IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v44y1998i1p83-102.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

SPOT: Scheduling Programs Optimally for Television

Author

Listed:
  • Srinivas K. Reddy

    (Terry College of Business, Brooks Hall, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602)

  • Jay E. Aronson

    (Terry College of Business, Brooks Hall, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602)

  • Antonie Stam

    (Terry College of Business, Brooks Hall, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602)

Abstract

This paper introduces SPOT (Scheduling Programs Optimally for Television), an analytical model for optimal prime-time TV program scheduling. Due in part to the advent of new cable TV channels, the competition for viewer ratings has intensified substantially in recent years, and the revenues of the major networks have not kept pace with the costs of the programs. As profit margins decrease, the networks seek to improve their viewer ratings with innovative scheduling strategies. Our SPOT models for scheduling network programs combine predicted ratings for different combinations of prime-time schedules with a novel, mixed-integer, generalized network-based flow, mathematical programming model, which when solved provides an optimal schedule. In addition to historical performance, subjective inputs from actual network managers were used as input to the network flow optimization model. The optimization model is flexible. It can utilize the managers' input and maximize profit (instead of ratings) by considering not only the revenue potential but also the costs of the shows. Moreover, SPOT can describe the scheduling problem over any time period (e.g., day, week, month, season), and designate certain shows to, and restrict them from, given time slots. The methodology of SPOT is illustrated using data for the first quarter of 1990, obtained from a cable network. The optimization model produces solutions that would have generated an increase of approximately 2% in overall profitability, representing over $6 million annually for the cable network. SPOT not only produces more profitable TV schedules for this network, but also provides valuable general insights into the development of mixed programming strategies for improving future schedules.

Suggested Citation

  • Srinivas K. Reddy & Jay E. Aronson & Antonie Stam, 1998. "SPOT: Scheduling Programs Optimally for Television," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(1), pages 83-102, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:44:y:1998:i:1:p:83-102
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.44.1.83
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.44.1.83
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.44.1.83?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeffrey H. Horen, 1980. "Scheduling of Network Television Programs," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 354-370, April.
    2. James S. Dyer, 1990. "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 249-258, March.
    3. John D. C. Little, 1970. "Models and Managers: The Concept of a Decision Calculus," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(8), pages 466-485, April.
    4. Fred S. Zufryden, 1973. "Media Scheduling: A Stochastic Dynamic Model Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(12), pages 1395-1406, August.
    5. Roland T. Rust & Mark I. Alpert, 1984. "An Audience Flow Model of Television Viewing Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 113-124.
    6. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    7. Hugh J. Watson & Patricia Gill Marett, 1979. "A Survey of Management Science Implementation Problems," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 124-128, August.
    8. James S. Dyer, 1990. "A Clarification of "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process"," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 274-275, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bragge, Johanna, 2001. "Premediation analysis of the energy taxation dispute in Finland," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 1-16, July.
    2. Sanjeev Swami & Martin L. Puterman & Charles B. Weinberg, 2001. "Play It Again, Sam? Optimal Replacement Policies for a Motion Picture Exhibitor," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 3(4), pages 369-386, July.
    3. Denny Meyer & Rob J. Hyndman, 2005. "Rating Forecasts for Television Programs," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 1/05, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
    4. Giovanni Giallombardo & Giovanna Miglionico & Houyuan Jiang, 2015. "New Reformulations for the Conflict Resolution Problem in the Scheduling of Television Commercials," Working Papers 2015/03, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    5. Eliashberg, Jehoshua & Hegie, Quintus & Ho, Jason & Huisman, Dennis & Miller, Steven J. & Swami, Sanjeev & Weinberg, Charles B. & Wierenga, Berend, 2009. "Demand-driven scheduling of movies in a multiplex," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 75-88.
    6. Alexander Dhoest & Nele Simons, 2016. "Still ‘Watching’ TV? The Consumption of TV Fiction by Engaged Audiences," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 176-184.
    7. M J Brusco, 2008. "Scheduling advertising slots for television," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(10), pages 1363-1372, October.
    8. Danaher, Peter J. & Dagger, Tracey S. & Smith, Michael S., 2011. "Forecasting television ratings," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 1215-1240, October.
    9. Daya Ram Gaur & Ramesh Krishnamurti & Rajeev Kohli, 2009. "Conflict Resolution in the Scheduling of Television Commercials," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 1098-1105, October.
    10. Gaurav Sabnis & Rajdeep Grewal, 2015. "Cable News Wars on the Internet: Competition and User-Generated Content," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 301-319, June.
    11. Srinivas Bollapragada & Marc Garbiras, 2004. "Scheduling Commercials on Broadcast Television," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 52(3), pages 337-345, June.
    12. Bollapragada, Srinivas & Bussieck, Michael & Mallik, Suman, 2002. "Scheduling Commercial Videotapes in Broadcast Television," Working Papers 02-0127, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    13. Giovanni Giallombardo & Houyuan Jiang & Giovanna Miglionico, 2016. "New Formulations for the Conflict Resolution Problem in the Scheduling of Television Commercials," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 838-848, August.
    14. I. Robert Chiang & Jhih‐Hua Jhang‐Li, 2020. "Competition through Exclusivity in Digital Content Distribution," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(5), pages 1270-1286, May.
    15. Srinivas Bollapragada & Michael R. Bussieck & Suman Mallik, 2004. "Scheduling Commercial Videotapes in Broadcast Television," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 52(5), pages 679-689, October.
    16. José Antonio Carbajal & Peter Williams & Andreea Popescu & Wes Chaar, 2019. "Turner Blazes a Trail for Audience Targeting on Television with Operations Research and Advanced Analytics," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 49(1), pages 64-89, January.
    17. Elsie Sterbin Gottlieb, 2002. "Solving generalized transportation problems via pure transportation problems," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(7), pages 666-685, October.
    18. Shinjini Pandey & Goutam Dutta & Harit Joshi, 2017. "Survey on Revenue Management in Media and Broadcasting," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 47(3), pages 195-213, June.
    19. José Antonio Carbajal & Wes Chaar, 2017. "Turner Optimizes the Allocation of Audience Deficiency Units," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 47(6), pages 518-536, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kun Chen & Gang Kou & J. Michael Tarn & Yan Song, 2015. "Bridging the gap between missing and inconsistent values in eliciting preference from pairwise comparison matrices," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 155-175, December.
    2. Suwignjo, P. & Bititci, U. S & Carrie, A. S, 2000. "Quantitative models for performance measurement system," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1-3), pages 231-241, March.
    3. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    4. Hoene, Andreas & Jawale, Mandar & Neukirchen, Thomas & Bednorz, Nicole & Schulz, Holger & Hauser, Simon, 2019. "Bewertung von Technologielösungen für Automatisierung und Ergonomieunterstützung der Intralogistik," ild Schriftenreihe 64, FOM Hochschule für Oekonomie & Management, Institut für Logistik- & Dienstleistungsmanagement (ild).
    5. Zachary F. Lansdowne, 1996. "Ordinal ranking methods for multicriterion decision making," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(5), pages 613-627, August.
    6. Dong, Yucheng & Xu, Yinfeng & Li, Hongyi & Dai, Min, 2008. "A comparative study of the numerical scales and the prioritization methods in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 229-242, April.
    7. Devesh Kumar & Gunjan Soni & Rohit Joshi & Vipul Jain & Amrik Sohal, 2022. "Modelling supply chain viability during COVID-19 disruption: A case of an Indian automobile manufacturing supply chain," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 1224-1240, December.
    8. Katie Steele & Yohay Carmel & Jean Cross & Chris Wilcox, 2009. "Uses and Misuses of Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) in Environmental Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1), pages 26-33, January.
    9. Elliott, Michael A., 2010. "Selecting numerical scales for pairwise comparisons," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 750-763.
    10. Satish Tyagi, 2016. "An improved fuzzy-AHP (IFAHP) approach to compare SECI modes," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(15), pages 4520-4536, August.
    11. Jiří Mazurek, 2018. "Some notes on the properties of inconsistency indices in pairwise comparisons," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 28(1), pages 27-42.
    12. A Ishizaka & D Balkenborg & T Kaplan, 2011. "Influence of aggregation and measurement scale on ranking a compromise alternative in AHP," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(4), pages 700-710, April.
    13. Alessio Ishizaka & Sajid Siraj, 2020. "Interactive consistency correction in the analytic hierarchy process to preserve ranks," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(2), pages 443-464, December.
    14. Begoña Gutiérrez-Nieto & Carlos Serrano-Cinca & Juan Camón-Cala, 2016. "A Credit Score System for Socially Responsible Lending," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 133(4), pages 691-701, February.
    15. Azzopardi, Ernest & Nash, Robert, 2013. "A critical evaluation of importance–performance analysis," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 222-233.
    16. A Ishizaka & D Balkenborg & T Kaplan, 2011. "Does AHP help us make a choice? An experimental evaluation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(10), pages 1801-1812, October.
    17. Arslan, Turan & Khisty, Jotin, 2006. "A rational approach to handling fuzzy perceptions in route choice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(2), pages 571-583, January.
    18. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2020. "How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    19. Linares, Pedro, 2009. "Are inconsistent decisions better? An experiment with pairwise comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 193(2), pages 492-498, March.
    20. Tomashevskii, I.L., 2015. "Eigenvector ranking method as a measuring tool: Formulas for errors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(3), pages 774-780.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:44:y:1998:i:1:p:83-102. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.