<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<STYLE type=text/css>DIV {
MARGIN: 0px
}
</STYLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18783"></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Garamond>I too have found this a very interesting
discussion. I think there's a good paper in this somewhere. Whilst
without Sandra or Tom's fundamental research background I did train in the
60s, a decade later than the subject of the question and therefore possibly
irrelevant. I have looked back at dusty old text books for this
response.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Garamond></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Garamond>I remember in about 1970 when my employer changed from
IBM to Univac, both bureau machines. I was responsible for all the
commercial applications, which were memory hungry database oriented,
while we also used the computer for product design (process plant for
petrochemicals such as spheres), which were computation oriented. Even
though the compromises were horrendous neither of us separately could justify
the expense but combined together we could. As far as I am aware everyone
then was in the same position. In the early 70s I was a Leo user which, as
Sandra stated below, was very much oriented toward the business user. I
worked for the mainframe division of ICL in the 1970s and most sales were
oriented toward computation users as it sounds the Pegasus was. This was
also true for Ferranti Computers division which survived the ICL merger.
</FONT><FONT face=Garamond>Ian Martin gave a very interesting paper at BSHS09 on
Martins Bank and Pegasus around about 1960 which sounded much more chaotic than
most of my experiences.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Garamond></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Garamond>With regard to "Management Science" in the question I
regarded it with the same suspicion as everyone else. None of my subjects
were called OR. One of my final papers was called 'Management Information
and Quantative Techniques' and another 'Management Principles and
Practice'. <FONT face=Garamond><FONT face=Garamond>The blurb on one of
my</FONT><FONT face=Garamond> text books 'Mathematics in Management' describes
its purpose "to provide a sound basis of knowledge about the methods of OR now
being applied in public industries and services". We knew that's what we
were studying but no one called it that. Apart from Peter Drucker all my
text books were British, which I have to say I now find
amazing.</FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Garamond></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Garamond><FONT face=Garamond>Searching the OED for Management
Science it says "<FONT face="Times New Roman"><STRONG>1954<!--end_d--></STRONG>
<I><!--start_w-->Amer. Econ. Rev.<!--end_w--></I> <B>44</B> 1030
<!--start_qt-->A new national society, the Institute of Management Sciences, has
been established with the objective of unifying scientific knowledge that
contributes to the understanding and practice of management. The Institute will
publish a journal, *<I>Management
Science</I>. <STRONG>1955<!--end_d--></STRONG> <!--start_a--><!--open_smallcaps-->H. K<SMALL>OONTZ</SMALL><!--close_smallcaps--><!--end_a--> & <!--start_a--><!--open_smallcaps-->C. O'D<SMALL>ONNELL</SMALL><!--close_smallcaps--><!--end_a-->
<I><!--start_w-->Princ. Managem.<!--end_w--></I>
<!--open_smallcaps--><SMALL>I</SMALL>.<!--close_smallcaps--> i. 11 <!--start_qt-->Extension of the frontiers of management science by increasing
the efficiency of management, would unquestionably have revolutionary impact on
the cultural level of our society.<!--end_qt--><!--end_q--> "
</FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT face=Garamond>For Computer Science it reads "<FONT
face="Times New Roman"><STRONG>1956<!--end_d--><!--end_ed--></STRONG> <I><!--start_ew--><!--start_w-->N.Y. Times<!--end_w--><!--end_ew--></I> 28 Oct. <!--open_smallcaps--><SMALL>III</SMALL>.<!--close_smallcaps--> 21 (<I>advt.</I>)
<!--start_qt-->Unparalleled opportunities to associate with the prominent
pioneers of computer science, at outstanding salaries. Electronic engineers
(circuit designers and magnetics engineers), logical designers, [etc.]."
</FONT></FONT><FONT face=Garamond>While being the same time frame as the Pegasus
usage in Sheffield it should be noted that these quotations are all american.
I've no idea when the terms might have entered common usage in
Britain.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Garamond><FONT face=Garamond></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT
face=Garamond><!--end_qt--><!--end_q--><!--start_q--><!--start_d-->Regarding the
possible use of the Pegasus by Sheffield University it seems inconceivable that
they would have had a department studying management science. Even though
Wharton was founded in 1881 there was no equivalent here. I considered the
very idea of me studying management, business, or computer science in a British
university pretty ridiculous. (I went to Glasgow College of Commerce, now
Caledonian Business School.) Looking through my old books I've come across
one that must belong to my wife. It was first published by the Org for
European Economic Cooperation in 1952 and describes a 'Technical Assistance
Mission' to the US. "American universities run schools of business
administration" of which there are 166. Presumably worth noting as there
were none here. None of my old books refer to computer science but one of
them actually has a photograph of a Pegasus! Generally they use the
term EDP. </FONT><FONT face=Garamond>Tom may know when computer science
was first taught in a British university. The majority of ICL sales in the 70s
were still to universities. Eden states that the Pegasus was jointly used
by Sheffield University and United Steel. It sounds to me as though Sheffield
maths department would have been using it in conjunction with United Steel for
OR functions, among other things. It should be possible to discover when
United Steel computerised commercial functions but I would guess subsequent to
the Pegasus. It seems most likely they were using it to compute some of
the processes.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Garamond></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Garamond>kind regards</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Garamond>neil</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Garamond></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Garamond></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>Dr Roger Neil Barton<BR>Visiting Research Fellow, Institute of Historical
Research<BR><A
href="http://www.uclmail.net/~neil.barton/">http://www.uclmail.net/~neil.barton/</A></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=sandramols@yahoo.co.uk href="mailto:sandramols@yahoo.co.uk">Sandra
Mols</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=edenm@indiana.edu
href="mailto:edenm@indiana.edu">Medina, Eden</A> ; <A title=members@sigcis.org
href="mailto:members@sigcis.org">Sigcis</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, July 20, 2009 10:31
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [SIGCIS-Members] computers
and management science</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV>Interesting debate. </DIV>
<DIV>I agree with the comments as regards to a necessary caution
when it comes to evaluate dedication and use of computers. </DIV>
<DIV>As regards to the Pegasus claim at the origin of this discussion, two
points attract my mind in particular. </DIV>
<DIV>One is about the extent to which this claim - independently of
its veracity - relate to Ferranti's wishes to steal pieces of the managament
computing market out of LEO's hands (launched in 1951). In my research,
the Pegasus was mostly used towards scientific uses and - as far as this
claim gets me to think - it may well be that Ferranti tried to push it
forward as an 'administrative' machine - due to its comaprative smaller size -
to expand its market outreach towards management 'bureau' issues which had
been recently targeted by LEO.</DIV>
<DIV>The other issue - expanding on Tom Haigh - is about the term of
'management science': what does it mean in 1956 when one takes into
account that management was a new fashionable thing in the post-WWII
context, being born out of OR WWII practices, with also OR remaining a very
unfixed, changing concept (more or less quantified) well until the 1960s?
</DIV>
<DIV>Hope this helps,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Sandra<BR></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>
<DIV
style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><FONT
size=2 face=Tahoma>
<HR SIZE=1>
<B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> "Medina, Eden"
<edenm@indiana.edu><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B>
"members@sigcis.org" <members@sigcis.org><BR><B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Friday, 17 July, 2009
19:37:44<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re:
[SIGCIS-Members] computers and management science<BR></FONT><BR>I knew this
was the right group to ask. <BR><BR>I too agree with the comments being
made and thank everyone for their thoughts on how best to address the
claim. Additional responses can be sent to me off list unless their is
extensive interest in this topic. To bring some closure to the topic I
may have found a very easy way to address Beer's statement. It seems
that the Pegasus machine he referred to was split between United Steel and
Sheffield University, thus throwing into doubt claims that it was entirely
dedicated to management science.<BR><BR>Again, thanks for the help.
<BR><BR>Eden<BR><BR>________________________________________<BR>From: Joel
West [<A href="mailto:joelwest@ieee.org"
ymailto="mailto:joelwest@ieee.org">joelwest@ieee.org</A>]<BR>Sent: Friday,
July 17, 2009 1:17 PM<BR>To: Medina, Eden; <A href="mailto:members@sigcis.org"
ymailto="mailto:members@sigcis.org">members@sigcis.org</A><BR>Subject: Re:
[SIGCIS-Members] computers and management science<BR><BR>Dear Eden,<BR><BR>I
share many of Gerard's concerns about the unmeasurability of such claims and
even how dubious making them might be. (I also agree with Tom that "management
science" is too vague -- does he possibly mean operations
research?)<BR><BR>However, as a positivist (are there any others on this
list?) I am inclined to take the claim at face value and see what they might
mean.<BR><BR>So while "first" is likely unprovable, I do think it would be
interesting to say "most computers were bought to do payroll or missile
trajectories and this one was bought to do management science." I suspect it
would be relatively easy to document the "typical" motivation or application
for computers in the era, even if the actual use (post hoc) is not easily
measured. (Ideally, you'd want a list of who had login accounts, and if
necessary assume each used their account proportionately).<BR><BR>But in some
ways, the inputs question is less interesting than the outputs question. If
Beer was the first boy in the invisible college of his discipline to have a
new toy, what did he do with it? Is there any evidence that this strategic
foresight (or dumb luck) enabled him to advance his field in ways that his
less-endowed rivals could not?<BR><BR>I would find it terribly interesting if
Beer has the best computing power but the major advances in numerical
approaches to management science were being made elsewhere. IIRC, the field's
major scientific prize (originally from ORSA, now INFORMS) is named after a
mathematician who made his most important contributions before these sorts of
computers existed.<BR><BR>Joel<BR><BR><BR>On 6:25 PM +0200 7/17/09, Alberts,
G. hath said:<BR>>What in heaven would be the purport of such claim?
Computers were not only expensive, they involved major investments, certainly
machines the size of Pegasus. Hence, the legitimation for making such
investment was seldomly based on the single use for one field of application,
or rather for one department in an enterprise or university. Historians
usually can trace the considerations leading to the actual purchase in the
company archives. Also one may be able to guess where (in which subdepartment)
the first initiative to such deep investment in modernizing business
originated.<BR>>How the machine was in fact used, once installed, is much
harder to reconstruct. Did the administrative support staff actually get to
use the computer or were they pushed out by the scientific computers from the
laboratory departments. Were management scientists favored before the
statisticians and the down to earth daily bookkeeping? In the incidental case
where a logbook is preserved, or where a very early computing center kept
statistics, one may be able to tell something about who was using the
machine.<BR>>So, what could be the meaning of "dedicated to"? Was that
"dedicated" on the level of legitimation of the purchase, or was it
"dedicated" in terms of seconds and minutes of use of the system? Let alone
that we could judge the claim of "entirely" or even
"first".<BR>><BR>>Rather, to us historians being aware of inclusion and
exclusion mechanisms around the use of computers, simply power struggles if
you will, the claim of "dedicated entirely" made in a first person account has
a clear intent. Other users, other interested parties, were succesfully made
invisible, at least in the account of the "management science" department.
Probably bookkkeeping use didnot count, or was counted under management
science in the first place, etcetera.<BR>><BR>>Rather than investigating
the claim, my suggestion would be to investigate the fact that such claim was
made, when and by whom.<BR><BR><BR>On 11:11 AM -0400 7/17/09, Medina, Eden
wrote:<BR>>I am hoping that your collective wisdom might help me check out
a claim. The British cybernetician Stafford Beer claims that the
Ferranti Pegasus 1 machine he bought in 1956 was the only computer at that
time dedicated entirely to applications in management science. Do you
know of any other examples of computers fully dedicated to management science
applications during this time period?<BR><BR>--<BR>Joel West, Ph.D.
<A href="http://www.joelwest.org/"
target=_blank>http://www.JoelWest.org/</A><BR>Professor, Innovation &
Entrepreneurship<BR>College of Business, San Jose State University<BR>BT 555,
One Washington Square, San Jose, CA
95192-0070<BR>_______________________________________________<BR>This email is
relayed from <A href="mailto:members@sigcis.org"
ymailto="mailto:members@sigcis.org">members@sigcis.org</A>, the email
discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. The list archives are at <A
href="http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/"
target=_blank>http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/</A> and you can change your
subscription options at <A href="http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members"
target=_blank>http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members</A><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV><BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>This email is
relayed from members@sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. The
list archives are at http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/ and you can change
your subscription options at
http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>