{"74621":{"#nid":"74621","#data":{"type":"news","title":"Operations Research in the Stewart School","body":[{"value":"\u003Cp\u003ETry this (if you have little else to do): Pick a buddy,\nthen grab a dozen people off the street\u2014okay, to make it a little more\ninteresting, when you visit for homecoming, just select a dozen people on\ncampus\u2014and ask them to define the field of study known as \u201coperations research\u201d\n(OR). Before doing this, however, make a wager with your friend: If at least\ntwo responses are the same, you will purchase for him two season tickets to the\nAtlanta Thrashers next year; otherwise, he has to mow your grass and rake\nleaves for a full year. Assuming he takes you up, how do you like your chances?\nWell, as they say: You have nothing to lose and everything to gain (hint: there\nis a very good chance you\u2019ll be staying out of your yard for a year, but, if on\nthe off-chance that you lose the bet, you won\u2019t have lost too much on the\npurchase of those hockey tickets, since the Thrashers became the Winnipeg Jets\nlast spring).\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EWhat\u2019s\nin a name?\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003ENo matter the stakes, your bet was pretty secure\nbecause there is a very high probability that those dozen responses to the\nquery posed above will be all over the proverbial map; some will have to be\ntightened to even reach the level of \u201cnebulous.\u201d And, even if a couple of\ndescriptions are the same, it is entirely likely that both are vague, outmoded,\nor simply nonsensical. So is there a punch line here\u2014a resolution of a riddle?\nActually, there is not (at least from this author), but there is an article, and\nits theme is this: We don\u2019t really have an air-tight definition of OR either,\nbut we do believe that in the H. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and\nSystems Engineering (ISyE), we do it at least as well as anybody and quite\npossibly better than any other academic program.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EIn order to have at least a fixed point, suppose we\ngo straight to the description offered up by what many will argue is the\nflagship professional society representing this identity-conflicted field. The\nInstitute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS) tells\nus on their website, \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/www.informs.org\/\u0022\u003Ewww.informs.org,\n\u003C\/a\u003Ethat\n\u201coperations research is the discipline of applying advanced analytical methods\nto help make better decisions.\u201d Paraphrasing the well-known sentiment expressed\nby Churchill regarding democracy as a system of government, this\ncharacterization of OR might well strike you as not so hot, but then none of\nthe others we know about appear to be any better. Indeed, the professional\nsociety recently rolled out a somewhat slicker marketing version calling OR the\n\u201cscience of better.\u201d Take your pick.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003ENo matter one\u2019s view on the definitional issue, it\ndoes remain that OR seems to occupy at least \u201cbrand name\u201d status. Even if they\ncan\u2019t agree on a formal description (this is not a new frustration but rather\none dating to at least the Second World War when the phrase was first introduced),\nmost people queried will certainly know the name. Universities, after all,\nteach plenty of courses directly related to if not actually titled Operations\nResearch, many award degrees (mostly graduate) specifically designated as OR,\nand some even have Operations Research in their academic program name.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EIf we return to the INFORMS- sponsored version\nstated above, we are also instructed that the section in the description\nreferring to \u201cadvanced analytical methods\u201d includes the following fundamental methodologies:\nsimulation, optimization, probability, and statistics. Okay, let us check the fall\n2011 roster of fifty-one academic faculty with full-time appointments in ISyE.\nFrom that list, let us apply a conservative, if not fairly stern test that\ncounts only faculty members who either originated and\/or teach an advanced\ncourse in statistics, optimization, or stochastics (probability\/simulation).\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\n\n\u003Cp\u003ESince you\u2019re reading this, I ask that you trust me\nto count for you; I get thirty- three. This means that nearly two of every\nthree ISyE faculty members are apparently \u201cdoing OR\u201d under the INFORMS\ndescription. But then if you turn back and focus on the word \u201capplying\u201d from\nthe INFORMS description, and add those faculty who are, by their own admission,\ndemonstrable and routine users of the stated methodologies, I can easily identify\nat least ten additional faculty that can be counted.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003ESo, thirty-three for sure and possibly as many as\nforty-five of fifty-one current ISyE faculty members are either teaching and\nconducting research directly in the methodologies of OR as defined by no less\nthan the parent professional society or are doing work that routinely draws\nupon OR tools in their research applications. Would not even the most casual\nobserver wonder: \u201cWhy isn\u2019t it the Stewart School of Operations Research?\u201d\nWell, it probably could be; however, tradition and history play a major role in\nnegotiating that question and that\u2019s how it should be. Indeed, it is quite\ncommon for industrial engineering (IE) programs to have much (or at least some)\nactivity in operations research; to be sure, many ISyE faculty who are counted\nin the forty-five above have their educational backgrounds firmly rooted in\nmodern industrial engineering and fully appreciate and respect that identity.\nOn the other hand, many, especially from the gang of thirty-three, have their\ndegrees in mathematics, statistics, and operations research. The larger point\nis, though, that the boundaries defining fields where operations research is\ndone legitimately are blurred at best and without a doubt overlap\nsubstantially.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EIn fact, one of the reasons that your bet in the\nopening paragraph was pretty safe is that on the spectrum of academic programs\nat universities, there are a host of points where operations research is\ngetting done, more or less. This easily includes programs in mathematics,\nstatistics, computer science, various other engineering departments, and\ncertain business schools. So, those dozen \u201crandom\u201d people indicated above,\nchosen, and asked to define OR, might well know the discipline and offer honest\ndescriptions of just what they think it is, at least what it involves, but\nthose descriptions will likely be tailored or influenced by their respective\ndomains and academic cultures.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EAcademics\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EIf you\u2019re a prospective student (at any level, but\nespecially for those at the graduate level), and you want to avoid any\ncoursework requirements covering OR methodology, you can save the cost of\napplication to ISyE. In the current list of active courses taught by ISyE\nfaculty, nearly forty-five are devoted explicitly to methodology in\noptimization, stochastics, or statistics. A half-dozen of these are at the\nundergraduate level, in support of the BSIE; the remaining courses are Master\u2019s\nand doctoral-level courses.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EAt the master\u2019s level, the School offers eight\ndesignated degree options, two of which are focused explicitly on OR and\nstatistics (MSOR and MSStat, respectively) even though most of the other\nmaster\u2019s (MS Industrial Engineering, MS Health Systems, etc.) also require OR\nmethodology courses somewhere in their programs of study. At the doctoral\nlevel, the PhD in OR is (surprise) intensive in its requirements of advanced\nmethodology courses, particularly in optimization and stochastics, but the PhD\nin IE, which breaks into four specializations, has heavy doses of the very same\ncourses sprinkled throughout depending upon one\u2019s chosen specialization, e.g.,\nsupply chain engineering, economic decision analysis, etc.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EAgain, these methodology courses are the hard-core, fundamental\ncourses, taught almost exclusively by those thirty-three faculty members\nmentioned earlier. Naturally, we also teach many additional courses pertaining\nto the classic as well as contemporary application domains commonly identified\nwith our fields and that apply these methodologies. Faculty whose primary\nresponsibility is covering those courses constitute, by and large, the others\nthat produced the larger estimate of forty-five \u201cOR- related\u201d faculty.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EPeople\nand Research\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EIn this section, we profile just some of the\nSchool\u2019s senior faculty members who make us look particularly good in the world\nof OR as we have interpreted it. It needs to be stated that many not on this\nlist have equally justifiable cases to have been included. As genuinely uncomfortable\nas this dilemma is for this author, it does serve to corroborate the\nexceptional strength of the OR faculty in the School.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EThe position that the School has risen to among the\nelites in the context of OR owes its origin to a small number of individuals\nwho, upon their arrival, sent clear signals to the broader community that ISyE\nwas ready not only to build upon existing competence but also to move to the\nnext level. The obvious pioneer in this group would be George Nemhauser (PhD in\nOperations Research, 1961, from Northwestern). Attracted from Cornell in 1985,\nhe came to Georgia Tech as the Russell Chandler Chair, the first endowed chair\nin ISyE. He also owns the remarkable distinction of being the first individual\nat Georgia Tech to be elected to the National Academy of Engineering while a\nsitting faculty member (1986). Long noted for basic work in integer programming\nand combinatorial optimization, a hallmark of much of his research career has\nbeen influenced by an attraction to interesting applications that validate his\nmethodological work. Many claim such interests, of course\u2014George Nemhauser\nactually does it. Working with generations of students and colleagues spanning\nmore than forty years, he has done impactful work in a broad spectrum of practical\nsettings, including vehicle routing, production, transportation, and even\nsports scheduling.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EInsisting that work in applied areas possess serious\nresearch content, he routinely attracts doctoral students who come from strong,\ntheoretically rounded backgrounds (and who are recruited precisely because they\ndo), but who also are interested in seeing their methodological work validated\nin practical settings. Always supported from sources typically aligned with\nfunding basic\/theoretical work (e.g., NSF, ONR, etc.), he is one of our most\nsuccessful faculty in attracting industrial sponsorship. Bridging the divide\nbetween theory and applications in a program of our stature and at the level\nexhibited by George Nemhauser is a rare feat.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EA giant in integer programming, Ellis Johnson (PhD\nin Operations Research, 1965, from Berkeley) has been directly associated with\nno fewer than three of the most famous and influential names in the entire\nhistory of methodology fundamental to Operations Research. His PhD advisor was George\nDantzig, the father of linear programming. While at IBM (and beyond) and\nworking with Ralph Gomory, he of cutting plane theory that bears his name,\nEllis produced elegant results pertaining to so-called corner polyhedra.\nFinally, with Jack Edmonds, the person who probably more than anyone is\nresponsible for creating the prominence associated with the discipline of\ncombinatorial optimization, Ellis authored fundamental results pertaining to\nthe storied Chinese postman problem that still stand as seminal in the field. \u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EIn 1988, he began a substantive collaboration with\nGeorge Nemhauser and others in ISyE, including several long-term faculty\nvisits. Then upon retirement from the mathematical sciences group at IBM\u0027s\nWatson Research Center, he joined the School as a permanent faculty member,\ntaking the Coca-Cola Chair in 1993. If there is a \u201cdouble-play combination\u201d\nmost responsible for sending a message that ISyE was ready to join the major\nleagues in OR, it would be the early presence of the Nemhauser-Johnson tandem. \u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EBut as renowned as his work in fundamental integer\nprogramming theory is, Ellis Johnson\u2019s name also resounds in an application\narea that he, almost single-handedly, invented: airline operations research.\nHis research, applying the tools from linear and integer programming and\nnetwork flows, has enjoyed enormous success in modeling and treating myriad,\nhard transportation and scheduling problems specific to the airlines; his\ninfluence in passing this expertise on to numerous students and younger\ncolleagues is well known. His stature is corroborated as the recipient of a\nnumber of research awards of the first rank; he was elected to the National\nAcademy of Engineering in 1988.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EThe traveling salesman problem (TSP) is arguably the\nmost celebrated example in combinatorial optimization. Required is that one\nfind a minimum-distance itinerary that visits all of the cities in a set\nexactly once before returning to the starting point. While particularly easy to\nstate, the problem is notoriously difficult. In fact, its position as one of\nthe hardest of hard problems has been formalized by being named one of the\nso-called Millennium Problems by the Clay Mathematics Institute. Still, much\nwork continues on and around this perplexing problem.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EIts applications are myriad in the real world and\nresearch on the problem itself, while not close to a formal resolution, spawns\nimportant results in related areas along the way; this is what forms good\nscience, and ISyE has the MVP in this game. \u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EBill Cook (PhD in Mathematics, 1983 from the\nUniversity of Waterloo), holder of the Chandler Family Chair in the School,\ncombines knowledge of and a personal research record pertaining to the TSP that\nmay have no rival anywhere in the world. He has written the definitive book on\nthe subject and was awarded the prestigious Lanchester Prize for the effort.\nImportantly, he, along with research colleagues elsewhere, have been able to\nverify optimal solutions for the largest known instances of a special but\nimportant class of TSPs. Bill is one of the world\u2019s ranking researchers in\ncomputational optimization. Because of his reputation, he is an in-demand\nspeaker in prestigious, public scientific forums and provides great visibility\nnot only for ISyE but for Georgia Tech and across boundaries that span OR,\nmathematics, and computer science. He was elected to the National Academy of\nEngineering in 2010.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EIf anyone in academia can stake a claim as the\nranking engineering statistician in the country if not the world, a safe bet is\nthat it is likely to be Jeff Wu (PhD in Statistics, 1976, from Berkeley).\nLuckily for us, he holds the Coca-Cola Chair in Engineering Statistics in the\nStewart School. Following distinguished careers at Wisconsin-Madison\n(Statistics), Waterloo (Statistics), and the University of Michigan\n(Statistics\/ Industrial and Operations Engineering), he has continued to\nconduct cutting- edge research in applied statistics that increasingly blends\nin and interacts with the activities historically prominent in OR, i.e.,\noptimization and stochastics. \u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EThat this is noteworthy follows because if we are to\nbe true to the characterization of OR from\u0026nbsp;\nINFORMS, statistics is a staple in the portfolio of methodologies that\nsupport the discipline; with Jeff Wu\u2019s role, the strength of that staple is\nmore than secure in ISyE. As a research advisor, he routinely attracts the best\ndoctoral students seeking work in statistics. Importantly, through his personal\npower of attraction coupled with a judicious hiring policy, he has added a\nmarvelous group of young statisticians who, when added to existing strength,\nhave made the engineering statistics group in ISyE an exceptionally strong one,\ncertainly the best in the country. \u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EWith particular expertise in experimental design, he\ntoo represents the School in prestigious, international forums. In August of\nthis year, he was honored by giving the famed R. A. Fisher Lecture, named for\nthe legendary statistician. In 2008, he was awarded a prestigious, honorary\ndoctorate in mathematics from the University of Waterloo; he was elected to the\nNational Academy of Engineering in 2004.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EThe British scientist and writer Jacob Bronowski said:\n\u201cA genius is a man who has two great ideas.\u201d Now, we know that Bronowski hung\nout with the great physicists and mathematicians in the first half of the last\ncentury, so the application of his claim to that population assumed a pretty\nlofty bar on what constituted a \u201cgreat\u201d idea. Still, we can surely understand\nwhat his rule implies in general, and in that regard, if there is a candidate\nin ISyE who would meet the test, it would be Arkadi Nemirovski (PhD in\nMathematics, 1974, from Moscow State University).\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EA world leader in continuous optimization for more\nthan thirty years, he has made three major breakthroughs in the field: the ellipsoid\nmethod for convex optimization, the extension of modern interior-point methods\nto convex optimization, and most recently, the development of a theory of\nrobust optimization. He has won three of the most prestigious scholarly prizes\nin operations research and applied mathematics: the Fulkerson Prize, the\nDantzig Prize, and the John von Neumann Theory Prize. In fact, he was the first\nindividual to have won all three of these awards. Interestingly, when he was\nawarded the Fulkerson Prize in 1982, he was not permitted to leave his native\nRussia to accept the honor.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EFortunately, in time, such barriers were dissolved.\nAfter some years on the faculty of the Technion in Israel, he was attracted to\nISyE in 2005 and presently holds the John Hunter Chair. In 2006, he was honored\nwith an invitation to give a plenary talk at the International Congress of\nMathematics. To underscore this achievement, he is the only sitting faculty\nmember from Georgia Tech ever to have been so honored. He was awarded an\nhonorary doctorate in mathematics from the University of Waterloo in 2009.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EIt takes a certain level of \u201cwizardry\u201d to invent and\nultimately present effective algorithms for hard problems that impress the user\nwith their near- primitive level of simplicity, e.g., \u201cHow can something this\nsimple, actually work so well?\u201d Meet Manhattan Associates Chair of Supply Chain\nManagement John Bartholdi (PhD in Operations Research, 1977, from the\nUniversity of Florida), and you\u2019ll likely get some insight. Working often with\nhis students as well as colleagues, John Bartholdi mines deeply for problems of\ngreat practical value\u2014notably, ones arising in common manufacturing and\nlogistics domains but that are, nonetheless, inherently difficult at their\ncore. Yet, he manages to produce approaches that yield good quality solutions\ncoupled with efficacy not by taking liberties that dismiss analytical or\nmathematical insights but to the contrary, by applying them. \u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EHis work, employing some old and fairly\nsophisticated notions from geometry pertaining to space-filling curves in order\nto produce approximate solutions to various classes of routing problems, is\nwell known and has been applied in a host of practical settings such as Meals\non Wheels. Similarly, his \u201cbucket- brigade\u201d notion, which induces a self-\norganizing phenomenon for assembly lines based on fundamental results in\nstochastics, is so simple that even ants can appreciate it.\u0026nbsp; The models have been and still are being used\nin such real world settings as Subway, Readers Digest, Radio Shack, McGraw-Hill,\nand many others.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EWith little debate, most observers (at least those\nwho have been around long enough) would agree that in the early 1980s, the most\nhighly regarded doctoral programs in OR resided at Stanford and Cornell;\nBerkeley and MIT were close, but maybe a notch below. Lumped together, the four\nformed something of a closed set in that graduates from those programs tended\nto join the faculties of those programs. Moreover, honesty compels one to admit\nthat we were simply not competitive in the recruitment of those graduates to\nISyE.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EHowever, in 1981, then-School Chair Mike Thomas made\na concerted effort to change that state of affairs and convinced Craig Tovey\n(PhD in Operations Research, 1981, from Stanford) to come to Georgia Tech. Like\nEllis Johnson, Craig conducted his work under the icon George Dantzig (who had\nmoved from Berkeley to Stanford). Importantly, he brought a talent and\nscholarly depth to the School that was influenced by the culture from his\nStanford experience and that took root in ISyE through his presence in teaching\nand research. Earlier in this piece, reference was made to various core OR\ncourses that PhD students endure early in their programs; more advanced\nversions follow, of course. These are fundamental and quite rigorous courses\nthat cover deterministic optimization as well as courses in applied probability\nand stochastics. If there is a list of ISyE faculty who could legitimately\nteach, at the level our best\u0026nbsp; doctoral\nstudents demand, more than two or three of these courses, that list would not\nbe very long indeed, and it would most certainly include Craig Tovey.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EThis breadth of rigorous, technical talent coupled\nwith genuine depth carries over to his research, the span of which may also be\nunrivaled in the School, ranging from mathematical models of voting systems to\nformalisms of graph algorithms, from circuit board assembly to polyhedral\ncombinatorics. He is the only ISyE faculty member to have an Erd\u00f6s number of 1.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EJim Dai (PhD in Mathematics, 1990, from Stanford) came\nto Georgia Tech in 1990 as a new assistant professor holding a joint\nappointment in the School of Mathematics and ISyE. He continued to hold the\njoint appointment all the way through his promotion to the rank of full\nprofessor after a remarkably short period of only eight years beyond\ngraduation. In 2001, he reconstituted his appointment to only ISyE, and in\n2007, he was named the Edenfield Professor in the School.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003ETrained in applied probability and stochastics, one\nof his major research specializations is in the area referred to as\nheavy-traffic queuing theory (think of a large call center or a dense roadway\nnetwork subjected to rush- hour traffic jams). Jim Dai has studied such\nproblems for twenty years.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EUsing advanced, multidimensional Brownian motion\napproximations to estimate performance characteristics for such systems, his\nresearch has led to important results that yield keen insights into attributes\nsuch as queue waiting times, expected lengths of queues, as well as various\nanomalous outcomes, e.g., is it possible for expected lengths of lines that\nform to drift off to infinity, yet for servers to have an abundance of idle or\nfree time? (The answer is yes.) He tackles deep, subtle real-life problems with\nsophisticated mathematical machinery and enjoys unquestioned recognition as one\nof the top world leaders in the field of applied queuing theory. \u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EDistinction\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EThis is a short section; don\u2019t expect any chants of\n\u201cWe\u2019re number one.\u201d Indeed, there are no formal rankings of OR programs akin to\nones read about every spring in U.S. News \u0026amp; World Report.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EOn the other hand, you can always just ask around\nand the bet is that a very, very short list will emerge that more or less\ndefines the elite programs in the discipline; the claim is that the OR done in\nISyE will be firmly rooted on that list. The eight profiles listed in the prior\nsection could easily have been altered with several substitutes without missing\na beat or diminishing the point that is being made. We could have spotlighted\nyounger faculty who are poised or are already starting to earn world-class\nrecognition, colleagues such as Shabbir Ahmed and Santanu Dey in optimization,\nTon Dieker in stochastics, and Ming Yuan in statistics. They, and several\nothers like them, represent our future; they would not come to a program like\nours were it not for the attractiveness of working alongside world-class\nscholars already here. Name a major prize or award in or related to OR and\napplied statistics and somebody on this faculty has probably won it; many will\nhave won several.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EThis program is simply exceptional and the\nassemblage of faculty expertise and reputation is arguably second to none\nanywhere.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ESummary\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003EWithin the set of similarly constituted or named\nacademic programs,11\u0026nbsp; ISyE is far and\naway the largest. But far more relevant, it\u2019s also an exceptionally strong\nprogram. Derived directly from the quality of its faculty, this level of\nstrength spans a broad expanse of areas, many of which are unambiguously and\nfundamentally aligned with the field of Operations research. We began this\narticle on a light-hearted but hopefully somewhat instructive note; we finish\nwith a similar exercise: suppose every academic unit at Tech (schools and\ndepartments) was asked to ascertain where its faculty members would relocate at\nthe Institute if their unit were eliminated.\u0026nbsp;\nNow, there are some rules: a valid case has to be made that a faculty\nmember actually fits in somewhere else, i.e., where they can teach real\ncourses, sit on committees, and such. However, let us also require that they\nhave to land at a place where their tenure is legitimate, where they could have\nbeen hired in the first place, and if not tenured, can earn it within the new\nunit\u2019s guidelines and standards; that their presence at the new place actually\nmakes the latter better not just that it adds to the workforce. This is a\npretty tough litmus test. Against this backdrop, suppose we define the \u201cwidth\u201d\nof a unit to be the number of distinct colleges at Tech where at least one\nmember of the evaporating academic unit\u2019s faculty can be taken in legitimately\nas defined by the test just described. A program with a high- width number\nimplies great breadth and strength that is deep, not cosmetic; those with a\nlower width, less of both.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003ESo what\u2019s the width of ISyE? At Georgia Tech, there\nare six distinct Colleges: Engineering (CoE), Sciences (CoS), Computing (CoC),\nManagement (CoM), Architecture (ARCH), and the Ivan Allen College of Liberal\nArts (IAC). If we are to compute the width for ISyE, we pull out the current\nroster and start down the list: where could this faculty relocate (if\nanywhere)? For sure some would stay in CoE; likely homes would probably be\nmechanical engineering (for manufacturing) or civil engineering (for logistics\nor transportation) and maybe others. Some would land in CoM (for operations\nmanagement, strategic planning, etc.). We even have a couple who could find a\nhome in IAC (for public policy). This calculation gets our width to three, not\nbad. Now here\u2019s what\u2019s impressive. We have, within our exceptionally strong OR\ngroup, faculty members who would be welcomed in the School of Mathematics (CoS)\nand others, some of whom are interchangeable with the mathematics candidates,\nin CoC. You\u2019ve seen the profiles of some of these above.\u003C\/p\u003E\n\n\u003Cp\u003ESo, ISyE has a pretty solid argument that its width\nis at least five (who knows, there may be somebody who would make a case for\nArchitecture, but let us not push it). Given that the width of any unit at Tech\nis bounded from above by six, this is no small thing, but neither do we intend\nfor this illustration to be gratuitous. If you can argue that another school or\ndepartment at Tech rivals our width, that they can legitimately argue that its\nfaculty could be placed in other college\u2019s units without the latter holding\ntheir noses or having the dean twist their arm, then so be it. In fact, you\nmight be hard-pressed to name another IE or OR academic program in the country\nthat betters the Stewart School width at their respective institution. Here, we\nare only paying attention to the Stewart School, your School, and how it can\ncontinue to thrive, knowing that much of its reputation rises and falls with\nregard to its presence in the field of OR\u2014no matter whose definition is\napplied.\u003C\/p\u003E","summary":null,"format":"limited_html"}],"field_subtitle":"","field_summary":[{"value":"\u003Cp\u003ER. Gary Parker discusses operations research in ISyE.\u003C\/p\u003E","format":"limited_html"}],"field_summary_sentence":"","uid":"27511","created_gmt":"2011-12-16 17:23:50","changed_gmt":"2016-10-08 03:10:53","author":"Ashley Daniel","boilerplate_text":"","field_publication":"","field_article_url":"","dateline":{"date":"2012-01-01T00:00:00-05:00","iso_date":"2012-01-01T00:00:00-05:00","tz":"America\/New_York"},"extras":[],"groups":[{"id":"1242","name":"School of Industrial and Systems Engineering (ISYE)"}],"categories":[{"id":"132","name":"Institute Leadership"}],"keywords":[{"id":"11269","name":"Gary Parker"},{"id":"1202","name":"H. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering"},{"id":"564","name":"operations research"}],"core_research_areas":[],"news_room_topics":[],"event_categories":[],"invited_audience":[],"affiliations":[],"classification":[],"areas_of_expertise":[],"news_and_recent_appearances":[],"phone":[],"contact":[{"value":"\u003Cp\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022mailto:barbara.christopher@isye.gatech.edu\u0022\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EBarbara Christopher\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003EIndustrial and Systems Engineering\u003Cbr \/\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003E404.385.3102\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003C\/p\u003E","format":"limited_html"}],"email":[],"slides":[],"orientation":[],"userdata":""}}}