See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/320839612

Operations Management Research: a 10-Year Survey

Conference Paper · May 2012

CITATIONS READS
2 6,212

1 author:

Alireza Sheikh-Zadeh
Texas Tech University, Rawls College of Business
15 PUBLICATIONS 55 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Alireza Sheikh-Zadeh on 24 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management
Istanbul, Turkey, July 3 – 6, 2012

Operations Management Research: A 10-year Survey

Alireza Sheikhzadeh
Department of Industrial Engineering
Hatef Institute of Higher Education
Zahedan, Iran

Hamed Heidari
Department of Industrial Engineering
Amirkabir University of Technology
Tehran, Iran

Abstract
Following the evolution and growth of the field of production and operations management POM, a number
of studies have recently appeared which provide insights on the ranking of the research outlets of the field.
This paper presents a brief history of the development of operations management (OM).This provides the
backdrop for a content analysis of journal articles published in the Journal of Operations Management and
the International Journal of Operations & Production Management between January 2001 and December
2009. MBA student survey data are then used to explore any gaps that may exist between the focus of
academic research and the perceived importance of given OM subject areas to practitioners. The practical
and conceptual insights highlighted are then used as the basis for a discussion of extant research priorities.
By considering the three following intervals, (i.e. 2001-2003; 2004-2006, 2007-2009), possible trends in
OM are discussed. Supply chain, performance measurement, quality, and process technology are the ones
discussed.

Keywords
Operations management Research, Practitioners Survey, Operations strategy

1. Introduction
The theoretical underpinnings of the OM field are somewhat different from other academic management
subjects like strategy, marketing or finance. Whereas these fields of study are more-or-less directly
connected to base theoretical disciplines such as economics, sociology, psychology and mathematics, OM’s
underpinnings are more fragmented.
(1) Are the “two worlds” of OM research and practice far apart?
(2) Does their relative proximity actually matter?
(3) What are the trends followed in main generic topics of OM and OS; based on papers published in
two relevant journals?
Recently there have been a number of reviews of empirical research, focusing on specific topics such as
operations strategy (e.g. Boyer et al., 2005), interdisciplinary and inter-organizational research (e.g.,
Buhman et al., 2005), sustainability (e.g., Kleindorfer et al., 2005), new product development (e.g.,
Krishnan and Loch, 2005), quality management (e.g., Schroeder et al., 2005), and supply chain
management (e.g., Kouvelis et al., 2006). There have also been other studies that reviewed the state of
survey research methods and data collection techniques (Barratt et al., 2011). A number of articles have
attempted to provide guidance as to how to undertake such research from a variety of disciplines—
management (Bitektine, 2008; Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007), information systems, marketing, and
operations management (Barratt et al., 2011). The paper begins by presenting a brief history of the
development of OM. This provides the backdrop for a content analysis of journal articles published in the
Journal of Operations Management and the International Journal of Operations & Production Management
between January 2001 and December 2009, which have been chosen according to some available research
on OM journals. This data reveals the trend of operations management research MBA student survey data

2472
(January 2000 to June 2005) is then used to explore any gaps that may exist between the focus of academic
research and the perceived importance of given OM subject areas to practitioners. The practical and
conceptual insights highlighted are then used as the basis for a discussion of extant research priorities.

2. A Brief History of OM 1
The early history of management thought is, in large part, the history of published works concerned with
the act of production (e.g. Smith, 1776; Babbage, 1963; Taylor, 1911; Ford and Crowther, 1922, 1926).
This production-centred content reflects the symbiotic relationship between the emergence of capitalism
and the development of the modern factory system, private profit provided the impetus to expand
production as efficiently as possible and profit was in turn invested as capital for further expansion.
Moreover, large-scale manufacturing, built upon the principle of division of labour and the application of
dedicated machinery to specific tasks, necessitated the creation of “managers”. It is no coincidence that the
earliest management ideas emerged in the UK but that their further development and widespread
acceptance happened in North America. The UK’s industrial revolution began in the textile industry during
the eighteenth century (Landes, 1999), stimulated by coincidental geo-political (a rapidly growing empire,
centred around India) and technological events (in particular James Watt’s refinement of the steam engine
and other celebrated manufacturing inventions such as James Hargreaves’ “spinning jenny”). By the mid-
nineteenth century however, an alternative system of manufacturing was emerging in America (Rosenberg,
1969; Wilson, 1998). For example, the first widespread introduction of interchangeable parts (a system first
seen in the arsenal of Venice in the fifteenth century), allowed manufacturers to fundamentally break with
craft production and fully exploit the division of labour. Likewise, unhindered by long-established
organisational structures such as craft guilds and supported by the growth of a nation-wide railroad, the
American system moved towards more vertically-integrated and hence larger scale, modes of production.

2.1. Modern OM research

Despite its rich heritage, OM spent several years as something of a Cinderella subject; to such an extent
that many people questioned the need for its continued inclusion in the business curriculum (Andrews and
Johnson, 1982). Such a direct challenge to its legitimacy may have revivified the disciplines pre-occupation
with current practitioner concerns (Voss, 1995) and led to much greater emphasis being placed on
empirical work (Ebert, 1990; McCutcheon and Meredith, 1993). Whatever the trigger (e.g. Miller and
Graham, 1981), by the early 1980s OM-related research had begun to reflect mainstream management
concerns once again. As an illustration, by the end of the 1980s managers at US utility Florida Power and
Light (the first non-Japanese winner of the prestigious Deming quality prize) were able to claim that 90 per
cent of Fortune 100 companies had attended their monthly quality seminars. If it is argued that quality
issues (for example, quality circles, total quality management (TQM), awards and standards like ISO 9000
and the Deming Prize, etc.) were in the vanguard of the re-emergence of OM as a core concern for many
managers and academics (Cole, 1998), more ideas such as lean production, business process reengineering
(BPR), supply chain management and e-business have all been closely associated with OM.

2.2. Modern OM practice

If the 1980s saw the beginning of an OM renaissance, then by the mid-1990s the discipline was once again
firmly located in both the academic and practitioner mainstreams. For example, if where firms spend their
money offers any indication of what they deem to be important for business success, then a 1997 survey of
global consultancy services (The Economist, 1997) provides ample evidence of OMs increased importance.
Figure 1 illustrates the results of a world-wide survey of client spending on consultancy services sub-
divided into areas of management activity and the largest single share of the market (31 per cent) is devoted
to “operations and process management” related work. Acknowledging that any results may be in part
explained by boundary categorization anomalies (i.e. if a respondent was unsure as to the category in which
to place a consultancy project, “operations and process management” could be interpreted as relevant to
most projects) and that the survey does not attempt to analyze the underlying reasons for this large market
share, it is still valid and interesting to propose some potential explanations for this apparently
overwhelming evidence of the subject’s relevance. For instance:

1
Based on “The two worlds of operations management research and practice” by N. slack et al.

2473
 Figure 1: a 1997 survey of global consultancy spending

• No other functional area has such a direct impact on both revenue and cost. The popularization of
ideas such as TQM and lean production established in both practitioner and research arenas the idea
that operations practice must pursue the twin objectives (even if to different extents) of improving
aspects of service such as quality, variety, responsiveness etc., while at the same time reducing costs.
Given the business maxim that “profit is a very small number made up of the difference between two
very big numbers”, any subject that claims to increase revenue and reduce costs must demand the
attention of companies that can appreciate its potentially disproportionate effect on profitability.
• All types of services (including “internal” services such as HR) have become more concerned about
their levels of productivity, quality, responsiveness, etc. (Levitt, 1972). As a result, the audiences for
process management and reengineering courses, books and consultancy, are no longer limited to
functional operations managers. Increasingly, all sorts of administrative personnel and managers see
themselves as managing processes and therefore have something to learn from operations
management ideas (Womack and Jones, 1994, 1996).

• Interest in OM has paralleled the growth of interest in resource-based (Wernerfelt, 1984; Barney,
1991; Mahoney and Pandian, 1992) or capability-based (Teece and Pisano, 1994, Teece et al.,
1997) models of competitive strategy. The overlaps between operations management/strategy and
resource-based driven views of general strategy are often explicit. Prahalad and Hamel (1990), for
example, defined their “core competencies” as “collective learning . . . especially how to co-
ordinate diverse production skills and integrate multiple streams of technologies”.

Even without an exact measure of the current extent of practitioner interest in OM, this discussion raises a
number of important questions for the OM research discipline. In particular, if practitioners are taking the
subject seriously, to what extent is academic research truly engaged with the world of practice?

3. Why to choose these journals?

Following the evolution and growth of the field of production and operations management POM, a number
of studies have recently appeared which provide insights on the ranking of the research outlets of the field.
A number of POM journal evaluation and ranking studies has recently been conducted (Barman et al.,
1991; Vokurka, 1996; Goh et al., 1997). Such rankings can be of help to a number of stakeholders.
Researchers, for example, can use such evaluations as a reference when choosing among potential journals
for their research work, since promotion and tenure decisions are typically influenced by the relevance and
quality of the journals they publish in. Faculty and librarians can use them to identify important journals.

2474
Practitioners can use them to keep up with current POM topics, research, and new ideas. Journal editors
seeking market feedback on their article selection process can also benefit from such evaluations. Barman
et al. 1991 report a survey questionnaire study which classified 20 selected journals, based on their
perceived relevance and quality. The research framework of the study included all the Decision Science
Institute members with POM listed as their primary interest area. The top journals concerning their
relevance to POM research were the Journal of Operations Management, the International Journal of
Production Research, and the International Journal of Operations and Production Management. Another
survey resulted in a similar ranking (Andreas C. Soteriou et.al 1997). The Journal of Operations
Management (JOM), the International Journal of Operations and Production Management (IJOPM) ,
Production and Operations Management (POM) , and the International Journal of Production Research(
IJPR) were placed at the top of the list. The perceived relevance ratings from the European POM
researchers are shown in Table1.

Table 1: Comparison of Barman and Soteriou

2475
Table 1 also shows the original Barman ranking of the journals, thus providing the means for a direct
comparison with the rankings obtained in this study. This finding is consistent with the results of Barman in
the sense that all journals that appear at the top of the list can be considered primarily as POM journals by
specifically emphasizing on POM related publications. In both surveys, JOM and IJOPM are among the
three top journals. That could strongly support the candidateship of these two journals.

4. Methodology
Research/practice gap question necessitates an investigation of the content priorities of OM-related
managerial and research activity. In order to achieve this, some form of topic categorization is necessary
and, once again, this introduces the challenge of establishing essentially artificial boundaries. Using the
same journal data set as before, current research content priorities were established by classifying 1039
papers(see table 2 and Figure 2) against a series of 16 generic topic headings in three periods from 2001-
2009 (see Table 3).

Table 2: No. of papers studied for each year (total of 1039 papers)
Journals
Year IJOPM JOM
1997 81 24
1998 76 39
1999 75 32
2000 68 29
2001 72 35
2002 69 40
2003 61 33
2004 63 44
2005 71 37
2006 62 28
total 698 341

Figure 2: Trend of Paper studied for each year

The percentage of these papers as a component of the total paper set is then used as a surrogate measure of
relative research priority.

2476
In order to obtain an approximate measure of the practitioner priorities, data from an annual survey of
MBAs at Warwick University were examined. This survey of full-time and executive MBAs is conducted
by the OM group at Warwick Business School and the data employed in this paper cover the period of 6
years (i.e. 2000-2005). It is drawn from a sample of 312 students (89 per cent of whom are European;
average age is 32.5 years; 12 per cent manufacturing background; 88 per cent general service background).
Assessments of the importance of each of the 16 content topics were framed in terms of individual
perceptions (based on previous industrial experience) of this “subjects” impact on overall business
performance, a five-point scale was used. Table I present the two sets of findings together, in rank order to
facilitate identification of any obvious similarities and disconnects.

Table 3: Comparison of practitioners (2000-2005) and research content priorities (2000-2009)

Ranked research content extract Combined mean
Mean practice Ranked practice content from JOM and IJOPM 2000- percentage of
contribution score MBA survey 2000-2005 2009 papers
4.25 Quality and Improvement Operations strategy (D) 18.90
4.15 Supply chain (A) Supply chain (A) 17.95
4.1 JIT/lean (B) Performance measurement 12.32
4.05 MRP/ERP (C) Quality & Improvement 12.17
3.9 Planning and control Process design 7.37
3.35 Process design Product/service design 6.24
3.3 Operations strategy (D) JIT/lean (B) 5.26
3.3 Capacity Process technology 5.22
3.2 Performance Planning & control 4.83
3.05 Inventory Inventory 3.05
3 Product/service design MRP/ERP (C) 1.89
2.95 Process technology Capacity 1.29
2.95 Job design Failure/risk 1.19
2.15 Failure/risk Maintenance 1.08
2.1 Maintenance Layout 0.66
1.7 Layout Job design 0.60

5. Results
Justifications can include: there is a gap in existing theory that does not adequately explain the
phenomenon under investigation (Benbasat et al., 1987; Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007; Meredith,1998;
Rothlisberger, 1977); the research is exploratory and therefore calls for case research to build theories
(Meredith, 1998; Yin, 1989); the research is explanatory (i.e., asking “how” and “why” types of questions)
and the context and experiences of actors are critical (Benbasat et al., 1987; Bonoma, 1985), especially the
experiences of managers so as to increase the practical relevance of the findings (Fisher, 2007).

5.1. Research/practice gap: content priorities

As discussed in the previous section, there are clear limits to the validity and reliability of any findings
from this analysis – especially with respect to the interpretative nature of the paper content classification
process and the use of a narrowly-based sample (i.e. age, education profile, European bias, etc.) of
practitioner perceptions. Yet even accepting once again that they are, at best, indicative findings, some
interesting observations can be made (letters refer to annotation on table):
• A. There are several topics that appear to have generated an equivalent level of practice and
research interest. For instance, supply chain issues have recently become extremely visible in both
the popular management press and OM conference proceedings. Similarly, a number of specialist
supply chain journals have emerged. It is interesting to note however that in the overall data set
(i.e.1990-2003) supply chain issues are the smallest category; confirming that the number of
supply chain related papers increased substantially over the period covered by the survey.
• B. There are also topics that practitioners appear to ascribe a greater significance than academics.
For instance, JIT/lean production is a long-established OM research priority that in recent years
has probably become less prominent as a subject as the core principles have matured. In terms of
practice however, there is still a great deal of scope for applying these, now clearly articulated and

2477
 tested, principles – especially beyond their traditional manufacturing roots (e.g.Womack and
Jones, 1994, 1996).
• C. Conversely, other subjects where practice appears to lead research (like MRP/ERP) may reflect
the apparent difficulties of providing a rapid academic response to an organizational phenomenon
that appears very quickly (e.g. the massive growth of ERP spending in the immediate pre-2000
period). A more heritable interpretation may be that it also reflects recognition on the part of
researchers that research issues associated with ERP systems are directly related to earlier well-
established MRP findings.
• D. There are also some topics where practitioner interest appears to strongly lag academic
priorities. For instance, operations strategy is the most popular research priority and yet it ranks
six places above its practice score. The explanations for this may lie in the limitations of the
research method: for example, it is much more challenging to articulate (on a single five-point
scale) the “contribution” of an amorphous construct like an operations strategy than a widely
shared notion like quality. At the same time, we should also entertain the possibility that these
ideas remain intellectually interesting rather than practically relevant.

- Does this relative proximity actually matter?

Figure 3 is an abstraction used to represent the interaction between operations capability and market
requirements, the 45◌ْ line indicating a state of exact alignment or “fit” (Slack and Lewis, 2001; Lewis,
2003). For the purposes of this paper, it is important to stress that the figure is not intended to act as a
prescriptive model indicating that research competences and practitioner requirements are easily measured
and their trajectories predictable. Rather this simple scalar representation is employed to help visualize the
practical and conceptual challenges of achieving fit over time.

Figure 3: Indicative degree of fit between capability and requirements

The concept of “fit” is to achieve an approximate balance between “market requirements” and “operations
capability”. To a large extent this model can be interpreted as analogous to the issue of reconciling OM
research and practice. Although no-one is arguing that OM practice would collapse without OM research,
the exchange between research and practice is undoubtedly two-way.

5.2. Trends followed in main generic topics of OM and OS

Figure 4 illustrates how final numbers obtained through exact enumeration of available papers during three
periods (i.e. 2001-2003; 2004-2006; 2007-2009); show some trends along the years:

- supply chain management

- quality

2478
 - performance measurement
- operations strategy
- process technology
are the ones with significant variations.

30.00

25.00

20.00
1
15.00 2
3
10.00

5.00

0.00
t/s tec m t

In sig l
Pr oc e ve in

de n
vic o t

ap e
uc s ure en

ni JI sign

es co n

M ilur tory
c m y y

J o de y

en sk
de o

La ity
P/ t
P
Fa en n
er hn en

R ou
an & I pl t eg

e log

C anc
b sig

oc & a
s ntr
Pr e m pro cha

ER
nt / r i

ac
od es as m

Pr ng T/le

M y
ai e
rm ity Sup tra

v
s
ns
tio

an
ra
pe

Pl
rfo al
O

Pe Qu

Figure 4: comparison of three periods of publication

5.2.1 Supply chain and operations management

Purchasing has a growing influence on a company's ability to compete in today's global marketplace. Due
to decreased vertical integration, purchasing volumes are growing constantly. The focus of purchasing
shifts from buying toward the management of complex procurement processes. Outsourcing involves the
transfer of the management and/or day-to-day execution of an entire business function to an external
service provider (Overby, S; 2007). This is not just outsourcing the procurement of materials and
components, but also outsourcing of services that traditionally have been provided in-house. The logic of
this trend is that the company will increasingly focus on those activities in the value chain where it has a
distinctive advantage and everything else it will outsource. Organizations increasingly find that they must
rely on effective supply chains, or networks, to successfully compete in the global market and networked
economy. In Peter Drucker's (1998) management’s new paradigms, this concept of business relationships
extends beyond traditional enterprise boundaries and seeks to organize entire business processes throughout
a value chain of multiple companies. During the past decades, globalization, outsourcing and information
technology have enabled many organizations such as Dell and Hewlett Packard, to successfully operate
solid collaborative supply networks in which each specialized business partner focuses on only a few key
strategic activities (Scott, 1993). As seen in figure 5 through a long-term operations management steps to
purchasing excellence include supplier management.

2479
 Figure 5: Three stages towards purchasing excellence

5.2.2 Quality
We have long been working on quality, and the new era seems to be the time for quality management more
than quality control. Although practitioners are eager about this topic, in research area quality has recently
been used as an index for other topics, not an individual subject of discussion.

5.2.3 Performance measurement

Performance measurement also shows a significant growth. An approach to performance measurement is a
necessary ingredient for ensured success, that is why it seems to be an advancing topic in OM.
Nevertheless, it alone is not sufficient. You will also need to know what to do with performance
measurement data once it has been collected.

5.2.4 Process technology

Process design and technology also continues to be a commonly researched topic within OM. The issues
addressed in this topic area are getting more strategic and include issues such as choice of technology and
information technology. In our statistics the summation of process technology and process design show a
decreasing trend. However, the incremental decrease is not enough to be judged as an obvious trend in this
field. So, one could suggest more studies in this area to get to a stronger conclusion.

6. Conclusion
The practical and conceptual insights are used as the basis for a discussion of extant research priorities. By
considering the three following intervals, (i.e. 2001-2003; 2004-2006; 2007-2009), possible trends in OM
are discussed. Supply chain, performance measurement, quality, and process technology are the ones
discussed. Statistical results indicate that percentage of supply chain performance measurements are
increasing and for quality, that is just the opposite. Process technology and design were the exceptions
.these two fields are good candidates for future work.

References
Andrews, C.G. and Johnson, T., The critical importance of production and operations management,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 7, pp. 143-7, 1982.
Barratt M., Choi T.Y., Li M., Qualitative case studies in operations management: Trends, research
outcomes, and future research implications, Journal of Operations Management, 29 (4), pp. 329-342,
2011.

2480
 Barman, S., Tersine, R., Buckley, M.R., An empirical assessment of the perceived relevance and quality of
POM related journals by academicians. Journal of Operations Management 10 _2., 194–210, 1991.
Bitektine, A., Prospective case study design qualitative method for deductive theory testing. Organizational
Research Methods 11 (1), 160–180, 2008.
Boyer, K.K., Swink, M., Rosenzweig, E.D., Operations strategy research in the POMS Journal. Production
and Operations Management 14 (4), 442–449, 2005.
Buhman, C., Kekre, S., Singhal, J., Interdisciplinary and inter-organizational research: establishing the
science of enterprise networks. Production and Operations Management 14 (4), 493–513, 2005.
Cole, R.E., Learning from the quality movement: what did and didn’t happen and why, California
Management Review, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 43-73, 1998.
Ebert, R.J., Announcement on empirical/field-based methods in JOM, Journal of Operations Management,
Vol. 90 No. 3, pp. 447-9, 1990.
Eisenhardt, K.M., Graebner, M.E., Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Academy of
Management Journal 50 (1), 25–32, 2007.
(The) Economist, 22 March, 1997.
Goh, C., Holsapple, C., Johnson, L., Tanner, J., Evaluating and classifying POM journals. Journal of
Operations Management 15, 123–138, 1997.
Kleindorfer, P.R., Singhal, K., Van Wassenhove, L.N., Sustainable operations management. Production and
Operations Management 14 (4), 482–492, 2005.
Kouvelis, P., Chambers, L.N., Wang, H., Supply chain management research and production and
operations management: review, trends, and opportunities. Production and Operations Management 15
(3), 449–469, 2006.
Krishnan, V., Loch, C.H., A retrospective look at production and operations management articles on new
product development. Production and Operations Management 14 (4), 433–441, 2005.
Lewis, M.A., Cause, consequence and control: towards a theoretical and practical model of operational
risk, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 21, pp. 205-24, 2003.
Miller, J.G. and Graham, M.A.W., Research in OM: an agenda for the 1980s, Decision Science, Vol. 12
No. 4, pp. 547-81, 1981.
Prahalad, C.K. and Hamel, G., The core competence of the corporation, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 68,
May-June, pp. 79-91, 1990.
Schroeder, R.G., Linderman, K., Zhang, D., Evolution of quality: first fifty issues of production and
operations management. Production and Operations Management 14 (4), 468–481, 2005.
Slack, N. and Lewis, M.A., Operations Strategy, Financial Times, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,
2001.
Teece, D. and Pisano, G., The dynamic capabilities of firms: an introduction, Industrial and Corporate
Change, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 537-56, 1994.
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A., Dynamic capabilities and strategic management, Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 509-33, 1997.
Vokurka, R.,. The relative importance of journals used in operations management research: a citation
analysis. Journal of Operations Management 14, 345–355, 1996.
Voss, C., Operations management – from Taylor to Toyota – and beyond, British Journal of Management,
Vol. 6, special issue, pp. 17-29, 1995.
Wernerfelt, B., A resource-based view of the fir”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 5, pp. 171-80, 1984.
Womack, J., Jones, D.T. and Roos, D., The Machine That Changed The World, Rawson Associates, New
York, NY, 1990.
Womack, J.P. and Jones, D.T., Lean Thinking, Simon and Schuster, New York, NY, 1996.

2481

View publication stats