hi Zohar - you have an interesting perspective. I like the way this thinking is going. I am interdisciplinary (I studied policy/social science in addition to math/stats/modeling), so your definition resonates with me. I'm not sure though that it would resonate with all INFORMS members - those focused on methods and theory may not see themselves as solving problems. Perhaps we'd have more impact if they did, but we'd need to do some change management across the field to make that happen.
I like the focus on solving problems with math, data, algorithms - I might add statistics and I would use "modeling" rather than algorithms. I think that's what you mean, but let me know if that is not the case. Other fields solve problems and teach critical thinking, but once it moves into calculations, I would say it falls into the OR and Analytics domain that INFORMS encompasses.
Finally, as a decision analyst, I would take it further (again, maybe leaving some INFORMS members behind which is not a good approach) and I would say we solve problems to inform decisons, tieing the problem solving to specific needs in the public and private sectors.
Thanks for starting the conversation
------------------------------
Kara Morgan
Principal
Quant Policy Strategies, LLC
Dublin OH
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 02-13-2023 00:45
From: Zohar Strinka
Subject: Proposing a definition of who belongs in INFORMS
I want to get feedback from the community on an idea I have been playing with to articulate what I see as the right "tent" for INFORMS. I suggest that we are problem designers and solvers.
I wrote about this idea
in my blog last year. In discussions since then it has become clear that INFORMS / OR people are not the only ones who learn "problem design" as a skill, but I haven't found another professional society that has this focus. I also find it to be an incredibly valuable skill. The notion of "solving the right problem" (and avoiding the "type three error" of solving the wrong one) was the original motivation for my blog when I started it three years into my PhD and has continued to be a theme of my professional life.
So I suggest that the people who belong in INFORMS are people who design and/or solve problems using math, data, and algorithms. There are natural segments to this that seem to cover most of our membership:
- People who solve problems - using math, data, algorithms
- People who work on the design of problems - business folks, technical people who understand the tradeoffs of different solution approaches, how to "solve the right problem," the complexity of dealing with people when you try to solve problems with the power of math, etc.
- People who care about both because the better you understand how to actually do the solving, the better you can pick the right solution approach. And the better you understand the design, the better you can come up for air when the solution isn't working.
I'm sure there are things I've overlooked in this definition, so I turn to you all to poke / fill holes in the framework. Maybe people who design tools to solve problems are their own bucket?
------------------------------
Zohar Strinka
Analytics Strategies LLC
Denver, CO
------------------------------