints: a methodology apart?—a comparison with selected OR/MS methodologies

Mingers (J. Oper. Res. Soc. 54 (2003) 559; Int. Trans. Oper. Res. 7 (2000) 673; J. Mingers, A. Gill (Eds.), Multimethodology: Towards the Theory and Practice of Combining Management Science Methodologies, Wiley, Chichester, 1997), Mingers and Brocklesby (Omega—Int. J. Manage. Sci. 25(5) (1997) 489; Systemist 18(3) (1996) 101) and others have sought to develop classificatory frameworks that would be useful in understanding the nature and characteristics of Operational Research/Management Science (OR/MS) methodologies and the philosophical assumptions underpinning them. This paper extends their work to the domain of methods and methodologies known as the Theory of Constraints (TOC). In particular, the paper helps position TOC methods and tools in relation to traditional OR/MS methodologies, methods and tools, and provides a basis for continuing multi-methodological development across the two domains.The paper concludes that the tools, techniques and methods of TOC can be viewed as a methodological set of complementary hard and soft tools and methods that contribute to all phases of activity and across all three social, personal and material dimensions of the Mingers–Brocklesby framework, and share the ontological and epistemological characteristics and assumptions of extant OR/MS methodologies.     

Ethical guidelines and codes in operations research

We review past endeavors by ORSs to establish ethical guidelines or codes to which their members must subscribe to. We contrast such activities with those of the international community of related professional societies. It is clear that ORSs world-wide do not exhibit the important basic characteristic of a profession, that is, the adoption of and adherence to ethical guidelines and codes. Such adoptions by OR professional organizations are rare.     

Management and Business Ethics: A Critique and Integration of Ethical Decision-making Models

This paper critically reviews the literature relating to the management of ethics within organizations and identifies, in line with other authors, a gap between theory and practice in the area. It highlights the role of management (both as an academic discipline and from a practitioner perspective) in bridging this gap and views managers, with their sense of individual ethical agency, as a key locus of ethics within organizations. The paper aims to address the theory–practice gap by surveying the business ethics literature in order to identify, draw together and integrate existing theory and research, with a particular emphasis upon models of ethical decision-making and their relationship to work values. Such an endeavour is necessary, not only because of the relative neglect of management practice by business ethics researchers, but also because of the current lack of integration in the field of business ethics itself. The paper outlines some of the main methodological challenges in the area and suggests how some of these may be overcome. Finally, it concludes with a number of suggestions as to how the theory–practice gap can be addressed through the development of a research agenda, based upon the previous work reviewed.     

Ethics in Operations Research and Management Sciences: A never-ending effort to combine rigor and passion

From practice to theory, we introduce a state-of-the-art stream of papers that promotes an inclusive and complementary consideration of both analytical methods and ethical values in Operations Research and Management Sciences (OR/MS). We suggest a perspective according to which the consideration of ethics in OR/MS constitutes an enrichment of our discipline as well as a contribution to a more sustainable future in general.     

Worker Heterogeneity,New Monopsony,and Training

Abstract. A worker's output depends not only on his/her own ability but also on that of colleagues, who can facilitate the performance of tasks that each individual cannot accomplish on his/her own. We show that this common‐sense observation generates monopsony power and is sufficient to explain why employers might expend resources on training employees even when the training is of use to other firms. We show that training will take place in better‐than‐average or ‘good’ firms enjoying greater monopsony power, whereas ‘bad’ firms will have low‐ability workers unlikely to receive much training.     

Learning from mixed OR method practice: The NINES case study

Despite continued interest in the use of mixed OR/MS methods, limited attention has been paid in the literature to generic lessons that could be gained from mixing methods in practice. Many organisational problems demand the use of a mixed method approach and thus recognising and sharing lessons could prove beneficial to both practitioners and researchers. This paper reports on an in-depth evaluation of a case study involving risk identification and quantification of the Northern Isles New Energy Solutions (NINES) project which sought to trial and plan a new energy system. The intervention involved a mixed method approach and client feedback on the efficacy of the approach was sought. The evaluation reported in this paper is carried out using a set of themes taken from the literature and seeks to highlight transferable lessons. The set of lessons that emerge are presented along with their implications for both general OR modelling practice and the specific situation of mixing OR/MS methods. The paper concludes by discussing the implications of the work and directions for future work which will be of interest to both practitioners and researchers interested in mixed method OR/MS work.     

HEURISTIC LOT-SIZING AND SEQUENCING RULES IN A MULTISTAGE PRODUCTION-INVENTORY SYSTEM

Material Requirements Planning (MRP) is currently being applied and used extensively in industry and is being proclaimed as the solution to many of the problems of traditional production-inventory control problems. While the latter may be true, MRP is not without its own problems, two of which are the decisions concerning the appropriate lotsizing and sequencing rules to use in order to improve system performance. This paper describes a computer simulation study which was conducted to determine the effects of using various sequencing and lot-sizing rules on various performance criteria in a multistage, multiproduct, production-inventory system using MRP. The results of the study indicate that the application of various rules causes changes in system performance and that an interaction effect exists between lot-sizing and sequencing rules. What is more important is that a set of guidelines is developed to enable the practitioner to choose a lot-sizing rule and a sequencing rule that will tend to improve the performance of his system for the various performance criteria.     

LEARNING WITH DETERMINISTIC DECISION RULES

While many problems of uncertainty are commonly analyzed by means of stochastic models, under certain circumstances this may not be an appropriate approach. The latter situation arises when the decision maker knows that the uncertain variables are not generated by a stochastic process, or when he is unwilling, or unable, to compute subjective probabilities. One of the nonstochastic approaches to uncertainty is the expectational approach in which the decision maker forms deterministic expectations about the uncertain aspects of his environment. This paper is concerned with some criteria for selecting among available expectations, or anticipations functions, and the possibility of ordering them according to these criteria. This study focuses especially on the learning criterion. The discussion brings out conceptual problems in connection with the definition of learning, as well as some technical difficulties that one encounters when attempting to compare different anticipations functions from the point of view of the learning criterion. As an illustration of the issues discussed, the paper reports on the results of some simulated decision rules. These show that decision rules in which no learning takes place, and in which some information is ignored, may perform better than more sophisticated rules.     

Ackoff's Fables revisited: stories to inform operational research practice

This paper considers Ackoff's Fables, a set of short stories published by Ackoff in 1978 as guides to creative problem solving. The paper argues that storytelling of this kind contributes usefully to management and MS/OR education, before addressing how such Fables might be interpreted. It is demonstrated, using one of Ackoff's Fables, The Smart Jackass, for illustrative purposes, that interpretation of even apparently straightforward stories such as these is not unambiguous. The Fables can be interpreted in a multitude of different and sometimes contradictory ways, and the truths they might contain are not self-evident. Yet, as the basis for discussion, they still have much to offer as educational tools. The paper concludes with a discussion of literal truth in stories, and presents a classification of story types according to their relationship to literal truth.     

Why Rules for Risk Communication Are Not Enough: A Problem-Solving Approach to Risk Communication

Current work on risk communication offers practitioners helpful guidelines and rules such as "speak clearly" and "speak with compassion." While important, these guidelines have limitations. They offer practitioners and scholars little aid in determining why a communication encounter failed. Also, they do not help practitioners anticipate and overcome likely difficulties in future risk situations, nor can they help locate information about how to reduce these difficulties. To overcome the limitations of rule-based approaches to risk communication, this paper describes a diagnostic or problem-solving approach. This approach maintains that instead of rules, people need bases for anticipating likely obstacles to effective communication and selecting approaches that reduce these difficulties. Research on building trust, increasing awareness, deepening comprehension, gaining agreement, and motivating action is available in fields such as communication, educational psychology, science education, marketing, counseling, negotiation, and disaster response. This paper describes a framework that assists scholars and practitioners in: (a) identifying communication goals; (b) determining principal obstacles to those goals; and (c) selecting research-based methods for overcoming or minimizing these difficulties and achieving communication objectives.     

Operational research in government and planning

This paper analyses the difficulties encountered by OR in the field of government and planning, difficulties due to the sociological nature of the executive and the administrative systems and to the psychology of ministers and civil servants. To improve this situation the paper suggests (1) changes in the composition of OR teams and the competence of their members (collaboration of model-builders and “reformers”, improvement of knowledge of basic sciences by model-builders, long experience of reorganization of reformers, sufficient familiarity with the public sector); (2) transformations in the mode of realization of studies (definition of problems, choices of objectives and criteria, reasoning in terms of general systems, costing, ...); (3) definition of a long-term policy for OR research-teams; (4) modifications in the relations between teams and decision-makers; (5) introduction of OR in the functioning of the democratic systems.