These issues are seldom satisfactorily resolved at birth and the question of definition remains important later in the life of the profession or discipline as debates continue about the domain of activities, the relationship with neighbouring disciplines and the rules for membership. Much is, of course, simply determined by what those people, who choose to operate under the banner of OR, do in practice. The military successes of OR led in the UK to enthusiasm for the application of OR to civil problems after the war. Initial efforts to establish OR in the government sphere were faltering but the groups established in the newly nationalised coal industry and the steel industry flourished. Of course, many of the problems could be satisfactorily resolved without sophisticated techniques at all, the solution being apparent once the situation had been appraised and the data gathered.
Simulation stands out as the technique that proved most valuable in diverse industrial situations.
However, most commentators agreed that it was not the techniques that define OR but its conduct by scientists who applied the scientific method. Much excitement was generated by two subsequent developments. First, efficient algorithms were developed in the US for the solution of linear programmes. As computer power grew it also became possible to tackle integer, quadratic and goal programming. Collectively these mathematical programming techniques could be used to tackle a wide variety of problems including resource allocation, transportation and production scheduling.