Thank you Ken for your candid insights (and notes on recent experience with this movement). I understand the concerns about "fit", though along with supporting micro-level empirical investigations into these topics (which have been grossly underinvestigated, to the detriment of practical OM policy formation) I would ultimately like to encourage a dialogue between camps (micro and macro; empiricist and math modelers). I really think we all have a lot to gain from such an exchange.
Having said that, I'd like to think of the various established conference venues (e.g. AoM, INFORMS, POMS, etc.) more as "outposts" than homes. Since we have a small but varied group here I don't want to exclude anyone by virtue of conference affiliation. I think we can accomodate some mechanism that allows the interests of this community to be voiced in special sessions, sections, etc. of multiple venues and gain strength by using the resources available through these venues to add strength to our cause. Since we've begun some in-roads at INFORMS I'd like to continue those, while simultaneously lookinginto establishing an outpost with AoM and POMS. I know people that regularly attend each and would be interested in special sessions (maybe even tracks).

If Behavioral Ops is a red-headed step child at INFORMS it will, I think, be puce-headed at AOM. That is, I don't see what I do as behavioral research with an OPS focus but rather as OPS research with a behavioral focus. As such the organization to which I should find a home (at least theoretically) should be an OPS group. If that doesn't work, I'll be happy to look elsewhere but INFORMS certainly seems to 'welcome diversity' in a very litteral sense.

The problem right now is getting a group large enough ot have critical mass.

Edited by author 04-21-2006 03:27 PM
Again, I'm a little cautious about trying to use any single conference as a "home base" - a lot of people with diverse interests here, some of which are OB people with and interest in OM research. As small a group as we are, we shouldn't isolate. I'm still more in favor of a "many flags planted" vs. "one castle(hovel?) built" model.

In my mind, the ultimate goal is for the behavioral OM research to become "mainstream" OM research, much like experimental economics is a legitimate part of economics. With this end goal in mind, I would be cautious about trying to separate us from the larger OM community too much. The idea of having a venue in which people with interests in this type of work can get together is a good one, as long as it does not make us too separate. I think INFORMS is a good main home base for us. I like the idea of co-sponsored sessions with M&SOM. We should try to do this in 2007.

The SSA Section (INBFORMS) affiliation is a good start (Flag). But the OM people who regularly attend the Academy are going to be a major source of interest here as well. I've talked to several at POMS and there's a definite buzz among them. The open nature of the BDOM network will be a strength.