Using MCDM Methods in automotive industry- A Review

Year : 2026 | Volume : 13 | Issue : 01 | Page : 20 26
    By

    Amit Rakshit,

  • Subhajit Banerjee,

  • Indrashis Sengupta,

  • Hemraaj Bhattacharjee,

  • Indranil Pal,

  1. Assistant Professor, Department of Mechanical engineering, Narula Institute of Technology, Agarpara, Kolkata-700109, West Bangal, India
  2. Assistant Professor, Department of Mechanical engineering, Greater Kolkata College of Engineering & Management, Baruipur, West Bangal, India
  3. UG Student, Department of Mechanical engineering, Narula Institute of Technology, Agarpara, Kolkata-700109, West Bangal, India
  4. UG Student, Department of Mechanical engineering, Narula Institute of Technology, Agarpara, Kolkata-700109, West Bangal, India
  5. UG Student, Department of Mechanical engineering, Narula Institute of Technology, Agarpara, Kolkata-700109, West Bangal, India

Abstract

In the automobile sector, choosing the best car necessitates weighing a number of factors, including cost, fuel economy, performance, safety, and environmental impact. In order to solve complicated situations that need the simultaneous evaluation of multiple conflicting aspects, Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) procedures are essential. Among the various MCDM approaches, the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) and MOORA are widely recognized for their straightforward structure and reliable outcomes. The application of the TOPSIS approach in the automobile industry to determine the best car alternatives based on several performance parameters is the main topic of this study. The process involves creating a decision matrix, normalizing the data, and identifying ideal and non-ideal reference solutions. Next, options are ranked based on how near they are to the optimal answer. Through objective and quantitative analysis, TOPSIS helps consumers and industry professionals choose the best car by facilitating systematic comparisons between various vehicles and helping decision-makers achieve a balanced evaluation of diverse attributes.

Rapid technical breakthroughs, strict environmental restrictions, and changing customer expectations present the automotive sector with increasingly complicated decision-making issues. It is necessary to simultaneously assess several, frequently contradictory factors in order to choose the best vehicle designs, suppliers, materials, powertrain technology, and consumer car options. By offering organized, transparent, and quantitative frameworks for decision-support, Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) techniques have become powerful analytical tools to tackle these issues. With a focus on popular approaches like TOPSIS, MOORA, AHP, VIKOR, and their hybrid integrations, this review paper provides a thorough overview of the implementation of MCDM techniques in the automotive industry.

Keywords: Automotive industry; MCDM; TOPSIS; MOORA; PROMETHEE

[This article belongs to Journal of Automobile Engineering and Applications ]

How to cite this article:
Amit Rakshit, Subhajit Banerjee, Indrashis Sengupta, Hemraaj Bhattacharjee, Indranil Pal. Using MCDM Methods in automotive industry- A Review. Journal of Automobile Engineering and Applications. 2026; 13(01):20-26.
How to cite this URL:
Amit Rakshit, Subhajit Banerjee, Indrashis Sengupta, Hemraaj Bhattacharjee, Indranil Pal. Using MCDM Methods in automotive industry- A Review. Journal of Automobile Engineering and Applications. 2026; 13(01):20-26. Available from: https://journals.stmjournals.com/joaea/article=2026/view=236325


References

  1. Sakthivel , M. Ilangkumaran, G. Nagarajan, A. Raja, P.M. Ragunadhan and J. Prakash, (2013) “A hybrid MCDM approach for evaluating an automobile purchase model”, Int. J. Information and Decision Sciences, Vol. 5, No. 1, PP. 50-79
  2. Albayrak, E. and Erensal, Y.C. (2004); “Using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to improve human performance: an application of multiple criteria decision making problem”, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp.491–503.
  3. Athawale, V.M. and Chakraborty, S. (2010) ‘Facility location selection using PROMETHEE II method’, International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management Dhaka, Bangladesh, pp.221–229.
  4. Behzadian, M., Kazemzadeh, R.B., Albadvi, A. and Aghdasi, M. (2010) ‘PROMETHEE: a comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 200, No. 1, pp.198–215.
  5. Beynon, M.J. and Wells, P. (2008) ‘The lean improvement of the chemical emissions of motor vehicles based on preference ranking: a PROMETHEE uncertainty analysis’, Omega International Journal of Management Science, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp.384–394.
  6. Chang, Y.H., Cheng, C.H. and Wang, T.C. (2003) ‘Performance evaluation of international airports in the region of East Asia’, Proceedings of Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 4, pp.213–230.
  7. Chang, Y.H., Yeh C.H. and Wang, S.Y. (2007) ‘A survey and optimization-based evaluation of development strategies for the air cargo industry’, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 106, No. 2, pp.550–562.
  8. Cheng, C.H., Yang, K.L. and Hwang, C.L. (1999) ‘Evaluating attack helicopters by AHP based on linguistic variable weight’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 116, No. 2, pp.423–435.
  9. Dagdeviren, M. (2008) ‘Decision making in equipment selection: an integrated approach with AHP and PROMETHEE’, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp.397–406
  10. Tzeng, G.H., Lin, C.W. and Opricovic, S. (2005) ‘Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation’, Energy Policy, Vol. 33, No. 11, pp.1373–1383.
  11. Das I., Dennis J.E.: A Closer Look at Drawbacks of Minimizing Weighted Sums of Objectives for Pareto Set Generation in Multi-Criteria Optimization Problems. “Structural Optimization” 1997, 14, 63-69.
  12. Chan F. T. S.(2003) “Interactive selection model for vendor selection process: an analytical hierarchy process approach”, International Journal of Production Research, vol. 41, no. 15, 3549-3579
  13. Larrodé, Emilio, José María Moreno-Jiménez, and M. Victoria Muerza. 2012. An AHP-multicriteria suitability evaluation of technological diversification in the automotive industry. International Journal of Production Research 50: pp. 4889–907
  14. Sirikrai, Sajee B., and John C. S. Tang. 2006. Industrial competitiveness analysis: Using the analytic hierarchy process. The Journal of High Technology Management Research 17: 71–83
  15. Topcu, Ilker, Berna Unver, Mine Isik, and Ozgur Kabak. An AHP based prioritization model for risk evaluation factors in the automotive industry. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process
  16. SANDEEP KUMAR CHAUBEY, “Using MCDM Technique-TOPSIS for Selecting Small Passenger Car”, Pal Arch’s Journal of archaeology of Egypt,2020
  17. Combining the AHP and TOPSIS to Evaluate Car Selection, M., MUJIYAULKHAQ, Wismar R. WIJAYANTI, M. SYARUFUDIN ZAIN, ELAN BASKARA, WIDYALEONITA, HONG KONG Association for Computing Machinery, (2020)
  18. An analytic hierarchy process approach with a novel framework for luxury car selection, SINAN APAK, GIZEM GURELI GOGUS, Ibrahim SARPER KARADILAR, 8th International Management Conference (2012)
  19. Application of Fuzzy TOPSIS Algorithm for Selecting Best Family Car, ANIRBAN SARKAR, ARIJIT GHOSH, BADAL KARMAKAR, AZHARUDDIN SHEIKH, SANKAR PRASAD MONDA, International Conference on Decision Aid Sciences and Application (DASA) (2020)
  20. Investigating car purchasing decision-making process using Multi-Objective Optimization Ratio Analysis based Analytical Hierarchy Process Model: An empirical case from Vietnam, PHI-HUNG NGUYEN, Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government (2021)
  21. Development of a new hybrid multi criteria decision-making method for a car selection scenario, YOUSAF Ali, BILAL MEHMOOD, Muhammad HUZAIFA, UMAIR YASIR, AMIN ULLAH Khan, FACTA UNIVERSITATIS (2020)
  22. Assessment and Comparison of Various MCDM Approaches in the Selection of Manufacturing Process, ATEF M. GHALEB, HUSAM KAID, Ali ALSAMHAN, SYED HAMMAD MIAN and LOTFI HIDRI, HINDAWI Advances in Materials Science and Engineering (2020)
  23. Banoth Nikhil Kumar, “SELECTION OF CAR USING FUZZY AHP AND FUZZY TOPSIS METHOD BY MCDM APPROACH”, International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET), (2023);  152-159
  24. Behzadian, M., Otaghsara, S. K., Yazdani, M., and Ignatius, J. (2012). A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications. Expert Syst. Appl. 39, 13051–13069. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.056

25. Bodukuri, A. K., and Kesha, E. (2021). Multi-attribute optimization of EDM process parameters for machining of SiC and B4C particle reinforced Al 6061 metal matrix composite adopting TOPSIS method. Int. J. Adv. Technol. Eng. Explor. 8, 735–752.

Regular Issue Subscription Review Article
Volume 13
Issue 01
Received 09/01/2026
Accepted 16/01/2026
Published 30/01/2026
Publication Time 21 Days
1

Login


My IP

PlumX Metrics