<p>I think I may apply to some engineering schools to pursue this topic. I realized I love optimizing stuff and since I want to own companies one day, I think knowing how all the pieces of an operation/company work will be helpful. Anyone out there who wants to give me just their take on Ops Research and anything else I can use to make up my mind. I can do pm or you can just post here; I WANT TO KNOW EVERYTHING YOU HAVE TO SAY.</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>"I realized I love optimizing stuff"</p>
<pre><code>Then you have picked a suitable major. Penn State has a superb program BTW.
</code></pre>
<p>"I want to own companies one day"</p>
<pre><code> I wanted to point out that in a sense, an OR background can become a hinderance to the entrepreneur. The most important thing a business owner must recognize is when something is good enough for the circumstances. However, engineers tend to want to continue, well,
</code></pre>
<p>engineering. This needn't be the case, since it is only a matter of perspective.</p>
<p>At my school OR is in the math department. I'm not sure if this major has much "engineering" per se.</p>
<p>Operations Research ("OR") involves application of various disjointed mathematical techniques to problems that have come up in the business world. Optimization is a big area of activity. There are a bunch of applications to scheduling and inventory control problems.</p>
<p>Graduates are really a kind of "mathematical engineer/programmer", sort of.</p>
<p>In and of itself OR is not particularly valuable training for running a company in my opinion. However many OR majors are engineering students who have decided after-the-fact to forge a path in business instead of engineering, without transferring out of their engineering school altogether and starting another school from scratch. Given their new interest they take many business-related electives and these courses are valuable for a future business career. Moreso than their OR training. IMO.</p>
<p>Specifically, OR will not teach you how all of the pieces of a company work. It may teach you how to, in general, create a mathematical model relating to some particular operation within a company.</p>
<p>If you want to do operations research, first do/understand some type of operation that you CAN research!</p>
<p>In other words, become an engineer first and then go for operations research.</p>
<p>I got an MS/OR in 1989, have worked in OR for over a decade, and am now getting a PhD in OR. I have been involved in several OR professional groups, written papers, attended meetings & symposia.</p>
<p>Most of the advice above is wrong. OR is a terrific degree. It exposes you to a broad range of quantitative techniques--optimization being only one--which are directly applicable to modern business. In fact, there's no reason to put it into the OR toolkit if it doesn't have application in the real world. </p>
<p>Most OR departments are in schools of engineering. </p>
<p>You've cosen well, young Jedi.</p>
<p>But, don't take my word for it. Visit salary.com. Input your city or zip. Compare the average salary of an "Operations Research V" to an "Electrical Engineer V"--these being the highest-experienced in the indivicual fields. Tell us what you find.</p>
<p>Perhaps redbeard has had different business experiences than I have.</p>
<p>In my experience the degree most closely aligned with future general business management aspirations is the MBA.</p>
<p>Well, we all have different experiences. In the business of government consulting (in particular, defense consulting) in the suburbs of Washington, an MBA is of limited value. And, there are lots of MBA's looking for positions in this town. There must be ten MBAs for every MS/OR. But, most vacancy notices I see look for an MS in systems engineering/OR. </p>
<p>Of course, if your region is dominated by finance or manufacturing, YMMV. </p>
<p>I actually completed 2/3 of the course-work necessary for an MBA in the 1980s. I gave it up and switched to OR. It just seemed like the market was too crowded. </p>
<p>I also think that an MS/OR is a much harder degree to get. Wrap yourself around a nonlinear programming problem and you will be out in the mathematical deep water--far beyond the toy LP examples in the MBA programs.</p>
<p>This may be true, but it has been my experience that people who create non-linear programs and implement quantitative models relating to business problems work for generalists who themselves do not have this training in any depth. for the most part, leaders of businesses I've been around have main skills in managing, leading, presenting, thinking outside the box, selling,etc. They have technologists working for them to work on these complicated math problems. I acknowledge that some of these technicians are well paid for what they do.</p>
<p>The OP said he wanted to run a business, not be a well paid analyst working for people who run businesses.</p>
<p>It may well be the case that MS ORs can get good, well-paying jobs easily; I would never dispute that.</p>
<p>I agree that many problems of this nature can be highly challenging. Real problems are tough. The people who handle them are highly skilled technicians. The need for people trained in OR is real, and I agree it can certainly be a valuable and rewarding career .</p>
<p>A digression for redbeard: on another current thread, somebody wants to know the top OR schools. Maybe you can help him/her out; I have no idea myself.</p>
<p>Am reposting... my original post seems to be lost. My dad has a guy with a Phd in OR working for him. The guy has a masters in Applied Stat. His undergrad is applied math. My dad says he is the best hire he ever made. A very specialized generalist. They guy got his Phd from Georgia Tech and is one of the reasons I've applied there. He is pretty amazing.</p>
<p>Most of the work he does is in disease modeling and economics with considerable forecasting to top it off. Some links to his work follow. Hope this helps you make a decision. Consider this one vote for Georgia Tech</p>
<p>Links
<a href="http://archive.naccho.org/documents/2005-JAMA.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://archive.naccho.org/documents/2005-JAMA.pdf</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/518444%5B/url%5D">http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/518444</a></p>
<p>LInk to GAtech <a href="http://www.isye.gatech.edu/or/%5B/url%5D">http://www.isye.gatech.edu/or/</a></p>
<p>RedBeard, I am currently pursuing a applied mathematics degree from Cornell. I will be transfering there over the spring. I really wanted to get into there OR program but I am not that far along in math yet. I have only taken first semester calculus. What other classes should I take to prepare for a masters or even just an undergrad in Financial engineering. Should I just focus on Math and will finance courses help me at all. I have always wanted to get into business. Than I took a Calc class and I would love to get into a career that involves alot of math also. Financial Engineering seemed like the logical choice. How far behind am I.</p>
<p>I'm curious as to how these programs are linked at Cornell. Financial Engineering is a relatively recent beast, and though it borrows some methods it is not the same as OR. Cornell's undergrad business program is in the ag school, isn't it? And the profs probably most interested in FE applications are probably at the Johnson school, which is private and grad only. And OR is in engineering. Where does financial engineering fit into this seemingly disjointed hodgepodge?</p>
<p>As far as courses go, I looked once at Princeton's FE course sequence and I thought that was pretty good. I'd follow that if you can. Find an adviser, or seek guidance at least, at the Johnson School if possible.</p>
<p>As to whether you're far behind, half the people at the financial engineering group I was recently associated with had PhDs in Physics, If that gives you any idea.</p>
<p>I meant applied economics at Cornell and, i guess i just lumped financial engineering and operational research together. Also, Monydad did most or any of the people in the group you were associated with have any experience in Finance or were they basically just engineers.</p>
<p>Most had training in a graduate financial engineering program like those I referenced. A couple had MBAs, with a quantitative slant. One had a PhD in finance. A few were recruited right out of graduate science programs with no other training- physics and meteorology. One was a mid-career physicist with no prior finance training who got in because he knew one of the other guys.</p>
<p>None were engineers with no training in finance. A couple of the MBAs had undergrad engineering, math, science or (mathematical) economics degrees.</p>
<p>IMO, schools do a disservice by establishing these programs and permitting the inference that tons of people are going to just graduate and get one of these jobs. The monicker "engineering", though appropriate, really doesn't help in this regard. When millions and billions of dollars are at stake they aren't going to let just the run of the mill engineer stroll in and do one of these jobs. The average engineer, believe it or not, is not quantitative enough for one of these positions. It is really more for the graduate level scientific/highly advanced math type profile. And relevant training is definitely appropriate.</p>
<p>Maybe it is ok to have an undergrad minor in something like this at a place like Princeton or MIT. But not many other places. IMO.</p>