What the study found
The study continues a 30-year effort to measure how institutions contribute to applied research in OR/MS, meaning operations research/management science. It reports both a current view and a time-series view of which institutions prioritize OR/MS in practice.
Why the authors say this matters
The authors say the work matters because it helps track institutional attention to OR/MS practice literature over time. The study suggests this gives a way to see which institutions prioritize OR/MS in practice.
What the researchers tested
The article presents a ranking-style analysis of institutional contributions to OR/MS practice literature. It extends the 14th Rothkopf Rankings as part of a 30-year tradition of measuring these contributions.
What worked and what didn't
The abstract states that the research provides both a current and a time-series view. It does not report specific institutional results, comparative outcomes, or any methods that failed.
What to keep in mind
The available summary is brief and does not describe the ranking method, the institutions included, or any limitations. No detailed results are provided in the abstract.
Key points
- The article continues a 30-year tradition of measuring institutional contributions to OR/MS practice literature.
- OR/MS is identified as operations research/management science.
- The study provides both a current view and a time-series view of institutional priorities in OR/MS practice.
- The abstract does not give specific ranking results or list institutions.
- No limitations or methodological details are described in the available abstract.
Disclosure
- Research title:
- Report tracks institutional contributions to OR/MS practice literature
- Authors:
- Michael F. Gorman
- Institutions:
- University of Dayton
- Publication date:
- 2026-02-27
- OpenAlex record:
- View
Get the weekly research newsletter
Stay current with peer-reviewed research without reading academic papers — one filtered digest, every Friday.