recognize that OR has some very hig

recognize that OR has some very high intcraction and some possible overlap with the planning functions, with Market and Economic Research, and with Financial or Operations Analysis. Working relationships with all these functions are maturing, and the orientation of the OR function has been to transfer capability into these groups as they are ready and willing to handle it. I think these functions need to be closely coordinated throughout the corporation with both the OR and the systems effort.
Another comment that has been made about our OR function is that it has exceeded• the traditio►al "critical mass" for OR func¬tions. I think it is z, valid question to ask whether or not our OR iunction is too large. I doubt it, for the type of thing we are trying to do. Typically, small traditional OR groups tend either to become, the pet project team of whoever is managing them or to become technically oriented, and there tends to be proliferation of these groups throughout a corporation. In addition they tend to be in conflict with the systems function. In our OR organization e have attempted to maintain some of the advantages of small units by breaking the department into sections where each section has an appliciticns orientation such as, Wood Products, Pulp Based Prod¬ucts, Coroorate Projects, and Engineering and Research. Because these linits have been together, we have been able to use common staff for programming, technical research, training, and recruiting.
In addition, we have managed the scientific systems develop¬ment and programming for the rest of the company within the OR Department. How long this should continue is a valid question.
I think we are getting good results out of our OR Department, and we have a good corporate visibility and control of its direction. I think we should carefully examine what we think would be achieved by changing the makeup of the organization, or its home.
The impetus for relocating the operations research function had stemmed front several considerations. Progress in OR had slacked off in 1969 after some solid successes in 1968. High-powered technical people had been hired during the peak success years, and they had trouble in relating to actual company problems. Some top managers seemed to feel that the OR Department was spinning its wheels and "talking to itself" rather than working on relevant issues.
Also, it was evident that OR endeavors had become more oriented toward planning than operating and data systems development (the func¬tion of I3Jsiness Systems). Therefore, a closer relationship among OR, IED, and M&ER seemed to be appropriate.
The change was made; OR was shifted to Corporate Growth, re¬porting o the Vice President for Finance and Planning. At that time the manager of OR assumed the task of significantly reducing the Depart¬ment's size and budget. One change involved shifting Scientific Comput¬Ing Servic.es Research, Development, and Engineering.