Christopher S. Tang
Distinguished Professor
Carter Chair in Business Administration
UCLA Anderson School of Management
Biographical Profile
Education
- Ph.D. in Operations Research, Yale University
- M.A. in Statistics and M. Phil in Operations Research, Yale University
- B.Sc. (First Class Hons.) in Mathematics, King’s College London
Professional Experience
- 2021-present: Senior Associate Dean, Global Initiatives, UCLA Anderson School
- 2002-2004: Dean, National University of Singapore Business School
- 1998-2002: Senior Associate Dean, Academic Affairs, UCLA Anderson School
- 1985-present: Assistant/Associate/Full Professor, UCLA Anderson School
INFORMS and Related Activities
- 2015-2020: Editor-in-Chief, Manufacturing & Service Operations Management (M&SOM)
- 2021: Chairperson, INFORMS Task Force on Improving Journal Review Process
- 2021: INFORMS DEI Ambassador
- 2015-2018: INFORMS Roundtable Member
- 1991-present: Editorial board member for INFORMS journals: Management Science (DE and AE), M&SOM (AE), Operations Research (AE), Service Science (DE)
- 1991-present: Editorial board member for Production and Operations Management (DE), IIE Transactions (DE), Journal of Operations Management (AE)
- 1991: Founding Chair, George Dantzig Award, INFORMS
- 2013: President of Production and Operations Management Society (POMS)
Awards
- INFORMS Fellow Award, 2011; INFORMS Service Award, 2017
- MSOM Fellow Award, 2015; MSOM Service Award 2019
- INFORMS TIME Best Working Paper Award (first prize) 2020; (runner-up) 2021
- POMS Fellow Award, 2015; POMS Gupta Service Award, 2017
More information can be found at https://www.anderson.ucla.edu/faculty-and-research/decisions-operations-and-technology-management/faculty/tang
Vision Statement
INFORMS’ publications have grown phenomenally over the past three decades, with 17 INFORMS journals receiving almost 10,000 submissions and accepting more than 1,300 papers in 2021. As INFORMS continues to expand, there is a growing concern raised by authors and editorial board members from different INFORMS journals about the quality, consistency, and timeliness of the review process. There is an opportunity for our vibrant research community to more effectively work with INFORMS to improve the review process so that INFORMS can create more societal impact through journal publications.
I am honored to be nominated for the Vice President, Publications for INFORMS, having served on the editorial boards of M&SOM (editor-in-chief), Management Science, Operations Research, and Service Science, and having chaired a task force on improving the review process for all INFORMS journals. If elected, I shall initially focus on the following three pillars to improve the review process:
1. Improving communication among editors, reviewers, and authors in the review process. Based on my observations of the reviews of thousands of articles as author, reviewer, AE, DE, and editor-in-chief, I believe the review process can be improved through clear and frequent communication. For example, each journal should provide clear definitions of evaluation criteria and clear instructions about the review process. Specifically, the review process should not result in rejection after 4-5 years of multiple rounds of reviews – editors could specify a more reasonable timeframe and an upper limit on the number of rounds of reviews. Also, there needs to be a process for time-sensitive topics such as those arising during the early months of COVID-19. Journal editors could hold periodic “information sessions” to communicate with reviewers (and potential reviewers) about how to write constructive and effective reviews. Through such sessions, editors can also engage with authors and reviewers on how to improve the review process. Finally, to reduce the frustration caused by misunderstandings, INFORMS journals could develop an efficient process for authors to anonymously communicate with reviewers to seek or provide clarification before submitting their formal response documents and revisions. Such a system would be especially useful when the different reviewers have contradictory requirements or, from the authors’ perspective, have not understood the manuscript, or have gone off-topic or beyond the scope of the paper.
2. Recognizing the efforts of reviewers. To encourage reviewers to exert voluntary efforts to improve the quality and timeliness of their reviews, INFORMS could consider recognizing outstanding reviewers beyond the current practice (e.g., meritorious reviewer awards). INFORMS could consider developing a “reviewer portal” using Publons or ORCID to keep track of each reviewer’s performance (number, timeliness, and quality of reviews). This publicly verifiable record can be useful for junior faculty members and Ph.D. students to report their contributions. Also, INFORMS could utilize this public record to improve reviewer selections and award selections.
3. Developing outreach programs. INFORMS journals are highly visible in academia, but there is a challenge for our INFORMS members to write short articles in layperson terms so that INFORMS can promote relevant articles to the private and public sectors. INFORMS could consider developing creative writing workshops to support interested members to write short research summaries for OR/MS Today and other public media.
If elected as VP of Publications, I shall work closely with INFORMS (board members, journal editors, publications department, publications committee, and members) to improve the review process and enhance the impact of INFORMS publications, with commitment to DEI matters. In doing so, INFORMS journals can encourage more members to tackle “big problems,” increasing the societal impact of INFORMS through journal publications.