A User-reviewed Multi-Criteria Framework for Evaluating Computer-aided Design Software Popular in the Woodworking Industry

Abstract

A Multi‑Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) approach is proposed to replace expert inputs with publicly available user-based evaluation data from Capterra and G2. Five computer-aided design (CAD) alternatives used in the woodworking industry (SketchUp, Autodesk Fusion, SOLIDWORKS, Rhinoceros, and Autodesk Inventor) were identified through a review of 14 online industry sources and evaluated using five criteria: customer satisfaction, ease of use, features, customer service, and cost. Criteria weights were calculated using the Criteria Importance Through Intercriteria Correlation (CRITIC) method, and alternatives were ranked using the Evaluation based on Distance from Average Solution (EDAS) method. SketchUp ranked first with an Appraisal Score (AS) of 0.9877, followed by Rhinoceros (0.8490), Autodesk Fusion (0.6472), Autodesk Inventor (0.4212), and SOLIDWORKS (0.0528). The robustness of the results was supported by sensitivity analysis and comparative analysis using Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), Simple Additive Weighting (SAW), and the VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR). Thus, user review data can be used as structured input for MCDM and applies CRITIC-EDAS framework to CAD software popular in the woodworking industry, using publicly available user-review data. The proposed framework offers a transparent and reproducible alternative to expert-based CAD selection approaches.