Sunday, 22 May 2011

Analytics and Operations Research; a practitioner’s view

The topic whether the O.R. society should embrace (business) analytics is one that will probably go on for a while. It’s THE theme that keeps O.R societies occupied at this moment; all are busy with the question whether they should hook on to analytics since it could boost awareness and interest for O.R. Although the term “Business Analytics” is quite old, it dates back to Frederick Taylor’s time management practice in the late 19th century, it is presented as the latest trend in management and every CEO should start using it. Amazon lists over 1,500 books on the subject, nearly every one of these books has the theme “Start using Analytics in decision making, otherwise you will be doomed to the lower end of the performance ladder and go bust”. In promoting the use of analytics different terms are used which makes it hard to understand what people are really talking about. Terms like business intelligence, business analytics, descriptive analytics, predictive analytics, prescriptive analytics, and so on. From a practitioner’s point of view the discussion on the subject is rather academic, my clients don’t really care whether I use the term Analytics or O.R. in improving their operations or decision making. They just want me to help them solve their problem.

If have been working in O.R. consulting for over 20 years now and have learned something that Plato already knew over 2300 year ago, a good decision is based on knowledge not on numbers. It isn’t the analyses of data (=Analytics?) or building and solving a math models (=O.R.?) that leads to better decisions, it’s the knowledge gained in the process. It starts with understanding the problem and framing it right. This can best be achieved by gathering and analysing relevant data, measuring performance and identifying the applicable business rules. Analytics if you will. This analysis will increase the knowledge about the problem at hand and the environment in which it needs to be solved. Based on the data analysis and the identified business rules, directions for improvement (scenarios) can be identified. By analyzing the scenarios, the impact (consequences) of each of these can be identified, again increasing the knowledge about the problem, but also on how to solve it. The “do’s and dont’s” have come forward at this point. Next step is to use the knowledge about the challenge, the data and the business rules to build and use/solve a math model to find the best possible and achievable solution to the challenge (note: optimality in practice is something different compared to the textbook concept of optimality). With the knowledge gained during each of the above steps, implementing the solution is straight forward, apart from the “normal” potential change management issues. Result of it all is a solution to a practical challenge, and hopefully a satisfied customer.


My clients have never asked me what techniques I use to help solve the challenge they face and I also never tell them. In the past 20 years (See: Does O.R. Sell?) I have never come across a client that hired me because I could analyse data, build a forecast model, build/solve a linear programme or was able to build a simulation model. There is a simple reason for that, they don’t know the difference and they don't need to. Introducing yourself with that you are really good at building a math model, have been in Monte Carlo simulation or Markov chains for years, doesn’t help build your credibility. Talking about O.R. or Analytics doesn’t either. What counts is that you understand or show that you’re able to understand the business of your client, his organisation and the challenge he faces. So discussing whether Analytics and O.R. are the same, part of each other or complementary doesn’t really matter from my point of view. I’ll use the technique that is required to solve my clients challenge, no matter if it’s descriptive, predictive or prescriptive. Whoever thought of the term “Prescriptive Analytics” by the way? It makes O.R. to something that can only be applied when a specialist tells you how and when to use it. “Solve this LP model 3 times a day and your problem is solved?”

I once used just a blank sheet of paper to solve a business challenge, a real back of the napkin situation. One drawing was enough to identify and solve the business issue. The drawing was a simple graph. The shortest path in the graph was the solution to the client’s challenge. Calculations where not required, even my client could see the solution immediately. This shows that O.R. can be down to earth and within reach of everybody. That is also how we should go about in the Analytics vs Operations Research discussion, down to earth and for everybody including clients. I would suggest a small twist and add some special focus on the practical side of it all.

3 comments:

Scott Nestler said...

You say in the header to your blog that you would like to share ideas with fellow practitioners and invite them to react. Well, here goes... I don't disagree with the main idea behind your 22 MAY 2011 post about OR and Analytics. As someone who is just (in one manner of thinking) getting started in the consulting side of the OR / Analytics field, I will think about ideas you bring up, but am not sure that I completely agree. You're right-- it is about turning data and information into knowledge, not about the specific tools (data analysis, optimization, simulation, etc.) themselves. When you say that you never discuss those sorts of things with your clients because they don't know or care about them, I have to wonder. While I can see this as being appropriate for less technically sophisticated clients, there are those who do know a little bit (or occasionally a lot) about what we as OR and Analytics practitioners do. I would suggest that providing them with some evidence that you know what you are doing in these different areas can be useful and help build their confidence in hiring you. Finally, I have to say that I was rather surprised to see the graphic I created a couple of weeks ago -- the one showing the three facets / categories / phases of analytics (decriptive, predictive, and prescriptive)-- on your blog, with no link or credit given.

John Poppelaars said...

Hi Scot, thanks for your comments. It is my experience that discussing the techniques used to solve a specific business issue doesn´t help solving the challenge or gain confidence in the suggested solution. What does in my experience, is to involve the client in each step of the analysis, sharing the results and therefore building up knowledge. That way the client will feel confident with the final solution. By the way, I've removed your graphic and replaced with one of my own.

Anonymous said...

(to Scott) Let's face it; go to any classic job fair full of HR managers and/or CEO. Then, assume you have to present yourself within 30 seconds. My bet that before the third interview you have banished words like "column generation", "discrete events simulation" (and "operations research"?) from your vocabulary.
Now talk about your achievements like when you save ressources to build that annual planning, plus how it would apply to their business; then you will see that specific light in their eyes...

As you underline, unless you talk to OR people (peers) what interest normal folk (including HR manager, CEO, clients, ...) is not OR techniques. And I think that they are perfectly right!

According to my own humble experience, the most difficult chalenge in OR is to build something that corresponds plainly to the (real) problem (as the final client needs it), even with quite simple techniques. On the other hand, the worst pitfall is to develop an overkill model/technique that misses some essential constraints/needs and makes the tool useless.

So, I share the idee that "building up knowledge" is the key.