IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aag/wpaper/v29y2025i3p44-84.html

Big Five Personality Traits in the Selection of Retention Strategies in the IT-ITES Industry: A Fuzzy MCDM Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Rachel Evelyn Vijayarajan

    (VIT Business School, Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai, India)

  • Sudarsanam S. K.

    (VIT Business School, Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai, India)

Abstract

[Purpose] The potential of any organization to flourish while sustaining competition and delivering excellent service depends upon its human capital. There is no one-size-fits-all approach to retaining employees, as every individual is unique, necessitating the use of multiple strategies. Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods are employed to rank employee retention techniques based on each personality . This study contributes to Decision Sciences by developing and validating a hybrid Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) and Fuzzy Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (FTOPSIS) framework that systematically links the Big Five Personality traits with specific retention strategies under conditions of uncertainty, thereby providing a quantifiable tool for strategic human resource management. [Design/methodology/approach] Expert opinions have been obtained with the objective of determining the most effective strategy based on each type. Based on the recommendations of experts, Organizational Culture, Inclusion and Belongingness, Employee Engagement, Employee Empowerment, and Employee Well-Being were taken into account as alternatives. The Big 5 traits, Openness to new experiences, Conscientiousness, Extroversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism, are used as criterion factors. The criterion weights established using FAHP were ranked using FTOPSIS. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to test the robustness and stability of the proposed method. [Findings] The Consistency Ratio of the fuzzy influence matrix was within the specified value, hence the scores given by the experts were valid and reliable. The study identified that Conscientiousness was the most preferred trait according to HR experts. Based on the criteria, i.e., Big Five personalities, organizational culture is ranked number one among the retention techniques to be employed for retention. Sensitivity analysis was performed and proved the reliability of the data. [Practical implications] Based upon the results of the model, organizations can customize their model with other personality types as criteria and build their own set of alternatives. By experimenting with various MCDM approaches, researchers may widen the scope of their investigation. Different sectors, combinations of factors, and geographical locations can be used for the studies. [Social implications] The study highlights that Fuzzy MCDM techniques can be used to predict retention techniques using personality. The algorithms and variables create a base for further restructuring that could be used irrespective of industry and organization. [Originality/value] The study broadens the scope of the literature by using mathematical models. A decision-making model has been customized for deciding upon employee retention strategies based on employee Personalities that are pertinent to the IT&ITES organizations in India.

Suggested Citation

  • Rachel Evelyn Vijayarajan & Sudarsanam S. K., 2025. "Big Five Personality Traits in the Selection of Retention Strategies in the IT-ITES Industry: A Fuzzy MCDM Approach," Advances in Decision Sciences, Asia University, Taiwan, vol. 29(3), pages 44-84, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:aag:wpaper:v:29:y:2025:i:3:p:44-84
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://iads.site/big-five-personality-traits-in-the-selection-of-retention-strategies-in-the-it-ites-industry/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://iads.site/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Big-Five-Personality-Traits-in-the-Selection-of-Retention-Strategies-in-the-IT-ITES-Industry.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas L. Saaty, 1986. "Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 841-855, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kaixuan Liu & Jiayu Zhao & Chun Zhu, 2022. "Research on Digital Restoration of Plain Unlined Silk Gauze Gown of Mawangdui Han Dynasty Tomb Based on AHP and Human–Computer Interaction Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-19, July.
    2. Bentes, Alexandre Veronese & Carneiro, Jorge & da Silva, Jorge Ferreira & Kimura, Herbert, 2012. "Multidimensional assessment of organizational performance: Integrating BSC and AHP," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(12), pages 1790-1799.
    3. Reza Banai, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    4. Eliaza Mkuna & Lloyd Baiyegunhi & Wiktor Adamus, 2020. "Sustainable livelihood alternatives among Nile perch (Lates niloticus) fishers in Lake Victoria Tanzania: analytical hierarchy process (AHP) approach," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 9(1), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Guh, Yuh-Yuan, 1997. "Introduction to a new weighting method -- Hierarchy consistency analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 215-226, October.
    6. Nikola Kadoić & Diana Šimić & Jasna Mesarić & Nina Begičević Ređep, 2021. "Measuring Quality of Public Hospitals in Croatia Using a Multi-Criteria Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-28, September.
    7. Lahouel, Béchir Ben & Zaied, Younes Ben & Song, Yaoyao & Yang, Guo-liang, 2021. "Corporate social performance and financial performance relationship: A data envelopment analysis approach without explicit input," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    8. Chou, Yuntsai & Lee, Chiwei & Chung, Jianru, 2004. "Understanding m-commerce payment systems through the analytic hierarchy process," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(12), pages 1423-1430, December.
    9. Tanrıverdi, Gökhan & Lezki, Şenay, 2021. "Istanbul Airport (IGA) and quest of best competitive strategy for air cargo carriers in new competition environment: A fuzzy multi-criteria approach," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    10. Bice Cavallo & Gerardo Canfora & Livia D’Apuzzo & Massimo Squillante, 2014. "Reasoning under uncertainty and multi-criteria decision making in data privacy," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1957-1972, July.
    11. Cui, Ye & E, Hanyu & Pedrycz, Witold & Fayek, Aminah Robinson, 2022. "A granular multicriteria group decision making for renewable energy planning problems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 1047-1059.
    12. Xiaoxia Li, 2022. "Research on the Development Level of Rural E-Commerce in China Based on Analytic Hierarchy and Systematic Clustering Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-18, July.
    13. Irene Josa & Albert de la Fuente & Maria del Mar Casanovas-Rubio & Jaume Armengou & Antonio Aguado, 2021. "Sustainability-Oriented Model to Decide on Concrete Pipeline Reinforcement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-25, March.
    14. Duke, Joshua M. & Aull-Hyde, Rhonda, 2002. "Identifying public preferences for land preservation using the analytic hierarchy process," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 131-145, August.
    15. Gopalakrishnan Suresh & Vadakkapaikkadu Ravindran Renjith & Anchalassery Balakrishnan Bhasi, 2024. "Prioritisation of operations during emergency shutdown of a crude distillation unit by interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy analytic hierarchy process," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 238(5), pages 1023-1036, October.
    16. Gerald Schweiger & Fabian Kuttin & Alfred Posch, 2019. "District Heating Systems: An Analysis of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats of the 4GDH," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-15, December.
    17. Haiyan Xu & Keith Hipel & D. Kilgour & Ye Chen, 2010. "Combining strength and uncertainty for preferences in the graph model for conflict resolution with multiple decision makers," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 497-521, October.
    18. Amelia Bilbao-Terol & Mariano Jiménez & Mar Arenas-Parra, 2016. "A group decision making model based on goal programming with fuzzy hierarchy: an application to regional forest planning," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 137-162, October.
    19. Danijela Tuljak-Suban & Patricija Bajec, 2022. "A Hybrid DEA Approach for the Upgrade of an Existing Bike-Sharing System with Electric Bikes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-23, October.
    20. Susan K. Schroeder, 2008. "The Underpinnings Of Country Risk Assessment," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 498-535, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C3 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables
    • C6 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling
    • M1 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:aag:wpaper:v:29:y:2025:i:3:p:44-84. 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: Vincent Pan (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dfasitw.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.