Applied Decision Analytics

Vol. 2 No. 1 (2026): Applied Decision Analytics
Articles

A Review of the Application of MCDM Methods in Business Analytics

Full text (pdf)
  • Arkyadeep Sarkar,
  • Shankha Shubhra Goswami
Arkyadeep Sarkar
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Abacus Institute of Engineering and Management, India, 712148
Shankha Shubhra Goswami
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Abacus Institute of Engineering and Management, India, 712148

Published 2026-02-04

Keywords

  • Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM),
  • Business analytics,
  • Hybrid MCDM,
  • AHP,
  • TOPSIS,
  • Predictive analytics,
  • Decision support systems
    • ...More
    Less

Copyright (c) 2026 Arkyadeep Sarkar, Shankha Shubhra Goswami (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Sarkar, A., & Goswami, S. S. (2026). A Review of the Application of MCDM Methods in Business Analytics. Applied Decision Analytics , 2(1), 150-180. https://ada-journal.org/index.php/ada/article/view/14

Abstract

Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques have become quite important in solving complex business decision-making problems that involve numerous conflicting criteria and uncertainty. This review provides a full discussion of theoretical backgrounds, methodological development, and practical implementation of MCDM within the framework of business analytics in marketing, finance and supply chain management, operations, human resource management, and strategic management. Classical methods such as AHP, ANP, TOPSIS, VIKOR, DEMATEL, COPRAS, Entropy, WASPAS, and MOORA have proved to be effective in prioritization, performance evaluation, and risk assessment. Hybrid structures that combine fuzzy logic, DEMATEL, ANP, and AI-based predictive analytics are additionally used to gain robustness, interpretability, and real-time decision support. The analysis identifies major methodological trends, gaps in the research, and uncharted areas and offers a systematic roadmap on which future research can be directed. These results emphasize the strategic importance of MCDM as a decision-support facilitator that incorporates ordered multi-criteria reasoning with data-driven evaluations that encourage transparency, resilience, and sustainability of managerial choices.

Full text (pdf)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Chowdhury, P., & Paul, S. K. (2020). Applications of MCDM methods in research on corporate sustainability: A systematic literature review. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 31(2), 385-405. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-12-2019-0284
  2. Sahoo, S. K., & Goswami, S. S. (2023). A comprehensive review of multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods: advancements, applications, and future directions. Decision Making Advances, 1(1), 25-48. https://doi.org/10.31181/dma1120237
  3. Yalcin, A. S., Kilic, H. S., & Delen, D. (2022). The use of multi-criteria decision-making methods in business analytics: A comprehensive literature review. Technological forecasting and social change, 174, 121193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121193
  4. Nallakaruppan, M. K., Johri, I., Somayaji, S., Bhatia, S., Malibari, A. A., & Alabdali, A. M. (2023). Secured MCDM Model for Crowdsource Business Intelligence. Applied Sciences, 13(3), 1511. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13031511
  5. Darvesh, A., Naeem, K., Bukhari, S. M., Sánchez-Chero, M., Núñez, R. A. S., Pozo-Suclupe, L. A., & Zuloeta, I. P. C. (2023). Time for a New Player in Business Analytics: An MCDM Scheme Based on One-Dimensional Uncertain Linguistic Interval-Valued Neutrosophic Fuzzy Data. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 61, 210-259. https://fs.unm.edu/nss8/index.php/111/article/view/3787
  6. Kazimieras Zavadskas, E., Antucheviciene, J., & Chatterjee, P. (2018). Multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques for business processes information management. Information, 10(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/info10010004
  7. Baydaş, M., Eren, T., Stević, Ž., Starčević, V., & Parlakkaya, R. (2023). Proposal for an objective binary benchmarking framework that validates each other for comparing MCDM methods through data analytics. PeerJ Computer Science, 9, e1350. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.1350
  8. Silva, A. J., Cortez, P., Pereira, C., & Pilastri, A. (2021). Business analytics in Industry 4.0: A systematic review. Expert systems, 38(7), e12741. https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.12741
  9. Chejarla, K. C., Vaidya, O. S., & Kumar, S. (2022). MCDM applications in logistics performance evaluation: A literature review. Journal of Multi‐Criteria Decision Analysis, 29(3-4), 274-297. https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.1774
  10. Kumar, R., & Pamucar, D. (2025). A comprehensive and systematic review of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods to solve decision-making problems: two decades from 2004 to 2024. Spectrum of Decision Making and Applications, 2(1), 178-197. https://doi.org/10.31181/sdmap21202524
  11. Sahoo, S. K., Goswami, S. S., & Halder, R. (2024). Supplier selection in the age of industry 4.0: a review on MCDM applications and trends. Decision making advances, 2(1), 32-47. https://doi.org/10.31181/dma21202420
  12. Abanda, F. H., Chia, E. L., Enongene, K. E., Manjia, M. B., Fobissie, K., Pettang, U. J. M. N., & Pettang, C. (2022). A systematic review of the application of multi-criteria decision-making in evaluating Nationally Determined Contribution projects. Decision Analytics Journal, 5, 100140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2022.100140
  13. Kumar, R. (2025). A comprehensive review of MCDM methods, applications, and emerging trends. Decision Making Advances, 3(1), 185-199. https://doi.org/10.31181/dma31202569
  14. Basílio, M. P., Pereira, V., Costa, H. G., Santos, M., & Ghosh, A. (2022). A systematic review of the applications of multi-criteria decision aid methods (1977–2022). Electronics, 11(11), 1720. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11111720
  15. Majd, S. S., Maleki, A., Basirat, S., & Golkarfard, A. (2025). Fermatean fuzzy TOPSIS method and its application in ranking business intelligence-based strategies in smart city context. Journal of operations intelligence, 3(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.31181/jopi31202532
  16. Gyani, J., Ahmed, A., & Haq, M. A. (2022). MCDM and various prioritization methods in AHP for CSS: A comprehensive review. IEEE Access, 10, 33492-33511. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3161742
  17. Chakraborty, S., & Chakraborty, S. (2022). A scoping review on the applications of MCDM techniques for parametric optimization of machining processes. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 29(6), 4165-4186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-022-09731-w
  18. Sahoo, S. K., & Goswami, S. S. (2024). Green supplier selection using MCDM: A comprehensive review of recent studies. Spectrum of engineering and management sciences, 2(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.31181/sems1120241a
  19. Vairetti, C., Aránguiz, I., Maldonado, S., Karmy, J. P., & Leal, A. (2024). Analytics-driven complaint prioritisation via deep learning and multicriteria decision-making. European Journal of Operational Research, 312(3), 1108-1118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2023.08.027
  20. Moktadir, M. A., Paul, S. K., Bai, C., & Santibanez Gonzalez, E. D. (2025). The current and future states of MCDM methods in sustainable supply chain risk assessment. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 27(3), 7435-7480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-04200-1
  21. Hapsari, I. C., Anandya, R., Hidayanto, A. N., Budi, N. F. A., & Phusavat, K. (2022). Prioritizing barriers and strategies mapping in business intelligence projects using fuzzy AHP TOPSIS framework in developing country. Emerging Science Journal, 6(2), 337-355. https://doi.org/10.28991/ESJ-2022-06-02-010
  22. Alsanousi, A. T., Alqahtani, A. Y., Makki, A. A., & Baghdadi, M. A. (2024). A hybrid MCDM approach using the BWM and the TOPSIS for a financial performance-based evaluation of Saudi stocks. Information, 15(5), 258. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15050258
  23. Gopal, P. R. C., Rana, N. P., Krishna, T. V., & Ramkumar, M. (2024). Impact of big data analytics on supply chain performance: an analysis of influencing factors. Annals of Operations Research, 333(2), 769-797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-022-04749-6
  24. Zhang, Y., Joneurairatana, E., & Vongphantuset, J. (2024). An AI-Driven Decision Support Framework for Ergonomic Optimization in Fashion Manufacturing: Integrating Predictive Analytics and MCDM Techniques. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 7(1), 786-802. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame7120241449
  25. Qin, J., Zeng, M., Wei, X., & Pedrycz, W. (2024). Ranking products through online reviews: A novel data-driven method based on interval type-2 fuzzy sets and sentiment analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 75(5), 860-873. https://doi.org/10.1080/01605682.2023.2215823
  26. Barasin, A. M., Alqahtani, A. Y., & Makki, A. A. (2024). Performance evaluation of retail warehouses: A combined MCDM approach using G-BWM and RATMI. Logistics, 8(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics8010010
  27. Černevičienė, J., & Kabašinskas, A. (2022). Review of multi-criteria decision-making methods in finance using explainable artificial intelligence. Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 5, 827584. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2022.827584
  28. Ayan, B., & Abacıoğlu, S. (2022). Bibliometric analysis of the MCDM methods in the last decade: WASPAS, MABAC, EDAS, CODAS, COCOSO, and MARCOS. International Journal of Business and Economic Studies, 4(2), 65-85. https://doi.org/10.54821/uiecd.1183443
  29. Torkayesh, A. E., Tirkolaee, E. B., Bahrini, A., Pamucar, D., & Khakbaz, A. (2023). A systematic literature review of MABAC method and applications: An outlook for sustainability and circularity. Informatica, 34(2), 415-448. https://doi.org/10.15388/23-INFOR511
  30. Dağıstanlı, H. A. (2023). An integrated fuzzy MCDM and trend analysis approach for financial performance evaluation of energy companies in Borsa Istanbul sustainability index. Journal of Soft Computing and Decision Analytics, 1(1), 39-49. https://doi.org/10.31181/jscda1120233
  31. Guan, X., & Zhao, J. (2022). A Two-Step Fuzzy MCDM method for implementation of sustainable precision manufacturing: Evidence from China. Sustainability, 14(13), 8085. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14138085
  32. Singh, R., Pathak, V. K., Kumar, R., Dikshit, M., Aherwar, A., Singh, V., & Singh, T. (2024). A historical review and analysis on MOORA and its fuzzy extensions for different applications. Heliyon, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25453
  33. Thanh, N. V. (2022). Designing a MCDM model for selection of an optimal ERP software in organization. Systems, 10(4), 95. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems10040095
  34. Demirdöğen, G., Işık, Z., & Arayici, Y. (2022). Determination of business intelligence and analytics-based healthcare facility management key performance indicators. Applied Sciences, 12(2), 651. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12020651
  35. Almutairi, K., Hosseini Dehshiri, S. J., Hosseini Dehshiri, S. S., Mostafaeipour, A., Hoa, A. X., & Techato, K. (2022). Determination of optimal renewable energy growth strategies using SWOT analysis, hybrid MCDM methods, and game theory: A case study. International Journal of Energy Research, 46(5), 6766-6789. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.7620
  36. Baydaş, M. (2022). Comparison of the performances of MCDM methods under uncertainty: an analysis on bist SME industry index. OPUS Journal of Society Research, 19(46), 308-326. https://doi.org/10.26466/opusjsr.1064280
  37. Jusufbašić, A. (2023). MCDM methods for selection of handling equipment in logistics: a brief review. Spectrum of Engineering and Management Sciences, 1(1), 13-25. https://doi.org/10.31181/sems1120232j
  38. Alshakhatreh, I., Thiombiano, D., & Al-Majali, S. (2024). Literature Review on Multi-Criteria Analysis and Application in Education Environment. Journal of Operations Intelligence, 2(1), 236-267. https://doi.org/10.31181/jopi21202428
  39. Taherdoost, H., & Madanchian, M. (2023). Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods and concepts. Encyclopedia, 3(1), 77-87. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia3010006
  40. Petrillo, A., Salomon, V. A. P., & Tramarico, C. L. (2023). State-of-the-art review on the analytic hierarchy process with benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 16(8), 372. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm16080372
  41. Stević, Ž., Miškić, S., Vojinović, D., Huskanović, E., Stanković, M., & Pamučar, D. (2022). Development of a model for evaluating the efficiency of transport companies: PCA–DEA–MCDM model. Axioms, 11(3), 140. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms11030140
  42. Punetha, N., & Jain, G. (2023). Game theory and MCDM-based unsupervised sentiment analysis of restaurant reviews. Applied Intelligence, 53, 20152–20173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-023-04471-1
  43. Işık, C., Türkkan, M., Marbou, S., & Gül, S. (2024). Stock market performance evaluation of listed food and beverage companies in Istanbul stock exchange with MCDM methods. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 7(2), 35-64. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame722024692
  44. Khulud, K., Masudin, I., Zulfikarijah, F., Restuputri, D. P., & Haris, A. (2023). Sustainable supplier selection through multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) approach: a bibliometric analysis. Logistics, 7(4), 96. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics7040096
  45. Bączkiewicz, A., Kizielewicz, B., Shekhovtsov, A., Wątróbski, J., & Sałabun, W. (2021). Methodical aspects of MCDM based E-commerce recommender system. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 16(6), 2192-2229. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer16060122
  46. Rasoanaivo, R. G., Yazdani, M., Zaraté, P., & Fateh, A. (2024). Combined Compromise for Ideal Solution (CoCoFISo): a multi-criteria decision-making based on the CoCoSo method algorithm. Expert Systems with Applications, 251, 124079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2024.124079
  47. Pelissari, R., Khan, S. A., & Ben-Amor, S. (2022). Application of multi-criteria decision-making methods in sustainable manufacturing management: a systematic literature review and analysis of the prospects. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 21(02), 493-515. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622021300020
  48. Ayyildiz, E., & Erdogan, M. (2025). Literature analysis of the location selection studies related to the waste facilities within MCDM approaches. Environmental science and pollution research, 32(32), 19574-19595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-34370-y
  49. Balasbaneh, A. T., Aldrovandi, S., & Sher, W. (2025). A systematic review of implementing multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approaches for the circular economy and cost assessment. Sustainability, 17(11), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17115007
  50. Bouraima, M. B., Tengecha, N. A., Stević, Ž., Simić, V., & Qiu, Y. (2024). An integrated fuzzy MCDM model for prioritizing strategies for successful implementation and operation of the bus rapid transit system. Annals of operations research, 342(1), 141-172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-023-05183-y
  51. Salehzadeh, R., & Ziaeian, M. (2024). Decision making in human resource management: a systematic review of the applications of analytic hierarchy process. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1400772. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1400772
  52. Trung, N. Q., & Thanh, N. V. (2022). Evaluation of digital marketing technologies with fuzzy linguistic MCDM methods. Axioms, 11(5), 230. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms11050230
  53. Nguyen, T. M. H., Nguyen, V. P., & Nguyen, D. T. (2024). A new hybrid Pythagorean fuzzy AHP and COCOSO MCDM based approach by adopting artificial intelligence technologies. Journal of experimental & theoretical artificial intelligence, 36(7), 1279-1305. https://doi.org/10.1080/0952813X.2022.2143908
  54. Işık, Ö., Çalık, A., & Shabir, M. (2025). A consolidated MCDM framework for overall performance assessment of listed insurance companies based on ranking strategies. Computational Economics, 65(1), 271-312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-024-10578-5
  55. Momena, A. F., Gazi, K. H., Rahaman, M., Sobczak, A., Salahshour, S., Mondal, S. P., & Ghosh, A. (2024). Ranking and challenges of supply chain companies using mcdm methodology. Logistics, 8(3), 87. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics8030087
  56. Belhadi, A., Kamble, S., Fosso Wamba, S., & Queiroz, M. M. (2022). Building supply-chain resilience: an artificial intelligence-based technique and decision-making framework. International journal of production research, 60(14), 4487-4507. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2021.1950935
  57. Vatankhah, S., Darvishmotevali, M., Rahimi, R., Jamali, S. M., & Ale Ebrahim, N. (2023). Assessing the application of multi-criteria decision making techniques in hospitality and tourism research: a bibliometric study. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 35(7), 2590-2623. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-05-2022-0643
  58. Singh, A., Kumar, V., & Verma, P. (2025). Sustainable supplier selection in a construction company: a new MCDM method based on dominance-based rough set analysis. Construction Innovation, 25(2), 328-362. https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-12-2022-0324
  59. Öztaş, T., & Öztaş, G. Z. (2024). Innovation performance analysis of G20 countries: A novel integrated LOPCOW-MAIRCA MCDM approach including the COVID-19 period. Verimlilik Dergisi, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.51551/verimlilik.1320794
  60. Moslem, S., Saraji, M. K., Mardani, A., Alkharabsheh, A., Duleba, S., & Esztergár-Kiss, D. (2023). A systematic review of analytic hierarchy process applications to solve transportation problems: from 2003 to 2022. Ieee Access, 11, 11973-11990. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3234298