On the history and future of OR

I read Jackson’s paper (Jackson, 2006) with interest but was disappointed that ‘a reinvention of the future of OR/MS’ turned out to be a recycling of old myths and prejudices and a platform for once again promoting his own approach, his particular variant of critical systems theory (CST), an approach which has been around for 20 years or so. In brief, Jackson’s paper sets out to describe how OR/MS lost its way, how with PSMs (problem structuring methods) in the vanguard OR/MS is in a much better position to realize its original ambitions, and how a pluralist approach overseen by CST can take this progress forward. The paper favours a theoretical evaluation leaving practical investigations to be conducted by others. The theoretical analysis is pursued in three phases: the first phase traces the evolution of OR/MS and applied systems thinking over the last 50 years; the second and third phases examine different strands of OR/MS and applied systems thinking. In outlining the history of OR/MS in his first phase, Jackson is keen to establish the failure of OR/MS to achieve the original ambitions of the pioneers. He turns for evidence to the literature, which is dominated by academics whose purpose in life is to be critical with the laudable aim of, in some way that they individually think desirable, improving the situation. However, the fact that an academic writes something down does not make it true, and there is a danger that constant repetition of the views of a few vociferous academics produces a distorted picture. Jackson also adds in a few distortions of his own and I believe the resulting narrative is at best unbalanced. He then uses his flawed historical narrative to point OR/MS in an overly narrow direction.