Investigating the methodological foundations of Operations Research in the form of the categorical syllogism

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Prof, of Industrial Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

2 Prof. of Industrial Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

3 Associate Prof. in Public Administration, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

This paper is an attempt to investigate the methodological foundations of Operations Research schools including Hard, Soft and emancipatory. So, first some propositions are deduced in relation to each OR school and then the proposition of each methodological school in the philosophy of science are put in the position of major premiss and OR propositions are put in the position of minor premiss in the form of a categorical syllogism. Finally the methodological foundations of the minor premisses are deduced from the major premisses. According to Habermas, each methodological school in the philosophy of science is suitable for solving a special kind of problem. So clarifying the methodological foundations of OR schools would help management scientists to determine the suitable OR methodology for any special kind of problematic situation.

Keywords

References

Carter, M.W. & Price, C.C. (2001). Operations research: a practical introduction. CRC, Boca Raton, USA.
Checkland, P.B. & Holwell, S. (1998). Information, Systems and Information Systems. Wiley, Chichester.
Chiasson, M., Fildes, R. & Pidd, M. (2006). Intelligent Thinking Instead of Critical Realism? The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57 (11), 1373-1375.
Daellenbach, H.G. (2002). Hard OR, Soft OR, Problem Structuring Methods, Critical Systems Thinking: A Primer. Unpublished Paper, University of Canterbury, NZ.
Dando, M. & Bennett, P. (1981). A Kuhnian crisis in Management Science? Journal of the Operational Research Society, 32(2), 91-103.
Gregory, F. H. (2003). Mingers on the Classification of Philosophical Assumptions. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 54 (12), 1301- 1302.
Heyer, R. (2004). Understanding Soft Operations Research: The methods, their application and its future in the Defence setting. Australia: A project done for DSTO Information Sciences Laboratory.
Hosseinzadeh, M., Mehregan, M.R. & Kiani, M. (2003). Operations Research: Science or Technology? Why is it important? Journal of Science & Technology Policy, 5(4), 33-46. (in Persian)
Iman, M. (2009). Paradigm Fundamentals of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods in the Humanities. Research Institite of Hawzah & University, Qom. (in Persian)
Jackson, M.C. (2003). The Power of Multi-Methodology: Some Thoughts for John Mingers. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 54 (12), 1300- 1301.
Jackson, M.C. (2006). John Mingers Is a Critical Realist Imperialist. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57 (11), 1370-1371.
Karen, S. & Holness, A. (2007). Systems view of the Operations Research practioner’s software development process. Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the State University of New York at Buffalo in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering.
Mingers, J. (2000). The Contribution of Critical Realism as an Underpinning Philosophy for OR/MS and Systems. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 51(11), 1256-1270.
Mingers, J. C. (2002a). Reply to Ormerod-The Importance of Being Real. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53 (3), 351-354.
Mingers, J. C. (2002b). Response to Ormerod: Play it again, Sam. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53 (3), 357-359.

Mingers, J. (2003a). A classification of the philosophical assumptions of management science methods. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 54 (6), 559-570.

Mingers, J. C. (2003b). Replies to Jackson and Gregory. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 54 (12), 1303- 1304.
Mingers, J. C (2006). Response from the Author: Intelligence and Realism in OR. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57 (11), 1375-1379.
Munro, I. & Mingers, J. (2004). Response to Richard Ormerod. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 55 (1), 90-93.
Nabavi, N. (2010). The elements of logic and methodology. Tehran: Tarbiat Modares University Press. (in Persian)
Ormerod, R. J. (2002a). Should Critical Realism Really be Critical for OR? A Comment on Mingers: The Contribution of Critical Realism as an Underpinning Philosophy for OR/MS and Systems. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53 (3), 347-351.
Ormerod, R. J. (2002b). Response to Mingers-An Overarching Philosophy for OR/MS-Sed Quis Custodet Custodies? The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53 (3), 354-357.
Ormerod, R. J. (2005). Comments on the classification of management science methods by Mingers. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 56 (4), 463- 465.
Ormerod, R. J. (2006). The OR Approach to Forecasting: Comments on Mingers' Paper. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57 (11), 1371-1373
Pidd, M. (2004). Systems Modelling: Theory and Practice, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Ulrich, W. (1983). Critical heuristics of social planning: a new approach to practicalphilosophy. Berne: Haupt.
Ulrich, W. (1987). Critical heuristics of social systems design. European Journal ofOperational Research. 31(3), 276–83.
Vidal, R.V.V. (2006). Oerational Research: A multidisciplinary field. Pesquisa Operacional, 26 (1), 69-90.
Industrial Management Journal
Volume 8, Issue 4
January 2017
Pages 575-600

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics