MSc Dissertation For print copy

Exploring the trend of customisation in the digital age: Is

there demand and potential for customised products in the

fashion industry online?

Y1401956

Supervisor: Jocelyn Hayes

September 2015

Dissertation submitted in part fulfilment of the degree of MSc in Global

Marketing

The York Management School

University of York Word count: 13293

Exploring the trend of customisation in the digital age

16/10/2015 2

Table of Contents Abstract………………………………………………………………………………………4

Acknowledgments……………………………………………………………………………5

I. Introduction

A. Background: Changing consumer attitudes and behaviour and the decline in mass production……………………………………………………………………………. 6

B. Purpose, aims and objectives…………………………………………………….........8 II. Literature Review

A. Defining and applying mass customisation………………………………….......10 B. Consumer behaviour and mass customisation in the fashion industry ………….15 C. Opportunities, dangers and limits to customisation……………………………...16

i. Willingness to pay and value of customisation……………………….....17 ii. Technology and TAM in the context of mass customisation……………18 iii. Mass customisation of the apparel market………………………………21 iv. The danger of the fast-fashion trend ………………………………........23

III. Purpose and Methodology A. The structure of the study……………………………………………………....... 26 B. Secondary data: hypotheses setting…………………………………………….....28 C. Primary research ………………………………………………………………… 29

i. Interview………………………………………………………………….. 30 ii. Questionnaire………………………………………………………………31

iii. Data analysis and findings………………………………………………....35

IV. Analysis of findings A. Secondary data analysis and hypotheses setting……………………………….........36 B. Interview analysis and findings……………………………………………………...47 C. Questionnaire results………..……………………………………………………….51 D. Overall results and discussion……………………………………………………….69

V. Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………….73 VII. Bibliography………………………………………………………………………. .77 VIII. Appendices…………………………………………………………………………. 83 XI. Glossary…………………………………………………………………………….101 Strategic tables: Table A ………………………………………………………………………………………………31 Table B……………………………………………………………………………………………… 34 Table C……………………………………………………………………………………………… 69


16/10/2015 3

Tables and figures Figures Figure 1: The long tail………………………………………………………………………… 7 Figure 2: Approaches to customisation by Gilmore and Pine (1997) ………………………… 11 Figure 3: Customisation in various industries………………………………………………… 12 Figure 4: Porter’s Generic Strategies ………………………………………………………… 13 Figure 5: Generalising findings to other markets ……….………………………………........ 18 Figure 6: Virtual Fitting rooms ………………………………………………………………. 19 Figure 7: A model showing casual paths and R2 for applying TAM on consumer attitudes toward online mass customization …………………………………………………………… 20 Figure 8: Model of mass customization in apparel …………………………………………… 40 Figure 9: Primary disappointment when shopping online–by age group …………………….. 42 Figure 10a: Fits.me statistics………………………………………………………………….. 43 Figure 10b: Fits.me statistics………………………………………………………………….. 43 Figure 10c: Fits.me statistics…………………………………………………………………. 44 Figure 10d: Fits.me statistics…………………………………………………………………. 44 Figure 10e: Fits.me statistics………………………………………………………………… . 45 Figure 11: Participants’ profile: Gender representation pie………………………………..... 52 Figure 12: Participants’ profile: Age group distribution pie chart ………………………....... 53 Figure 13: Participants’ profile: Income level ………………………………………………. 53 Figure 14: Participants’ profile: Interest in fashion and looks ………………………………. 54 Figure 15: Participants’ profile: Computer literacy and on-line shopping experience………… 55 Figure 16: Participants’ profile: Reasons people fail to buy a clothing item ………………… 57 Figure 17: Participants’ willingness and interest to buy customised clothes.………………… 57 Figure 18: Participants’ willingness to pay …………………………………………………… 58 Figure 19: Consumer preferences: Price Vs Quality ………………………………………… 59 Figure 20: Consumer preferences: Preferable items to be cutomised ………………………… 60 Figure 21: Interdependence testing: covariance between degree of customisation and preferred apparel category …………………………………………………………………… 61 Figure 22: Consumer preferences: Degree of customisation ………………………………… 61 Figure 23: Concerns consumers have when purchasing an apparel item online ……………… 63 Figure 24: Interdependence testing: covariance between age and what is more likely to worry consumers in ordering custom clothes online ………………………………………. 63 Figure 25: Interdependence testing: covariance between age and what discourages from buying a clothing item.………………………………………………………………………… 64 Figure 26: Interdependence testing: covariance between gender and comfort in using technology for customisation processes………………………………………………………... 65 Figure 27: Interdependence testing: covariance between interest in fashion and preferable level of customisation ………………………………………………………………………… 66 Figure 28: Interdependence testing: covariance between IT literacy, fashion involvement and confidence in using technology for customisation processes …………………………… 67 Figure 29: Interdependence testing: covariance between level of customisation and IT literacy……………………………………………………………………………………. 68 Tables Table 1: Most studies fail to answer essential questions (which are explored in this study)…. 8 Table 2: Success and failure of mass customisation ………………………………………… 14 Table 3: Conditions of a successful customisation strategy………………………………..... 17 Table 4: Successful companies in the customisation of apparel market.………………….... 21 Table 5: Overall, the dissertation explores and aims to answer the following questions…… 28 Table 6: Sample of respondents…………………………………………………………...... 33 Table 7: Levels of customisation …………………………………………………………... 36 Table 8: Hypotheses testing table ………………………………………………………….. 46 Table 9: Formula for estimating the price of a customised garment provided by.………….. 50 Table 10: Target consumer characteristics ………………………………………………….. 50 Table 11: Mass customisation strategy for a successful brand of custom apparel online………………………………………………………………………………………… 69


16/10/2015 4

Abstract

What enables mass customisation of a brand to be successful?

This dissertation aims to explore the potential of mass customisation in an online apparel

market from both a producer’s and consumer’s perspective. It takes into account the

advantages of technological innovations and identifies potential threats from the emerging

fashion trend called fast-fashion. It explores the concept of co-design and additional barriers

connected to technology acceptance by consumers.

The purpose of this research is to explore the willingness of consumers to co-create

and purchase customised garments online and to reveal conditions in which a company’s

mass customisation strategy would succeed. The paper summarises previous studies through

a secondary data analysis and presents an updated empirical study divided into two parts: An

individual in-depth interview with a made-to-measure designer who would provide insights

from a producer’s perspective and an online survey that reveals findings from a customer’s

perspective. This work also studies critical elements of opportunities and risks for a start-up

company that would wish to adapt a mass customisation product strategy. It also explores the

limits of the customisation concept and generates a new consumer-based mass customisation

framework to be applied by start-up companies as a business strategy.

Keywords: mass customisation, on-line apparel market, TAM, CAD, co-design, consumer

behaviour, fast-fashion trend, made-to-measure clothes


16/10/2015 5

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the TYMS Management school for support; especially, Kevin Harper

and my supervisor Jocelyn Hayes for understanding and encouragement. Without them, I

would not have graduated this year.


16/10/2015 6

I. Introduction

A. Background: Changing consumer attitudes and behaviour and the decline in mass

production

Before the Industrial Revolution, each customer was a segment of one. The products

that, in most cases, only wealthy customers could afford were produced individually for each

buyer (Pine, 1993). When hand tools were replaced with machinery the mass production that

reduced production costs was made possible. Known also as Fordism, this era of mass

production was described aptly by Henry Ford, who implemented the Ford Model T

production system: “Any customer can have a car painted any colour that he wants as long as

it is black” (Ford, Crowther, 1922:72). “A new generation of mass consumers grew up

satisfied with standardized products at reasonable prices, even if that meant sacrificing some

of their preferences” (Sheth et al. 2000).

When the “markets in many industries began to mature and saturate”, their

homogeneity was threatened by the input instabilities and changing demographics; moreover,

the changing needs of consumers had established new requirements for goods to match their

individual needs (Porter 1996; Prahalad and Ramaswamy 2004). The new niche markets

became customer-oriented and more segmented (Kotler, 1967; 1977) in order to satisfy

diversified consumer needs. Initially, products were tailored according to segments and their

average preferences (Franke et al, 2010). Alongside, increased demand for individualisation,

niche markets developed, whereby each individual customer is a separate market (Porter,

1996, Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004, Gilmore and Pine, 2000). By the late 1980s, markets

became extremely heterogeneous, leading to the emergence of an advanced market

segmentation strategy called mass customisation (Bardakci & Whitelock, 2004).

Lancaster (1966; 1979) provides an explanation of this phenomenon in his theory of

customer demand. In this, he suggests that customers purchase products to utilise their

specific characteristics. Each consumer may identify a variety of uses from the different

characteristics of the product. In other words, standardised products are less likely to satisfy

the needs of every consumer.

Anderson (2006), who explains the “long tail” phenomenon, also argues that a

standard demand curve will change in tandem with greater demand for niche products.

Therefore, highly customised products available for an affordable price could be an

“appropriate strategy to exploit the long tail” (Harzer, 2013:7).


16/10/2015 7

Individualisation and diversity drive today’s consumers and give the competitive

advantage to the firms (Gandhi et al, 2013). Mass customisation helps companies “increase

revenue, gain competitive advantage, improve cash flow, and reduce waste through on-

demand production” (Gandhi et al, 2013:3). With new technological advances and the web

mass customisation is achieved easily in an economically efficient manner. However, when it

comes to customisation in the fashion industry, it might not be as easy as with other products

due to complexity of production and the emergence of the fast-fashion trend.

Customisation is based on collaboration between the producer and end-user through a

system that reveals the precise product characteristics required for customer satisfaction

(Ulrich et al, 2003:401). The development of new technologies plays a key role in co-

designing and making manufacturing process of customised goods less expensive and less

time-consuming by taking advantage of economies of scope. They save money and time by

virtually displaying the products and discovering products (Brannon et al, 2002).

Customisation is possible in many industries. This study focuses on the apparel

market and the potential for mass customisation in the fashion industry. Previous studies on

mass customisation of apparel are outdated and do not take into account other contradicting

trends and recent technological innovations.

Taken from Harzer, (2013)


16/10/2015 8

B. Purpose, aim and objectives

This dissertation will study previous findings on mass customisation and, through a

set of empirical research methods, will present new findings relevant to nowadays apparel

market and recent shifts in consumer attitudes in the international online market.

This study aims to explore the advantages of the technology and the dangers of the

emerging fast-fashion trend in the context of customisation. The research will reveal

consumer attitudes towards customisation and ordering such services online, as well as,

dangers and limitations for the producer of customised services through an online space.

The idea must be analysed not mainly from a purchaser perspective but also producer’s

viewpoint in order to evaluate capabilities when providing high-quality services. Most studies

are fragmented and only partially analyse and answer questions connected to mass

customisation of apparel online.

Hypothetically, fast-fashion and customisation is a trade-off between quality and price.

However, there is little said about what motivates consumers to purchase certain types of

fashion apparel. There is not much about the segmentation of consumers that accept certain

types of new trends in apparel like fast-fashion and mass customisation, (Fairhurst, Bhardwaj,

2010:171) as well as, what characteristics perspective customers for mass customisation

poses in connection to what level of customisation they prefer.

Table 1: Most studies fail to answer essential questions (which are explored in this

study):

· What are the key buyer motivation for customers to buy customized clothes in the

context of disposable and these changing seasonal fashion trends?

· How attractive a shopping experience would it be for customers to construct apparel

online as opposed to shopping in malls?

· Which are the key target groups who may be interested in buying made-to-measure

clothing and what type of clothes would be possible to tailor online?

· Is online mass customisation a viable business option? What are the production

implications in producing a singular item for minimum cost?

· What methods could be employed to encourage customers to trust the online

transaction when buying clothes online?

(Source: constructed by the researcher after reviewing literature mentioned in this paper)


16/10/2015 9

This research integrates separate studies into one paper and analyses mass customisation

from a broader perspective. It tries to answer questions that previous studies failed to answer

and aims to construct a framework for a successful mass customisation strategy.

Most studies limited to young technology literate females in certain regions. This could have

influenced positive attitudes towards mass customisation processes of apparel online.

This study takes into consideration older consumers with varying levels of IT literacy

and fashion awareness, and in different locations in the world. The study is not limited to a

specific product; rather, it explores different product categories in the apparel market to

identify those that yield high customisation demand. It also explores preferential choices and

levels of participating in the co-creation of garments, while examining the perceived risk of

mass customisation from a customiser’s perspective.

Overall, the dissertation explores and aims to answer the following questions:

(a) Is there a demand for mass customisation in the apparel market? How big is it?

(b) Does the fast-fashion trend contradict the need for customisation? How to overcome it?

(c) What type of consumers prefer fast-fashion products and what type of consumers would

rather buy customised clothing items?

(d) What products and to what level should be customised?

(e) In what way have technological advances contribute to customisation? Can they solve

problems connected to customisation services? How comfortable the consumers are with co-

design software? Can they make design decisions?

(f) How people view the possibility of customising and buying products online? Can it

compete with shopping in malls?

(g) What key issues could arise from the customisation of apparel online? How can they be

omitted?

(h) What pricing strategy would be acceptable for customised apparel? What price the

consumers are willing to pay for long-term satisfaction?

(i) What components positively effect on success of the company that provides mass

customisation services? What are the key elements that would ensure mass customiser’s

success?

(j) What characteristics target consumers of a mass customised product should posses?


16/10/2015 10

II. Literature review

A. Defining and applying mass customisation

Chamberlin (1962) was the first academic to highlight the idea of the customisation of

products and services in order to meet the needs of consumers. However, Davis (1987)

coined and defined the term ‘mass customisation’ as being a strategy that offers products and

services tailored to the specific wants of the consumers and “sold at prices reflecting

economies of scale” (Ibid, Brannon et al., 2002:240). Tseng & Jiao (2001:685) define it as

"producing goods and services to meet individual customer's needs with near mass

production efficiency”.

Mass customisation is a consumer-centric ‘production process’ and a ‘business strategy’

enabled by technology that is “organized around short product development and

manufacturing cycles with products built to the specifications of individuals” (Brannon et al,

2002: 241). This implies a perfect balance between supply and demand and avoiding any

excess in supply and facilitating on-request tailoring. In addition, is reduces the production

cost and waste for the mass customisers. Furthermore, wide product variety and collaboration

with the end-consumers result in high customer satisfaction and loyalty (Abdelkafi, 2008).

“The foundation of mass customisation lies in identifying the common needs and interests of

consumers that allow the development of component-driven mass production to supply

customized goods” (Brannon et al. 2002:249).

While standardised production “thrives on a homogenous market” and places customers

at the end of the value chain, mass customisation considers consumers at the beginning of the

product development; thereby assuming a heterogeneous market (Brannon et al, 2002: 241).

This should not be confused with mass personalisation as customisation takes into account

not only unique consumer needs, but also the manufacturer’s customisation capabilities and

sets limits on mass customisation (Tseng et al,2003; Haag et al.,2002).

Gilmore and Pine(1997) suggest four approaches to customisation: using collaborative

customisation, where the company and users collaborate to create products that correspond to

consumer needs; creating adaptive custom designs that enable consumers to alter the product;

introducing cosmetic customisation usage where the same standardised product is represented

differently for various consumers (same product in different packaging); and using


16/10/2015 11

transparent customisation monitors to provide consumers with unique goods without letting

on that they are customised (e.g. Google AdWords).

Subsequently, Gahndi et al. splits collaborative customisation into configured

customisation where the menu for choosing different elements is offered and individualised

customisation where the product is created specifically for the customer according to his or

her unique characteristics (2013:4).

Figure 2: Approaches to customisation

Source: http://i1.wp.com/www.entrepreneurial-insights.com/wp-

content/uploads/2015/02/approaches-to-mass-customization.png


16/10/2015 12

In the first scholarly article pertaining to mass customisation, Kotler (1989:47) claimed

mass customisation can serve as a differentiation strategy that can serve individuals,

following the death of the mass market. Later, Pine (1993) concluded that mass customisation

is a highly beneficial strategy for firms operating in turbulent markets (i.e. where uncertainty

relates to unstable conditions in the marketplace (Brannon et al, 2002)). Both Davis (1987)

and Kotha (1995:22) consider that a mass customisation strategic approach helps companies

gain a competitive advantage, increase revenue, lower investment risks and reduce waste

“through on-demand production” (Gahndi, 2013:3).

According to Porter (1980;1985), a firm’s competitive advantage is achieved and

maintained by offering “either lower priced products with low operating costs or

differentiated products with a price premium over competitors” (Harzer, 2013:8). Moreover,

mass customisation is able to offer a hybrid strategy by proposing differentiated products

without the premium cost (Harzer, 2013:8; Kaplan and Haenlein 2006:176).

Figure 3: Customisation in various industries.

Source: Gahndi, 2013


16/10/2015 13

In circumstances where the higher price for such products cannot be lowered, studies

have revealed that customers are frequently willing to pay extra for customised products

(Franke et al., 2009). This is because they gain more utility from such products. Nevertheless,

costs should be sufficiently low to target the same market segment that previously purchased

standard products (Harzer, 2013:10, Kaplan et al 2007; Frankie and Piller 2004, Schrier 2006,

Frankie et al 2009).

Conversely, scholars like Alptekinoglu and Corbett (2008) and Jiang et al (2006) view

mass customisation as a less sustainable strategy that depends significantly on external

market environments and internal firm capabilities (Salvador et al, 2009:74). Moreover, a

study conducted by Squire et al. (2006) concludes that mass customisation is limited and is

not an appropriate strategy for any type of firm. Accordingly, Kotha (1995:36) emphasises

that mass customisation should replace neither standardised products nor services; it can be

an additional service that delivers to another consumer segment (Radder and Louw 1999).

For instance, companies such as Adidas, Lego and Masterfoods provide standard products

while simultaneously offering those that are customised (Harzer,2013).

A study conducted by Herzer et al (2013), which explored companies and their

customisation endeavours, demonstrated that the combination of inappropriate strategies

foiled their attempts. Companies that understood consumer behaviour, needs and reactions

were successful.

Figure 4: Porter’s Generic Strategies. Source: Porter, 1985, p.12


16/10/2015 14

Table 2: Success and failure of mass customisation:

Company Year Customisation project Reasons for failure Similar projects

that succeeded

Procter &

Gamble

2005 Reflect.com

- Allowed consumers to create

their own make-up, skincare, hair

care, and perfume products.

Customisation options: colour,

fragrance, packaging, ingredients

and product name (Piller et

al.2004).

1)Excessively wide choice

of customisation

characteristics such as

10,000 shades of lip gloss

created “mass confusion”

for customers (Huffman

and Kahn,1998).

2) High prices for

unbranded products.

3) Online distribution

excluded traditional

buyers (Bittar 2001).

Mybodylotion.de

Liliemakeup.com

Land’s

End

1999 Made-to-measure pants and shirts 1)Did not combine

personification with mass

customisation capabilities.

2) Emphasized on

personification that does

not take into account

customer preferences and

failed to satisfy needs of

consumers.

Dolzer.com

Indochino.com

General

Mills

2001 Mycereal.com

-Allowed customers to customise

cereals.

Customisation options:

Size of servings, taste

1) Offered limited amount

of choices: Cheerios,

Chex, or Wheaties. No

natural or organic

ingredients were available.

2) Price for products with

no specific advantage was

too high.

3) No order follow-up.

Mymuesli.com

Mixmygranola.com


16/10/2015 15

Levi’s 1994 “Original Spin” - Personal Pair of

jeans

Customisation options: -type of

jeans (classic, low-cut, or

relaxed); colour, leg opening

(tapered, straight, boot cut, flare

or wide), the fly (either zip or

button). Three body

measurements (hip, waist, and

inseam) and other personal

options. The customer could

choose to name the jeans, for

instance.

1) No individual

relationship with

consumers

2) No physical presence in

stores

Getwear.com

indicustom.com

Diejeans.de

Dell 90’s 1)Customised computer

products do not deliver

superior value.

2) Production costs too

high.

Sony

Apple

Source: Adapted from Harzer (2013)

B. Consumer behaviour and mass customisation in the fashion industry

As discussed previously, mass customisation operates well in turbulent markets. The

retail market is regarded as turbulent due to constant changes in global competition, trade

regulations and economic swings. Therefore, fashion-oriented goods can benefit hugely from

mass customisation due to the diverse tastes and lifestyles of modern consumers (Brannon et

al., 2002:242). Udwadia and Kumar (1991:263) predicted that the rising needs of consumers

to be involved in product creation would be satisfied through collaborative customisation.

Malone (1998, 1999) “claims that mass production of fashion products was not a

solution to gain profits in the fashion business” (Fairhurst, Bhardwaj, 2010:167). Numerous

studies reveal consumer dissatisfaction with standardised apparel because it meets neither

their needs nor expectations (SRI consulting, 1997, Brannon et al., 2002). In particular,

women struggle to find the correct fit of apparel. This is usually the main reason cited for

failing to purchase an item of clothing (Kurt Salmon Associates, 1997). Some consumers

have issues with inconsistent sizing within and between brands, while some are dissatisfied


16/10/2015 16

with the psychological effect of buying a bigger size than they wish; a factor that actively

discourages some women from purchasing clothes (Workman and Lents, 2000). One study

highlighted that “widespread dissatisfaction with fit and sizing in mass produced apparel and

interest in the potential for customising fit to individuals was important” (Brannon et al.

2002:255). If fit works for consumers, it increases sales and customer loyalty (Rogers 1999).

A research published by Cisco revealed that 58% of shoppers are willing to share their

“personal measurements and sizes in exchange for more personalized recommendations ...in

order to facilitate a more curated and relevant shopping experience” (Fits.me, 2015).

Another study demonstrated that consumers are not only interested in on-line

shopping and the wider choice it provides, but also in personalising their apparel. They are

“willing to pay far more for products that fit their preferences” (Franke et at, 2009). In 1998,

Pisut discovered that more than 90 percent of students surveyed have either a moderate or

high interest level in customised design of apparel. Another recent study conducted by Bain

& Company in 2013 questioned 1,000 shoppers:

“…less than 10 percent had customized a product. But 25-30 percent said they’d be

up for it. And that’s enough for many brands that want to believe there’s potential in

personalization” (Sherman, 2014).

There are numerous examples to prove these claims. For instance, Levi’s increased

sales by 38 percent after introducing a customised jeans service; the Personal Pair

programme (Rogers 1999, Brannon et al 2002).

C. Opportunities, dangers and limits to customisation

Franke et al. (2010) raise questions regarding customisation and its potential for failure. It

is assumed that the success and benefits of customisation rely heavily on consumer

characteristics. Firstly, customisation requires customers to be able to specify precisely what

they want and be able to express their preferences correctly. “Research on consumer

decision-making suggests that preference systems are often ill-defined, and many people have

hard time stating what they really want” (Franke et al 2010: 28). Therefore, with this lack of

knowledge, consumers are: “more inclined to construct preferences based on situational cues

when asked to specify product requirements-which will bring about a high error term in their

preference measurements” (Franke et al 2010:31). Facilitating preferences is possible through


16/10/2015 17

recommendation systems and technology that aids customers in exploring their true

predilections and making decisions.

Consequently, the same paper provides three conditions in which customisation is a

successful strategy:

Table 3: Conditions of a successful customisation strategy

1) Customers must have sufficient preference insight because customisation is based

on specific preference measurements.

2) Customers must be able to reveal their preferences information to the company.

3) The customer must exhibit high involvement in the product category in order to

care enough about maximum satisfaction.

Source: adapted from Franke et al. (2010).

Another issue with customer’s strategic behaviour is that buyers delay the purchase until

the retailer marks down its products. With customisation sales would occur rarely and could

affect purchasing decisions of potential customers and willingness to pay (Cachon, Swinney,

2011). But customisation means there is no stock to reduce, so if the new concept is accepted

by the shoppers, their habits of waiting for reduced apparel might change. In return they

would gain satisfaction and get exactly what they want.

i. Willingness to pay and value of customisation

How much more will consumers pay and how to calculate the value of customised goods?

Research by Franke et al. (2010) studied consumer’s preferences and willingness to pay by

carrying out an experiment where three groups of people where offered three types of

newspapers: mass market newspaper, segment-specific newspaper and individual newspaper

customised according to consumer preferences. The findings showed that customers were

willing to pay more for the individual newspaper (1,5 euros for the customised newspaper in

comparison to 94 cents for segment-specific and 92 cents for mass market newspaper). Thus,

the value increment between a standardised product and a customised product is 12 % and

only 2% for segment-specific product.

The same study was carried out in other product categories and revealed that

“customisation also creates higher benefits than segmentation strategies in other markets-thus


16/10/2015 18

indicating that the superiority of customisation over segmentation is independent of the

specific market” (Franke et al, 2010:31).

However, the question of price still remains. One thing is to pay 6 cents more for a

customised newspaper, another is to pay extra 50 Euros for a garment tailored to specific

measurements and tastes. The process of clothes production is more complex, especially

when it is produced for one individual. There will certainly be an added cost when producing

an item, so, the end price will be higher too. The reduction of costs could be achieved through

exploiting advanced technologies in order to reduce expenditure not only in production

processes but also communication, shopping space and service delivery areas.

ii. Technology and TAM in the context of mass customisation

Modern technologies facilitate universal customisation at a reasonable price (Brannon et

al, 2002:241-3) by enabling “the transactions required for creating customisation smoother,

swifter, and less expensive” (Gandhi,2013:3). The main benefit of mass production can be

exploited in single-unit creation through technologies that not only make production cost-

effective but also waste-reductive (Franke et al,2010:33).

With the emergence of the Internet in 1980s the technologies not only simplify and

reduce production costs but also enhance the depth of communication and relationship with

consumers while also increasing the customisation value of products and services

(Mcmanus,2000; Lee, Chang, 2011:174). Every company can have an online presence

Figure 5:

Source: Franke et al., 2010


16/10/2015 19

through a web page from which it can distantly operate and provide services in more than one

country without being physically present.

Flexible production technologies and smart algorithms enable the setting up of a

competitive pricing scheme and reduce production times and cost. Full body scanning

technologies that let producers distantly develop made-to measure clothes, as well as, online

interactive configuration technologies and 3-D digital modelling like design toolkits, CAD

software, and virtual fitting rooms help reveal customer preferences and recreate the

measuring, fitting, and tailoring processes online (Gandhi,2013:3; Lee, Chang,2011).

Ultimately, they give customers a visual result of the product they have created which,

subsequently, instils confidence in their purchasing decisions (Mass Customisation

Developments, 2000; Brannon et al,2003).

Technological acceptance and usage

Technology Acceptance model (TAM) is an important concept to take into account

when dealing with customisation. Even though technologies may lower costs of

Figure 6: Virtual Fitting rooms. Source: Fits.me (2013)


16/10/2015 20

customisation processes, they could also discourage consumers from using mass

customisation services due to inability to control the technological processes. Consumer’s

web skills and ability to use CAD software plays a big role in success of customisation (Lee,

Chang,2011:173; Blecker& Abdelkafi,2006; Piller,2003,2004).

Perceived ease of use and perceived control is what effects TAM the most (Lee and

Chang, 2011:175). For technology to really help mass customisation it has to be easy to use

for minimum efforts to the consumers. Perceived usefulness and perceived enjoyment also

shape the customer attitudes towards purchasing through an online retailing system.

To conclude, Web interface and CAD software of an online mass customiser should be

user-friendly, entertaining and limited in choices and helpful for the consumers to make their

decision (Lee,Chang, 2011:190).

Figure 7: a model showing casual paths and R2 for applying TAM on consumer attitudes toward online mass customization, Source: Lee, Chang (2011)


16/10/2015 21

iii. Mass customisation of the apparel market

“In an era when brand loyalty is low and demands are high, it makes

sense that customisation has taken off. Shoppers can design their own

Nike sneakers, Brooks Brothers suits, Burberry trench coats and

Longchamp bags” (Sherman,2014, fashionista).

The concept of collaborative design in apparel industry is still new, but the companies

that use customisation, co-design services and computer-aided technologies tend to grow and

flourish. Some have more advanced software and website programming, some have great

online customer service to advice shoppers. Despite the notion that female consumers are

more interested in mass customisation, there is more successful companies that offer

customised services for men. The customised services are mainly aimed at men due to lower

complexity of garment production and lower expectations in fit. In terms of consumer

expectations, the “one size fits all” approach is now viewed as archaic (Fits.me, 2015).

Despite that 96 percent of retailers believing personalisation makes good business

sense, only 6 percent currently have a strategy in place to make it a reality (Ibid).

Table 4: Successful companies in the customisation of apparel market

Company Description/Products Features

Indochino Made-to-measure suits and shirts for men with design

options with an up-scale price. In-store fitting available.

Standard sizes and products available.

http://www.indochino.com/shoppingbag/display

Fabric selection, free

global shipping, options to

buy or customise

Tinker Tailor

Customisable clothing for women, wide price range. Has shut down in

2015(Brooke,2015)

Modern Tailor

Custom menswear: shirts, suits, jackets, pants for

affordable price. Standard products not available.

http://www.moderntailor.com/customsuits

Limited amount of items to

customise.

Non-user friendly CAD,

bad visualisation,

monogramming.


16/10/2015 22

Gorgeouscouture

Made-to-measure evening dresses for women, luxurious

fabric, up-scale prices. Standard products and sizes

available.

http://www.gorgeouscouture.com/shop

Free returns for UK orders,

Limited customisation

(size and colour only),

Swarovski elements. No

CAD software to order

customised garments( by e-

mail).

Piol Go-to dress for work designed according to client’s hair,

eye and skin colour; the fabric options shown are based on

that information.

https://pioldress.com/information/lookbooks/

Full refund if the customer

is not satisfied, tips how to

measure, send the

measuring tape, stylistic

advice

eShakti Customised fit and design options for women. Various

dresses, tops, and bottoms to buy as they are or customise.

http://www.eshakti.com/HowItWorks.aspx

US shipping, easy check-

out, various levels of

customisation (from the

menu), wide range of

products

Tailor Store Made to measure shirts and suits for men (almost from

scratch). Tailor Store Sweden was acknowledged as the

"best e-commerce company in Scandinavia in 2006" at the

SIME event in November 2006.

https://www.tailorstore.com

Guarantee of a perfect fit,

fabric selection, very

detailed customisation

options, reasonable prices.

Charles Tyrwhitt Customised shoes, shirts, ties, suits, and casualwear for

men. Some products for women without customisation.

http://www.ctshirts.com/

Made-to measure shirts

(size and collar type only),

Tailored shoes, reasonable

prices, monogramming

Sumissura Custom made-to-measure clothes for women. Various

products and extended customisation options.

http://www.sumissura.com/en/

Perfect fit guarantee, free

shipping, wide range of

products, affordable prices,

various design options:

style, fabrics, accents,

advanced CAD, easy

check-out

Black Lapel

Stylish men's custom-tailored formalwear of good quality.

https://blacklapel.com/customize/solid-black-vest

customise the style, the

fabric, and the fit,

"Flawless Fit Promise” or


16/10/2015 23

iv. The danger of the fast-fashion trend: another buyer-driven trend

“These labels encourage style-conscious consumers to see clothes as disposable—

meant to last only a wash or two, although they don’t advertise that—and to renew

their wardrobe every few weeks. By offering on-trend items at dirt-cheap prices, Cline

argues, these brands have hijacked fashion cycles, rattling an industry long

accustomed to a seasonal pace” (Sancon,2012, Bloomberg).

Fast fashion is a highly influential concept within the fashion industry because it

affects “on the way consumers purchase and react to trends” (Fairhurst, Bhardwaj, 2010:171-

2). Despite that both trends (mass customisation and fast-fashion) democratise couture fast

fashion trend could affect negatively on demand for customisation. “Budget fashion is seen as

chic, practical, and democratic…it has now remade the entire apparel industry….and it has

profoundly changed the way we think about clothing,” making consumers accustomed to pay

less and get more (Cline, 2012:3).

Fast-fashion retailers have grown faster than the industry and took over the market

share from traditional rivals. Companies like H&M, Zara, Topshop and Benetton expanded

their sales profits to over 20 percent per year (Sull, Turconi,2008:5). They earn higher profit

margins averaging 16 percent as opposed to traditional retailers with 7 percent of profit

margins (Ibid).

The key defining characteristics of a fast-fashion trend are rapid responsiveness to

changes in the market and great variety and flexibility. The competitive advantage is

Blank Label

Award Winning Men's Custom Suits, Dress Shirts.

https://www.blanklabel.com/build-your-own-shirt

On-line customisation for shirts only. Suits require

scheduled fitting in one of the stores.

remake, step-by-step

guidance, affordable price.

Advanced web-site and

CAD, menswear specialist

guidance, US market only,

monogram option

(Source: constructed by the researcher after reviewing companies in the market)


16/10/2015 24

achieved through quick identification of consumer needs and quick delivery through flexible

supply chains. Low cost and speed of delivery stimulate consumption and ensure cash flow

(Cline,2012:3, Sinha 2006). High fashion made affordable - is the main concept. It focuses

on imitating and interpreting high fashion designs made with cheaper fabric and sold for

much less. This is made possible by outsource manufacturing to low wage nations in order to

benefit from economies of scale (Sull, Turconi,2008:168, Christopher, Lowson, and Peck

2004).

In academia it is seen as a buyer-driven trend and a business model that exploits

vertical integration and economies of scope (Richardson,1996; Fairhurst, Bhardwaj, 2010;

Sull,Turconi,2008:167). “Fast fashion retailers have replaced the traditional designer-push

model-in which a designer dictates what is “in”- with an opportunity –pull approach, in

which retailers respond to shifts in the market within just a few weeks” (Sull,

Turconi,2008:5).

Unlike tailoring, fast fashion is characterised by factors such as “low predictability,

high impulse purchase, shorter life cycle and high volatility of market demand” (Fairhurst,

Bhardwaj, 2010:168, Fernie and Sparks 1998). Low-cost fashion results in a speedy

‘throwaway market’ where clothes are bought for one season due to low price and ever-

changing fashion trends (Tokatli, Wringley, Kizilgun 2008, Fairhurst, Bhardwaj, 2010). Gen

Y consumers, in particular, prefer low-quality cheap, fashionable clothes that they dispose of

when new arrivals come in; conversely, baby-boomers prefer quality and durability (Crewe

and Davenport, 1992).

An emerging fast-fashion trend could be a major barrier to the success of

customization. Demands of fashion savvy and used to constant updates consumers could fail

mass customisation completely. The market of conservative consumers who see fast fashion

as a waste and would prefer fewer but higher quality clothes could be too small or, due to

sociocultural changes, preferring lower prices and tolerating lower quality. This will be

explored in the primary study.

Conversely, as Gen Y grows up and becomes more wealthy, their demands will

change and they might turn to choosing better quality clothes (Sull, Turconi, 2008).

Moreover, in 1996 Kurt Salmon Associates reported that a “growing number of consumers

were willing to pay more and wait up to three weeks for custom-made merchandise.”

Consequently, by 2015, the interest must have grown wider taking into account new

technological possibilities and changing consumer behaviour towards personalisation and


16/10/2015 25

uniqueness; however, this has not been proven. The literature contains little evidence of

consumer behaviour towards fast fashion and its potential effect on mass customisation.

Hypothetically, both trends should improve profitability for the company and satisfaction for

customers; but what are conditions of their success?


16/10/2015 26

III. Purpose and methodology

Market orientation depends on consumer focus and demand. Consumer’s future needs and

references, as well as, customiser’s abilities should be researched carefully in order to

produce a successful business strategy (Kohli and Jarowski, 1990, Brannon et al,2002). In

order for mass customisation to be successful, companies need to understand the conditions

where customisation is successful, what kind of customisation consumers value and what

risks customisation of apparel involves (Franke et al, 2009, Gilmore, Pine, 1997). Also,

“empirical understanding of consumer characteristics and their motivation to make purchase

decisions” for throwaway or customised fashion “can help retailers in developing effective

business strategies to perform more effectively in the market” (Fairhurst, Bhardwaj,

2010:172).

The overall purpose of this study was to explore the potential of a mass customisation

strategy in apparel market online, the acceptance of the concept, willingness to pay and

overall consumer interest in such services. The primary study examines what type of people

would prefer customisation over fast –fashion. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to fill

the gaps identified in previous researches on mass customisation.

The research comprises various methods and includes a wider sampling approach because

of the changing consumer characteristics and new on–line opportunities. There is little

evidence on the technology acceptance, target consumer group, their characteristics and

attitudes towards the mass customisation trend. It expands the research of Brannon et al.

(2002) and constructs a new model which not only identifies new obstacles but also presents

ways to eliminate or diminish them. It takes into account the new fast-fashion trend that has

recently emerged and consumer’s recent sociological changes.

A. The structure of the study

The research consists of three parts that combine secondary and primary, as well as,

qualitative and quantitative research methods. They helped to produce a coherent analysis of

the potential of mass customisation strategy for apparel market on-line and consist of:

1) The analysis and summary of secondary data

2) An in-depth interview with a made-to-measure designer

3) An on-line survey


16/10/2015 27

Theoretical frameworks, models, and approaches:

Conceptually, the study was based on Gilmore and Pine’s (1997) collaborative

customisation concept. This research takes into account both types of collaborative

customisation described by Gandhi et al (2013): configured and individualised customisation.

The mixture of both types are most appropriate as part of a customisation strategy for the

apparel market. The TAM and co-design concepts from the study of Ulrich et al (2003) were

also included into this research.

As the basis of this research, the study conducted by Brannon et al (2002) was expanded

and tested in order to reveal most recent consumer attitudes towards the on-line customisation

of apparel on-line by considering the fast-fashion trend and producer capabilities. The

consumer-driven model was used to construct research questions and to analyse consumer

behaviour (Brannon et al, 2002:244-5). The mass customisation framework in the apparel

market constructed by Anderson-Cornell et al. (Ibid) was also used to create and analyse

primary research results. Consequently, it generated a new consumer-based mass

customisation framework. Methodologies from two studies conducted by Ulrich et al (2003)

and Brannon et al (2010) were used selectively and adapted for this research to correspond to

current market changes.

Secondary and primary research methods reveal consumer perceptions of modern

consumers, alongside customiser opportunities and limitations. All methods were used to

collect data for defining and solving the following research questions:


16/10/2015 28

B. Secondary data: hypotheses setting

A secondary research method was selected in order to reveal previous findings

pertaining to mass customisation of apparel on-line and to avoid repetition in this research.

The findings were used to indicate research questions for this dissertation and to construct a

set of hypotheses. These would be tested using a deductive approach to data reduction and

primary research methods in the form of an interview and questionnaire (Bryman, Bell,

2011:92). The secondary research helped guide the focus of the interview and questionnaire.

The findings were summarised and analysed in the context of selected research questions.

Table 5: Overall, the dissertation explores and aims to answer the following questions:

(a) Is there a demand for mass customization in the apparel market? How big is it?

(b) Does the fast-fashion trend contradict the need for customization? How to overcome it?


rather buy customized clothing items?

(d) What products and to what level should be customized?

(e) In what way have technological advances contribute to customization? Can they solve

problems connected to customisation services? How comfortable the consumers are with co-

design software? Can they make design decisions?

(f) How people view the possibility of customizing and buying products online? Can it compete

with shopping in malls?

(g) What key issues could arise from the customization of apparel online? How can they be

omitted?

(h) What pricing strategy would be acceptable for customised apparel? What price the consumers

are willing to pay fro long-term satisfaction?


customization services? What are the key elements that would ensure mass customizer’s success?

(j) What characteristics target consumers of a mass customized product should posses?

(Source: constructed by the researcher after reviewing literature mentioned in this paper)


16/10/2015 29

Only uncertain claims that may have altered over time were tested. Both qualitative and

quantitative data are of interest in the analysis of secondary data.

Previous studies pertaining to attitudes towards mass customisation of apparel on-line

were used; including company reports on the trend. The data was accessed through on-line

business and marketing journals available via the University’s access system, Shibboleth.

External data sources provide easy access to already published data, which is inexpensive and

easy to search (Schmidt, Hollensen, 2006). It provided high-quality, complex and accurate

data about consumer attitudes gathered by academic researchers and professional services.

(Hollensen and Schmidt, 2006: 16-5; Bryman, Bell, 2011:319-21).

Unfortunately, little control can be exerted over secondary data and most proved to be

outdated on this specific topic. This is because new trends have emerged and consumer

behaviour has changed (Ibid). As secondary data may lack accuracy and comparability to this

specific study, a complimentary primary research method was employed (Hollensen and

Schmidt, 2006:33).

C. Primary research

Next, a primary research was performed to expand on the findings of previous studies.

It was also used to answer questions not considered in previous academic works about mass

customisation and consumer attitudes.

The primary research methodology includes a combination of quantitative and

qualitative research in the form of a face-to-face interview and an on-line survey.

In this study, qualitative data is crucial because it aims to reveal non-quantifiable consumer

attitudes and helps gain deep insights into the phenomena; from both the consumer and

producer perspective. However, it is too subjective and difficult to analyse due to the lack of

structure. Thus, quantitative data plays a pivotal role in measuring objectively the popularity

of the the concept and how many end-users would actually use customised services (Bryman,

Bell,2011:385-421).

It is advantageous to collect primary data in the context of this research because the

results provide the most relevant information on the topic. Conversely, it is very time-

consuming because it requires more effort and resources (Ibid).Furthermore, finding an

appropriate questionnaire sample proved difficult, as did scheduling an interview with a

relevant subject.


16/10/2015 30

i. Interview

As a first step of the primary research an in-depth, personal, face-to-face and semi-

structured Skype interview with a designer who produces made-to measure clothes was

carried out. It is an appropriate method to generate responses directly connected to the

operations and customisation processes from a supplier’s perspective since customisation

does not only depend on consumer’s desires but also producer’s capabilities (Tseng et

al,2003; Haag et al.,2002).

Spender’s three steps of setting up the interview were used (Bryman & Bell,

2011:468) to gain access. Ksenia Svirid was chosen for this interview because she is

currently working in the made-to-measure industry and planning to launch an on-line made-

to-measure brand in Czech Republic. Because the designer used to own a tailor’s business

and has direct contact with this concept she is the right candidate to interview in order to gain

useful insights from a professional point-of view on opportunities and barriers to mass

customisation. The interview guide was constructed by using Kvale’s (1996) (Bryman &

Bell, 2011:476) criteria of a successful interviewer and guidelines from QRM seminar

(Richards, 2015).

The construct consists of an introduction explaining the research goal and aim of the

interview and what topics it is trying to uncover. It also reviews the ethics check list and the

time frame (appendix 2). The semi-structured interview was constructed chronologically as a

formal conversation with direct open-ended questions.

First, the concept of the mass customisation strategy was explained to the participant.

Then, the subject gave answers to outlined questions on the topic in a semi-structured

interview. Considering the subject’s location, the interview was conducted through Skype (an

alternative to a face-to-face interview) for a period of two hours in a comfortable setting. The

interview was conducted in Russian as the participant was more comfortable expressing

herself in her native language (Gordon, 1975). In accordance with ethical considerations, the

consent form was signed by the participant. The participant agreed to have her name

mentioned in this study.

The interview focused on the benefits and difficulties of customisation, and helped

answer some of the question of this dissertation. It also provided valuable insight into the

construction and analysis of the questionnaire. The interview discussed the popularity of the


16/10/2015 31

concept of mass customisation in the fashion industry and the risks a mass customiser might

face when such services.

Table A: The interview’s questions explored: (Source: constructed by the researcher)

1) How big is the mass customisation market?

2) Who are the target consumers of the mass customisation brand? What

characteristics do they posses?

3) What are the most successful types of customisation?

4) What items have more demand to be customised?

5) What issues can the company face in delivering mass customised services?

6) What type of technologies the company should use to make the mass

customisation more efficient?

7) What price is appropriate for such services to make profit?

8) What are additional risks when providing mass customisation services

(including fast-fashion trend)?

For data accuracy and convenience, the interview was recorded, transcribed,

translated and analysed in detail by the researcher (Heritage, 1984:238). All unnecessary

information was discarded, and only relevant to the study information was analysed.

Responses that answered the research questions were indicated in the transcript (appendix 1).

ii. Questionnaire

As a second step, an on-line self-administered questionnaire was constructed using

Qualtrics software and distributed mainly though social media channels and the University of

York TYMS Management school database system. It is an appropriate method for generating

and quantifying a broad range of responses regarding consumer attitudes towards the concept

of mass customisation.

Objectives of the online questionnaire were to test a set of hypotheses and to reveal

consumer acceptance or rejection of the concept of mass customisation. Survey answers

revealed the preferred type and degree of customisation, what garments require

customisation, what price is reasonable for customised clothing, how easy it is for consumers


16/10/2015 32

to order customised items on-line and what are the target consumers for customisation

services of apparel on-line. Moreover, the goal was to reveal attitudes towards fast-fashion

clothes and what type of consumers prefer fast-fashion items over customised items.

The questionnaire provides demographic information about consumers and answers

questions about their purchasing behaviour, computer experience and feelings about clothes.

Given the time and resources available, it was the most appropriate method to use in

order to gather as much diversely sampled quantitative and qualitative data from respondents

living in different counties. The biggest advantage of an on-line survey for the researcher is

the low cost and ease of creation and distribution, in addition to gathering and analysing

quickly the data on-line. It is also advantageous for the respondents due to the convenience

(Hollensen and Schmidt,2006:143-5). The disadvantages lie in the researcher’s inability to

prevent the drop-outs and control the accuracy of answers due to n sample. It also limits the

research in providing assistance and preventing self-selection and non-response biases

(Hollensen and Schmidt,2006:145, Illyeva et al 2002). Some respondents struggled to

complete the questionnaire due to their low English language proficiency. Moreover, because

the questionnaire was complex and time-consuming, the drop-out rate was extremely high.

The segmentation and screening for the survey was decided to be wider than in

previous studies that preferred to study young, computer-literate women who might have

moderate or high level of interest in fashion. Since the studies are outdated and there might

have been a significant shift in consumer behaviour, expanding the segmentation to both

genders was agreed. Men, if not interested in buying customised clothes for themselves, they

might be interested in buying them as gifts. In addition, the age group was also expanded and

ranged from 12 to 60 years old for the same reason. Teenagers and older women might have

the need and interest to customise goods due to problems associated with fit and sizing, and

due to their eclectic tastes. Because the research was conducted in the context of an on-line

space, location was not a part of segmentation. Because linking technologies for mass

customisation require some level of computer literacy, it was essential to collect responses

from respondents with computer access and proficiency.

Moreover, customisation would most likely be interesting to consumers with some

interest in fashion. With the study of Lee and Chang (2001:191) in mind, it was decided to

use these criteria for segmentation and screening. Therefore, computer literacy and fashion

awareness were left as main factors in participant selection; however, other factors were also


16/10/2015 33

Source: constructed by the researcher

considered during the analysis. The selected target group comprised representatives of the

target population of interest.

Table 6: Questionnaire Sampling

Sampling size: 50 respondents (the number was small due to higher interest in quality rather

than quantity of the data)

Target population: all computer literate, international and fashion –aware consumers

Sampling method: stratified random sampling (Bryman, Bell,2011:181)

Stratifying criteria: international on-line users with some interest in fashion.

The questionnaire was distributed online via social media and fashion forums, and

Facebook groups. This was the easiest way to reach computer-literate target consumers with

diverse tastes and characteristics, and who have some interest in fashion. Couchsurfing and

Expats communities were accessed through social media in order to obtain an international

perspective on the topic. As an addition, a student database of the University of York TYMS

management school was used to access other international respondents. This was the most

appropriate way to distribute the survey in order to gain a broad range of cross-cultural

responses. This ensured random sampling and the diversity of international respondents.

The participants were informed about the aims and objectives of the research. After

reviewing the instructions and agreeing to participate, they gave consent for their information

to be used in this research. Anonymity of respondents was secured and personal data

protected.

The questionnaire consisted of 16 questions and began with an assignment where

respondents were asked to try to choose and order a garment from a mass customiser brand

eShakti using CAD software. They were then asked to comment on their shopping experience

(appendix 3). Due to the complexity of the concept, making participants experience it first-

hand and then answer related questions seemed the easiest way to explain the concept. The

company eShakti was notified that their company and their website were being used in this

study.

Further, the questionnaire design was created according to the research methods

theory (Hollensen and Schmidt,2006). The construct of the survey is a mixture of closed and

open-ended questions. There is a combination of various types of nominal and scale

questions, including multiple choice, continuous scale, matrix multiple choice with additional


16/10/2015 34

text space. The responses were gathered over a one-month period. There was no time limit to

fill out the questionnaire; however, on average, it took around 15-20 minutes to complete.

SPSS statistical software was not appropriate in this case because little can be done

with such quantitative data without instantiating (Hollensen and Schmidt, 553). Moreover,

the results would have contained numerous errors and deviations due to the complexity and

excess of highly qualitative data, and specific survey errors. Many questions had multiple

answers and long explanations. Answers provided by 50 respondents were analysed in

Qualtrics software by using the cross-tabulation function and other advanced statistical tools.

These revealed the standard deviations, p-values, means and performed Chi-square and T-

tests. This was an accurate and less time-consuming way to analyse behavioural patterns of

consumers, provide statistical analysis and test the hypotheses.

For the questionnaire, four options for individualised apparel design characteristics

mentioned in the study of Ulrich et al (2003) were used: clothes clones, totally custom, co-

design, design options with standard sizes. Survey questions from studies of Ulrich et al

(2003), and Brannon et al, (2002) were adapted and explored the following:

Table B: Questions explored in the questionnaire:

1) How comfortable consumers are to co-design or design garments on their own? Do

they need assistance? To what level?

2) How comfortable are they with the concept of shopping online for mass customised

clothes?

3) What level of customisation is appropriate? What options of customisation

consumers need?

4) What characteristics do perspective buyers of co-designed clothes posses?

5) What is the connection between the fashion interest and interest in customised

garments?

6) In what circumstances buyers fail to purchase a clothing item?

7) What product categories in apparel market consumers would like to customise?

8) How much the respondents are willing to pay for customised services?

9) How would perspective buyers resolve the trade-off between price and quality?

10) How computer literacy is connected to being comfortable purchasing fashion

garments on-line?

11) What worries perspective consumers when ordering customised clothes on-line? (Source: constructed by the researcher)


16/10/2015 35

iii. Data analysis and findings

The deductive secondary data analysis produced a set of hypotheses to be tested

during the interview and survey analysis. Hypothesis are indicated in the table and test results

are presented in a form of a summary. The purpose of the analysis is to identify the

perspective consumers of custom-made apparel and produce a summary of a successful

business strategy for perspective mass customisers.

Responses with highest scores and relevant to hypotheses will be mentioned and

analysed in the study.

Overall results of both survey and interview analysis data was divided into ten

sections:

1) Willingness to buy customised goods

2) Acceptable price on customised goods from a consumer and producer perspective

3) Suggested target consumer profile

4) Suggested categories of clothes for customisation

5) Suggested level of customisation

6) Preferential technology-aided strategy

7) Suggested strategy to compete with the fast-fashion trend

8) Concerns of consumers when buying mas customised items online

9) Risks for the mass customiser and solutions to them:

10) Additional comments


16/10/2015 36

IV. Analysis of findings

A. Secondary data

Consumer involvement with CAD

1) Brannon et (2002) were first to reveal consumer perceptions of mass customisation in the

apparel market; including interest and need in certain types of customisation. The study

comprised 70 women aged 20-50 who participated in seven focus groups, and identified

the level of interest in mass customisation and the attitudes towards integral parts of its

processes among female consumers. Negative comments were classified as barriers to the

adaption of the concept and willingness to buy such apparel.

The study revealed that consumers are interested in four customisation options:

‘Clothes clones’, ‘Totally custom’, ‘Design options with standard sizes’, and ‘Co-design’.

Some consumers expressed a need for greater customisation that would fit specific body

measurements and preferences (Brannon et al, 2002:253).

Table 7: Levels of customisation

Type of

collaborative

customisation

‘Clothes clones’ ‘Totally custom’ ‘Design options

with standard

sizes’

‘Co-Design’

Explanation of the

term

Replications of

individuals’

treasured styles.

(creating copies

of favourite

designs). Any

favourite style or

garment can be

replicated

(sometimes in a

different size and

with different

fabric).

Customers have

complete control

over fabric

selection and style

development.

Totally custom

design includes

selection of fabrics,

colour, design, fit

and size. It requires

some sort of body

scanning

technology and a

CAD software.

Consumers select

design

components (such

as cuffs, trims,

buttons, pockets

and etc.) from a

manufacturer’s

menu with a set of

options in a CAD

software. Since

the components in

the menu are

controlled by the

company with

Collaboration in

production

between the

producer and

consumer

through

computer-aided-

design software.

(CAD)- a

system that

allows

consumers to

articulate exact

wants.


16/10/2015 37

However, this

might be viewed

as fashion piracy

accordance to

“production

efficiency, quality

control and costs,

the customised

product can be

made and

delivered for a

price that is

competitive with

mass produced

product”

(Brannon et al

2003:253).

Source: adapted from Ulrich et al., 2003:400-401 and Brannon et al 2002:249-255

The interest in totally custom collaborative customisation was greater for specific

categories of apparel: bridal wear, special occasion clothes, swimwear, dresses, suits, and

jackets.

Moreover, participants with some experience and knowledge of custom apparel viewed

more positively the idea of on-line customisation of clothes. Consumers who lacked

creativity or technical skills, in contrast, experienced anxiety when participating in the design

process. Some thought that learning CAD software would be difficult and time-consuming.

Nevertheless, all of these participants still expressed interest in some form of customisation.

Co-design is an alternative to those requiring professional assistance to design

customised apparel. It can be combined with design options that have a limited set of choices

and sizes, or combined with totally custom customisation in order to satisfy unique fit

preferences.

Some participants had concerns about the price, time, convenience, equipment, and

privacy. Those who were sure that mass customisation services would cost more than mass

produced products expressed their willingness to “trade long – term satisfaction for the

gratification gained from finding a bargain” (Brannon et al,2002:254). Some had security

concerns when paying online and some expressed the need for personal interaction.


16/10/2015 38

Others were concerned that mass customisation might take more time and will be

inconvenient for those who lack the skills or access to essential technology.

Through focus groups, the study revealed that a lack of expanded search and

expanded selection leads to customer sacrifice gaps and dissatisfaction with garment choices.

The fit was the main problem noted by the researchers, which means there is a great demand

for customised fit (Brannon et al 2002:251).

Respondents also expressed concerns about using the CAD software. The time frame and

ability to create a good-looking garment without professional guidance were two further

concerns (Ulrich et al, 2003:400).

The four types of collaborative customisation options will be presented to consumers in

the questionnaire in order to assess which is the most preferred option. Moreover, the

following hypotheses will be tested in the primary research.


16/10/2015 39

Set 1: hypotheses for testing

H1– consumers are not comfortable using CAD software.

H2 – consumers are not confident in constructing clothes without professional assistance.

H3 – expanded search and selection are essential for customer satisfaction

H4 – consumers are concerned about the price, time of delivery, convenience, equipment and

privacy.

H5 – lack of creativity and technical skills make it hard for consumers to participate in design

processes.

H6 – previous experience with and knowledge about customisation helps consumers view on-line

customisation positively.

H7 – focus on customised fit is the most appropriate type of customisation for the mass

customisation strategy.

H8 – shopping on-line for customised garments is time-consuming and complicated for

consumers.

H9 – consumers prefer bargains to long-term satisfaction.

H10 – totally custom option is suitable for fashion-aware consumers with confidence in style.

H11 – many people do not trust on-line transactions.

H12 – interest in collaborative customisation is greater for specific categories of apparel: special

occasion clothes, swimwear, suits, jackets and dresses.

H13 – consumers need some degree of confidence and knowledge in decision-making process

connected to garment structure and design features.

H14 – there is demand and interest in some form of customisation.

H15 – co-design combined with design options or totally custom is an optimal choice for the

mass customisation strategy on-line.

Brannon et al. (2002) constructed a mass customisation model focused on the apparel

industry. It will be used in this dissertation to analyse the findings and create an updated

version of the mass customisation strategy framework.


16/10/2015 40

Figure 8: Model of mass customisation in apparel

1) Study by Ulrich et al. 2003 explored consumer’s willingness to co-design using

computer-aided software (CAD software) by using simulation. 34 female university

students had to design three coordinated pieces (consistent of a jacket, skirt and blouse) to

wear for a job interview in the design bank of CAD software developed by the

researchers.

As a result, all subjects expressed strong interested in co-designing with CAD

program. The majority was comfortable using the program scoring 9.6 points out of 10 in

the questionnaire. All but one was satisfied with customisation options in the menu of the

CAD software. 56 percent indicated that they would not change their final image and 65

percent claimed that they would place an order of the outfit they created. 30 out of 36

found it easy to make decisions for co-designing apparel. They quickly chose styles and

used more time for details and colours (Ulrich,2003:408). Some garment styles were not

used at all and some were popular indicating that the choice in menu can be easily limited

to favourites. Participants also expressed interest in having design advise (Kumar 1991,

Gilmore and Pine 1997). The study also satisfies Fiore et al’s (2001) findings “that


16/10/2015 41

consumers who seek out and appreciate stimulating situations were more willing to use

co-design process for apparel.” Also, “subjects who perceived clothing to be an important

communicator were less comfortable with the co-design process” (Ulrich, 2003:409).

Thus, the following hypotheses will be tested in the primary research:


H16 – consumers are interested in constructing and buying clothes with CAD software.

H17 – consumers find it easy to construct and order customised clothes on-line.

H18 – consumers who see clothes as an important communicator are uncomfortable

with the co-design processes.

2) Conversely, the study by Lee and Chang revealed that consumers with high web skills

and high fashion involvement view on-line mass customisation process as a more

enjoyable and useful process (2011:191) They also discovered that consumers with

greater fashion involvement would be more willing to put effort into selection processes.

Thus, another contradicting hypothesis we will explore:

Set 3: hypothesis for testing

H19 – consumers with high web skills and high fashion involvement are more open to, interested and confident in collaborative design processes than others.

3) Kamali and Loker (2002) found that the participants displayed personal attachment to the

product and higher satisfaction when putting effort into configuration processes.

Furthermore, they demonstrated that even though consumers want more choice, too much

has a negative impact on consumer interest in a product and discourages customers from

purchasing customised items.


H20 – too many choices discourage consumers from participating in mass

customisation processes.


16/10/2015 42

4) Franke et al. (2009) noted that customers are willing to pay much more for customised

products than mass products. However, Kaplan et al (2007) concluded that the additional

cost should not place the product into another price-range (Frankie and Piller 2004,

Schrier 2006, Frankie et al 2009). The hypothesis employed to test this is:


H21 – Consumers are willing to pay much more for customised products.

5) A company that produces virtual fitting rooms (type of CAD software) for apparel brands

has presented a detailed research about customer trends in the context of customisation. It

discovered that “73 % of consumers would trust technology solutions to help them with

fit online” (Redshift research,2014:3). Apparently, people use in-store fitting rooms

mostly because they have to and some are open to new technologies to save the time and

effort standing in queues and undressing. However, the fit problem is the most

disappointing issue when shopping on-line, especially for 18-24 –year-olds. Another

dissapointment is the inability to determine garment quality.

“Texture scored 10% of the ‘biggest disappointment’ vote, followed by lack of

confidence in the colour at 5%. Just 4% of respondents cited ‘something else’, i.e. a factor not

on the list” (Fitsme Report, 2012).

Source: Fits.me report (2012)

Figure 9:


16/10/2015 43

Interestingly, the reaction to the wrong fit was mostly neutral and the majority would buy

from the supplier again.

Source: Fits.me report, 2012

Figure 10a: Fits.me statistics

Figure 10b: Fits.me statistics



16/10/2015 44

The report also revealed that men are more open to the idea of on-line fitting rooms

than women; meanwhile, consumers aged between 25 and 54 would be more confident

buying customised garments on-line because they care less about trying them on beforehand.

In order to test these assumptions beyond UK consumers, the hypotheses were

formulated for the primary research:



Figure 10c: Fits.me statistics

Figure 10d: Fits.me statistics


16/10/2015 45


H22 – the biggest concern for consumers (especially aged 18-24) when shopping on-line is

getting the right fit.

H23 – inability to ensure the quality of the garment worries consumers (especially aged over

30) after fit.

H24 – men are more open to using technology for mass customisation processes.

H25 – 25-54 is the age range of the perspective buyers of mass customised services on-line.

6) Another report of Fits.me studied consumer’s decision-making processes. When buying

apparel, customers measure products by multi-modal information like “appearance,

availability, cost, quality, colours, texture and size” first; then they look at secondary

attributes such as “the affordability, value-for-money, desirability or fit of the item in

question” (Fitsme Report, 2013:2). For 57%, sizing plays a critical role in purchasing

decisions on-line. 70%-80% of people do not buy fashion items online because they are

unable to try on clothes before buying them. The study claims that the barriers to mass

customisation in a form of the fit can be eliminated through advanced technologies such

as virtual fitting rooms which would ensure confidence in purchasing decisions for the

consumers. The convenience of consumers who use on-line fitting rooms is 67% high, as

opposed to 10% that do not (Fits.me,2013).


H26 – inability to try on clothes on is the biggest danger to on-line operations of

mass customisation


Figure 10e: Fits.me statistics


16/10/2015 46

H27 – people need help with choosing their size or indicating their measurements.

Having reviewed secondary sources, the hypotheses were constructed for further

testing:

Table 8: Hypotheses testing table:

H1– consumers are not comfortable using CAD software.

H2 – consumers are not confident in constructing clothes without professional assistance.


H4 – consumers are concerned about the price, time of delivery, convenience, equipment

and privacy.

H5 – lack of creativity and technical skills make it hard for consumers to participate in

design processes.

H6 – previous experience with and knowledge about customisation helps consumers view

on-line customisation positively.

H7 – focus on customised fit is the most appropriate type of customisation for the mass



consumers.

H9 – consumers prefer bargains to long-term satisfaction.

H10 – totally custom option is suitable for fashion-aware consumers with confidence in

style.

H11 – many people do not trust on-line transactions.

H12 – interest in collaborative customisation is greater for specific categories of apparel:

special occasion clothes, swimwear, suits, jackets and dresses.

H13 – consumers need some degree of confidence and knowledge in decision-making

process connected to garment structure and design features.

H14 – there is demand and interest in some form of customisation.

H15 – co-design combined with design options or totally custom is an optimal choice for the mass customisation strategy on-line.

H16 – consumers are interested in constructing and buying clothes with CAD software.

H17 – consumers find it easy to construct and order customised clothes on-line.


16/10/2015 47

H18 – consumers who see clothes as an important communicator are uncomfortable with

the co-design processes.


H20 – too many choices discourage consumers from participating in mass customisation processes.

H21 – Consumers are willing to pay much more for customised products.

H22 – the biggest concern for consumers (especially aged 18-24) when shopping on-line is getting the right fit.

H23 – inability to ensure the quality of the garment worries consumers (especially aged over 30) after fit.


H25 – 25-54 is the age range of the perspective buyers of mass customised services on-line.

H26 – inability to try on clothes on is the biggest danger to on-line operations of mass customisation.

H27 – people need help with choosing their size or indicating their measurements.

Legend: H-discussed in the interview, H–rejected in the survey results, H–accepted in survey results.

B. Interview

The interview results directly answer the questions of this dissertation; however, some

assumptions are tested and supported by qualitative and quantitative data further in the

questionnaire. Some of the hypotheses are explored in the interview but the majority are

tested in the questionnaire results (appendix 1).

(a) The interview revealed the demand for mass customisation in the apparel market

presupposing acceptance of H14. Nevertheless, the market and the niche of consumers are

still small the mass customisation market is becoming increasingly more popular. As

Svirid said, “all trends are shifting towards self-expression.”

(b) The fast-fashion trend is a direct threat not only to mass customisation, but also the rest

of the ‘higher quality’ apparel market. Good quality products are devalued because


16/10/2015 48

people think a dress should cost 10 Euros. In reality, only good fabric for the dress and

production somewhere in Europe already costs at least three times that price per dress.

This trend has distorted the consumer expectations about the price and the real cost of

clothes. Thus, the fast-fashion trend not only contradicts the need for customisation in

some way, it devaluates it in the eyes of consumers. This implies acceptance of H9;

however, consumer perceptions on price acceptance will be explored in the questionnaire.

(c) People who see value in good quality fashion and also have the need to express

themselves through clothes in order to feel special or unique are the ones that most likely

will be interested in custom-made clothes. The designer Ksenia Svirid thinks that those

are either customers with unusual measurements and preferences or the “opinion leaders”

with good imagination and taste. People who utilise clothes as just something to wear and

to fit in with everyone else would prefer fast-fashion clothes. These people care much less

about the way they look and do not aim to gain superior satisfaction from clothes. These

are most likely to be “the followers” who buy whatever is trending and whatever

everyone is buying.

(d) Products such as women’s coats, underwear, dresses, men’s pants, jackets suits and

shirts, and most importantly, special occasion wear are the most relevant items to

customise. In order to look good, they should be fitted to a specific figure type. Co-design

with design options and a possibility of various size and fit options is the best most viable

strategy of customisation. The statements are similar to H12 and H14, which will be

further examined in the survey results.

(e) (f) Technology can help eliminate problems with customised production, especially with

time and cost-efficiency in production processes. This will be explored further in the

questionnaire.

(g) Some key issues may arise from on-line apparel customisation but they can be omitted.

Firstly, the niche of the consumers is small. This might be problematic for companies,

however, the demand must not be extremely high as in mass production. If it is too

popular it will not be tailoring with personalised approach, thus, it will not be as special

and valuable. Secondly, measuring errors is the main issue with customisation on-line.

Even if everything is provided for consumers to measure and indicate their measurements

there will always be a percentage of errors. This can be eliminated by offering on-site

fitting services provided by partnering tailor shops. This fully supports H26.


16/10/2015 49

Many people still do not trust on-line transactions, especially in relation to ordering

clothes. This accepts H11. Lower prices and guarantees would instil confidence and

motivation in perspective consumers to purchase. However, keeping prices as low as fast-

fashion would be impossible. The only way to achieve this would be to compromise quality

and buy cheap materials and recruit cheap labour. In order for customisation to gain a

competitive advantage over fast–fashion, superior services and quality must be offered at a

reasonably higher price.

Some countries require firms to have return policies. Return policies and guarantees

might be hard to manage when making custom-made clothes. Moreover, it will be

problematic for the producer to assign blame when incorrect measurements were provided or

the garment does not fit the customer. If the customised garment is returned, it is difficult to

utilise or resell. In such cases, offering re-tailoring is more appropriate than accepting returns.

Some companies adopt this policy or they accept returns and donate dresses to charities, or

they recycle them. Furthermore, clothes that are less difficult to construct could be offered

(tops, shirts, skirts); thereby reducing the likelihood of fitting errors.

Another issue concerned with customisation is time. There is no stock, so, a consumer

will not receive their dress in three days. Impatient consumers will be dissatisfied with this;

however, there are ways to ensure faster operations and turn the waiting time into “can’t wait

to get” process through marketing and a personalised approach. Potentially, 3D printers and

laser technologies for garment construction could help. Additional concerns from a consumer

perspective will be explored in the questionnaire.

The final issue connected to customisation is the problem of consumers deciding what

they want and communicating this to the supplier. In such circumstances, suppliers should

widen their choices but set limited capabilities of custom designs. This is because too much

choice discourages consumers from participating in mass customisation. This statement

accepts H20. Producers should also help inspire some ideas and provide suggestions and

advice on the site.

(h) The pricing strategy for the mass customiser is not an easy decision. Svirid thinks that

price is very important in purchasing decisions. Unfortunately, by definition,

customisation cannot be cheap. It cannot compete with prices for fast-fashion. Thus, the

best way is to split the costs for fabrics and production in order to understand how the


16/10/2015 50

price is constructed. There is a need to explore further how much consumers are willing

to pay for such services.

Table 9: Formula for estimating the price of a customised garment provided by Ksenia Svirid.

(i) In Svirid’s opinion, customisation works better as a strategy for smaller companies that

provide services to less customers but are able to adapt a personalised approach. The

main component of success of customisation is establishing a psychological bond

between the consumer and producer. Satisfying psychological needs rather than providing

something of utility is the way to succeed. The trend cannot be mass in a sense that

everyone has it because in such case the value of such services will drop. Limited

products should be available for everyone. It helps the client to ensure his uniqueness and

self-expression. The idea of customisation lies in a higher attention per client which can

be delivered even on-line nowadays. Mass customisation sells experience and satisfaction

of both psychological and physical needs of consumers.

(j) The table of characteristics of the target consumer was adapted from the interview. There

could be just one of the characteristics present to be a perspective consumer of mass

customised clothes or more.

Table 10: Target consumer characteristics:

• non-standard size figure/measurements

• middle/upper class men and women for whom clothes is important

• lives in a place with limited choice in clothing suppliers

• does not like to shop in malls

• always knows exactly what he/she is looking for but often cannot find it

• wants to be different

• want his/her personality reflected through clothes

• cares about the fit and self-expression more than price

• has the need to feel special


16/10/2015 51

• people who like to experiment and try new things, “opinion leaders”

• has unique style and well-defined fashion-taste.

The findings from the interview were used as additional guidelines in survey analysis.

Characteristics were later tested in the questionnaire findings.

C. Questionnaire results

Participants’ profile

A total of 52 respondents took part in this on-line self-administered survey; two of

whom did not answer all of the questions. Consequently, 50 respondents were used in the

analysis of the result and the rest were classified as a data-collection error. Respondent 23

made a mistake when answering a question about perspective interested in buying customised

clothes. According to his earlier comments, the respondent meant that he would buy

customised clothes for himself and for others. This might have affected the accuracy of the

results. In order to eliminate the mistake, one “No” answer was disregarded in the analysis.

The introduction of the survey served as selection. Those who were interested in the

topic took part. 72 percent of respondents were females and 28 percent were males. Taking

into account the randomised sampling and high drop-out rate (135 respondents left without

starting the survey), fewer male than female respondents chose to take the survey, and more

male respondents chose to drop out. This already demonstrates higher interest among females

to participate in on-line customisation processes.

However, from those who participated, 78,6 percent, 11 males out of 14, expressed

interest in buying customised garments (7 respondents would customise for themselves and 4

others would customise for themselves and for others). 80,5 percent, 29 females out of 36,

showed interest in buying customised clothes (20 would customise clothes for themselves and

9 would customise clothes for themselves and for others). Thus, both men and women are

interested in buying customised clothes.


16/10/2015 52

Participants’ age ranged from 18 to 40+ with 48 percent being aged between

24 and 30. 34 percent where aged between 18 and 23, 14 percent were between 31 and 40.

Only two respondents (4%) were over 40. Unfortunately, there were no respondents in the

12-17 age group. 14 out of 17 (82,4%) aged between 18-23 are up for customisation. 11

from them were females and three males. 19 out of 24 (79,2%) respondents aged between

24-30 were interested in ordering customised clothes. 14 from them were females and five

males. 2 out of 2 (100%) aged 40+ (both females) would buy it. Even thought the

representation of the population is small, we can see that the age range is from 18-40+ which

slightly skews from H25 that states 25-54 is the age range for perspective buyers of

customised services.

H25

Source: Created by the author of the dissertation in Qualtrics as a part of a survey report

Figure 11: Participants’ profile: Gender representation pie


16/10/2015 53

Respondents from 15 countries took part: Estonia, UK, US, Romania, Spain, Czech

Republic, Mexico, Greece, Switzerland, Indonesia, France, Brazil, Italy, Germany, and

Canada.

60 percent of respondents had an average income level (in their country of residence),

20 percent had below average income level, and 20 percent had above average income level.

Income level

Source: Created by the author of the dissertation in Qualtrics as a part of a survey report Number of respondents


Figure 12: Participants’ profile: Age group distribution pie chart

Figure 13: Participants’ profile: Income level


16/10/2015 54

The majority of the respondents (74%) care about the way they look, but do not obsess

about the latest fashion trends. They prefer to wear what suits them and what reflects their

personality. 12 percent do no follow fashion trends at all and wear whatever they feel is

comfortable. Only 8 percent always strive to look their best and follow newest fashion trends.

48% of respondents are advanced computer users that often shop on-line. 40% of

participants are moderate users that sometimes shop on-line for specific products. 4% have

basic skills and 8% are advanced users who seldom shop on-line or moderate users who shop

often.

Interest in fashion and looks


Number of respondents

Figure 14: Participants’ profile: Interest in fashion and looks


16/10/2015 55

Survey errors There was no selection bias as the sampling was random; however, there were errors

connected to the type of sampling. Inaccurate sampling frame means that the respondents do

not truly represent the sample of the population. There were significantly more female

respondents than male respondents, and the majority of respondents were aged between 24-

30, which might have affected the survey results (Bryman, Bell, 2011:198).

Overrepresentation of the female group and population aged 24-30 were taken into

consideration in data processing. This problem could have been overcome by choosing a

focus group approach rather than a self-administered survey in order to ensure the appropriate

sample frame.

In addition, 185 surveys were started but only 50 were completed; therefore, there

was an overall drop-out rate of 73%. In a couple of instances, drop-outs after answering at

least one question also skewed the results somewhat. In order to omit skewness, the responses

were filtered for the analysis and included 50 complete responses. One data collection error

occurred connected to availability of multiple answers in question concerning interest in

purchasing customised apparel. The correlation with other variables was analysed manually

to omit data processing errors (Bryman, Bell, 12011:96).

Number of respondents Source: Created by the author of the dissertation in Qualtrics as a part of a survey report

Figure 15: Participants’ profile: Computer literacy and on-line shopping experience


16/10/2015 56

Hypotheses testing:

The first assignment for the participants was to follow the link to eShakti’s on-line

store and try to order custom-tailored dress on-line by using CAD software and then

comment on the experience.

For the majority it was very easy and straightforward and took no more than 5 -10

min to order (which satisfies H17). For some it was too hard or confusing because they were

not ready to put so much effort and wait for the order to arrive. The ones that did like the

concept found either that there was a lot of options to choose from in order to customise or

that there could be more. Some thought there was too many options. The interested subjects

also expressed the need for eShakti to extend the possibility of international shipping.

One outstanding comment was that a respondent did not want to register on the

website in order to checkout. The majority of respondents were concerned with inability to

see all the changes they made on-line. Respondents liked the custom fit option but disliked

providing their measurements in inches.

Many expressed concerns about the fit and quality of fabrics and whether it would be

possible to return the item if any issues arise; thus proving H22 and H23 correct. Separate

respondents felt like they need help from a professional. Some were uncertain if they can take

the right measurements; thereby suggesting that H27 is a valid point. One consumer wanted

to know how the price is constructed rather than having the end price. She wanted to know

the exact components and how much they cost. The majority would buy this way if they had

confidence in the brand and the website, or were directed to it by a friend.

When respondents where asked about what discourages them from purchasing a

clothing item (multiple answers were available), 82 % answered that the main reason is

because the garment does not fit them well and makes them feel uncomfortable. Thus, it

satisfies the H22 and H7 that suggest that the main consumer concern is fit and that the focus

on customised fit is the most appropriate type of customisation for the successful


Another discouragement for 66% was the high price of the garment they liked. 64%

worry that the garment did not compliment their body, 58% came across the problem of size

availability. 50% did not like the quality and 48% would like to change some details about

the item they liked. Not many (18%) dislike buying items that everyone has. 6% are

H7 H22

H17

H22; H23 H27


16/10/2015 57

concerned about ethical considerations connected to the brand (e.g. made in sweat shops).

40 out of 50 respondents (80% percent) would be interested in buying mass

customised clothes to fit their unique measurements and preferences nine from which would

not only customise for themselves but for others too. This accepts the H14 that suggest that

there is demand and interest in some form of customisation. Only 10 out of 50 would not buy

it, three of whom would buy it for someone else if they knew their measurements and

preferences.

H14



Figure 16: Participants’ profile: Reasons people fail to buy a clothing item

Figure 17: Participants’ willingness and interest to buy customised clothes.


16/10/2015 58

A significant amount (72%) of respondent are ready to pay more for customised

clothes but only if the extra cost is reasonable (20-30% from the basic price) which rejects the

H21 that presupposes that consumers are willing to pay much more for customised products.

4 percent do not mind to spend any amount for such services and 22% do not want to pay

extra and would rather buy standardised clothing items for a lower price.

When trying to characterise the on-line shopping behaviour, more respondents agreed

that they are very picky. They want clothes to fit perfectly and to satisfy all their needs. A

little less agreed that they do not trust on-line transactions which accepts the hypothesis 11.

They worry if the items will be the same as described when it arrives or if it will arrive at all.

Another two common agreeable characteristics were not knowing what product they want

unless they see it, and wanting to buy a bespoke clothing item that reflects their style and

personality. Quite a lot, but less than previously, agreed that they have unusual body

measurements and it is very hard for them to find the right fit.

Interestingly, 82% (41 out of 50) of participants would rather buy more expensive but

better quality clothes that are more durable. This disproves H9, which suggests that

consumers prefer bargains to long-term satisfaction. The reasons for that varied. Some prefer

H11

H21



Figure 18: Participants’ willingness to pay


16/10/2015 59

to construct outfits and if one item fails, the entire outfit is ruined. Some prefer classic items

for reasons of good quality, because they save them money in the long run and look and fit

better. Others struggle to find clothes they like that fit well. So, they prefer to have these

items as long as possible. Some do not like throwing clothes away because they are

sustainable. Others live in countries with extreme weather conditions, so they prefer to have

comfortable and durable clothes. Only18% percent prefer cheaper but lower quality clothes.

These consumers prefer to have more items and wash and wear them less often. Some like to

update their wardrobe when fashion trends change. Some cannot afford anything more

expensive.

The survey showed that the most relevant clothing items to customise are special

occasion clothes (counting 60% of respondents). Coats and jackets (46%), suits (38%),

bridal wear (38%) and casual dresses (36%), as well as jeans and shirts (24% each) are also

seen as popular items to customise. Thus, the hypothesis 12 was tested and proved

successful.

H12



Figure 19: Consumer preferences: Price Vs Quality

H9


16/10/2015 60

To test the correlation between the type of customisation preferred and the apparel

item cross tabulation was performed. Co-design was the priority option for all items.

However, after co-design, consumers also thought that suits can be made totally custom or

custom fitted; jeans are better custom fitted or having design options; casual dresses with

design options or custom fitted; shirts and coats and jackets made totally custom or custom

fitted; special occasion clothes or bridal wear custom fitted or with design options; swimwear

custom fitted only and underwear either custom fitted or with design options.



Figure 20: Consumer preferences: Preferable items to be cutomised


16/10/2015 61

Co-design was the trending type of customisation consumer prefer. 38 percent (19 out

of 50) chose co-design as opposed to 30 percent (15 out of 50) that chose customised fit and

size, 14 percent Design options and 12 percent chose totally custom. This means that

consumers prefer having professional assistance and a menu of design components to choose

from with an option of standard or tailored size and fit. These results fail to satisfy H15

because the mixture of co-design and customised fit and size only is seen as the most

acceptable strategy for the consumers. However, including totally custom and design options

will be advantageous.

H15


Figure 22: Consumer preferences: Degree of customisation


Figure 21: Interdependence testing: covariance between degree of customisation and preferred apparel category


16/10/2015 62

The majority said they are quiet confident in using on-line (CAD) software to

construct and order clothing items on-line disproving hypothesis 1 and supporting

hypotheses 16 and 17. There are 62 percent who feel confident from 6 to10 and only 38

percent who feel between 0 and 6 confidence level on a scale from 1 to 10.

The majority (43 out of 50) of perspective consumers (especially aged between 18

and 30) worry that the item will not look the same in reality (including fit, size and quality)

when ordering customised clothes on-line. This satisfies H22 and H23 but widens the age

group for these concerns. Many (28 out of 50) worry that they will not be able to return a

customised item. Fewer (21 out of 50) worry if they can measure themselves properly for

customisation and not make mistakes which still means that people need help in indicating

size and measurements. Thus, H27 is accepted. Only 18 subjects are worried about the end

price and 12 worry about the time it will take to produce such product disproving H4. No

one mentioned privacy or equipment concerns.

Interestingly, only five subjects worry if they are able to design clothes for

themselves and seven worry about errors in custom production processes which means that

H2 is not supported by the primary data.

H1, H16, H17

H4 H2

H22, H23 H27


16/10/2015 63

To test what age of consumers worry the most for H22 and H23 a cross tabulation was

performed in two variations (for closer study):

H27 accepted

H22, H23 accepted



Figure 23: Concerns consumers have when purchasing an apparel item online

Figure 24: Interdependence testing: covariance between age and what is more likely to worry consumers in ordering custom clothes online



16/10/2015 64

As we can see the dissatisfaction with fit is important for consumers in 18-23 and 14-

30 age groups; however, quality worries more consumers in 24-30 and 30-40 age groups.

Additional testing:

1) To test if men are more open to using technology for mass customisation the cross

tabulation was performed.


As we interpret the cross tabulation, both men and women are comfortable

customising with on-line technologies; however, men are more open to the concept. 85,7% of

male respondents as opposed to 55,6% of female respondents are comfortable from 6 to 10 in

using on-line software for customisation. Thus, H24 is accepted.


Figure 25: Interdependence testing: covariance between age and what discourages from buying a clothing item.


16/10/2015 65

2) Next two hypotheses that test the connection between interest in fashion and

preference in certain type of customisation will be explored:

H18- consumers who see clothes as an important communicator are uncomfortable with the co-

design processes.

H10- totally custom option is suitable for fashion-aware consumers with confidence in style.


Figure 26: Interdependence testing: covariance between gender and comfort in using technology for customisation processes


16/10/2015 66

Unfortunately, it is impossible to accept or reject these statements due to a very small

sample of extremely fashion-aware consumers. As we see, the p –value (Pearson’s correlation

coefficient) is more than 0.05 which means that there is less likely to be a significant

relationship. These assumptions must be tested in further research (Field, 2009).

3) For the same reason as previously tests connected to highly fashion involved

consumers cannot be performed. However, testing web skills is possible:



Figure 27: Interdependence testing: covariance between interest in fashion and preferable level of customisation


16/10/2015 67

Sour

ce: C

reat

ed b

y th

e au

thor

of t

he d

isser

tatio

n in

Qua

ltric

s as a

par

t of a

surv

ey re

port

Figure 28: Interdependence testing: covariance between IT literacy, fashion involvement and confidence in using technology for customisation processes


16/10/2015 68

Here we can see a direct connection between high computer literacy and high confidence in using software for customisation.

More advanced users are open to any type of customisation including such

complicated options such as co-design and totally custom. Respondent with moderate

computer literacy preferred easier options like custom fit and size and design options.

The rest of the hypotheses could not be tested in this research. They need a different

sampling method and a different survey construct. Future research should test the following

assumptions:

Table C: Hypotheses for future research:

H10 – totally custom option is suitable for fashion-aware consumers with confidence in

style.


consumers.


Figure 29: Interdependence testing: covariance between level of customisation and IT literacy


16/10/2015 69


H5 – lack of creativity and technical skills make it hard for consumers to participate in

design processes.

H6 – previous experience with and knowledge about customisation helps consumers view

on-line customisation positively.

H18 – consumers who see clothes as an important communicator are uncomfortable with

the co-design processes.

H19 – consumers with high web skills and high fashion involvement are more open to and interested in co-design processes than others.

H13 – consumers need some degree of confidence and knowledge in decision-making

process connected to garment structure and design features.

The following were explored in this research but need more primary data to be tested in the future research:

H20 – too many choices discourage consumers from participating in mass customisation processes.

H26 – inability to try on clothes on is the biggest danger to on-line operations of mass customisation.

D. Overall results and discussion

This research presents a mass customisation strategy for a successful business by

answering the questions posed in this dissertation.

Table 11: Mass customisation strategy for a successful brand of custom apparel on-

line:

1) Willingness to buy customised goods:

The overall interest among consumers is high, as well as, the willingness to buy

customised apparel. With time and development of more advanced technologies it the

demand and on-line mass customisation market will grow, especially in the fashion

industry.

2) Acceptable price on customised goods from a consumer and producer

perspective

Even though the interview findings accept H9, the survey analysis rejected the notion that

consumers would not pay more for customised clothes. The majority prefer good quality


16/10/2015 70

apparel and are willing to pay a reasonably higher price for it. The way to calculate it is

to apply the following formula: fabric cost (including decorations, threads, zippers, etc.)

+ garment production process cost (including seamstress’ rate per hour, time and

complexity of work) + % of profit a company is planning to make per item (taking into

account electricity bills and the rent of the building); considering that consumers will pay

reasonably more (20-30%) than the base price.

3) Suggested target consumer profile.

Two essential traits (appendix 4):

a) Picky consumers who want their clothes to fit perfectly and satisfy all their needs.

b) Consumers who want one–of–a–kind clothing items that reflect their personality and

style.

Additional characteristics (one or more):

• People with a non-standard size or figure.

• Men or women of any income level aged between 18 and 40+ for whom clothes is an

important communicator.

• People who care more about fit quality and long–term satisfaction than price.

• Advanced computer users who feel comfortable constructing custom clothes in CAD

software and then ordering it on–line.

• People who know exactly what they want but cannot find it in stores.

• Limited in time or do not like searching for clothes they want.

• People who want to be different and feel special, seeking self-expression.

• Have unique style and well-defined fashion taste.

4) Suggested categories of clothes for customisation

The interview gave more categories than the survey but consumer preferences are

more important in this context. Thus, special occasion wear, bridal wear, coats and

jackets, suits, shirts, casual dresses and jeans are the suggested categories.

5) Suggested level of customisation

Even though the interview suggests that co-design mixed with design options is

preferential level of customisation the survey proves co-design mixed with custom

size and fit options to be more popular among potential consumers. Design options

and totally custom could be left as an option or applied only to specific apparel

categories: Totally custom option for suits and coats and jackets and, and design

options for casual dresses and bridal wear (see page 63).


16/10/2015 71

6) Preferential technology-aided strategy

Smart usage of technology and an integrated technological approach where

technologies “complement one another across a company’s various functions” is the

way to achieve maximum efficiency, to “add customization value to consumers, bring

down transaction costs and lead times, and control the cost of customized production”

(Gandhi,2013:8).User-friendly CAD software is the main technology to invest in.

Companies like fits.me create believable virtual fitting rooms by displaying a

consumer’s avatar with exact measurements which shows how the clothing items fits.

They might have to be updated constantly due to weight fluctuations.

If the company has more resources to invest, technology is better used for production

rather than selection processes. 3D and laser printers can help make one–of–a kind

item for a lower cost and in a shorter time frame. Technology should also help to

communicate with the consumers and help them with measuring, fitting and choosing

the garment.

7) Suggested strategy to compete with the fast-fashion trend

When starting operations of customised services, the focus should be on establishing

a deep emotional connection with the consumers rather than focusing on profit. Better

quality for a reasonable price, more attention per client, unique experience and

opportunity for creativity and self-expression should be the brand’s promise in

marketing strategies and operations which will bring competitive advantage over fast-

fashion trend.

8) Concerns of consumers when buying mas customised item on–line

Many people do not trust on-line transactions. They worry about not being able to see

and touch the end product they are buying and then not being able to return a

customised item they did not like. Many also worry about providing incorrect

measurements. Fewer worry about the end price.

9) Risks for the mass customiser and solutions to them:

a) Inability to try on clothes on is the biggest danger to on–line operations of mass

customisation processes. Measuring errors will always occur because the majority

of consumers will not be able to take their measurements as a professional tailor

would. As a result, the company could be blamed even if it was the customer’s

mistake which would result in low satisfaction among consumers and bad

feedback for the company.


16/10/2015 72

Solution: scheduled fitting services in partnering tailors or stores, provide

measurement charts with various converters, focus on simpler designs and apparel

categories

b) Balancing between profit and “individual experience” could be challenging for

the company, as well as, balancing between reasonable price and quality.

Solution: try to find the ‘middle ground’ in the business strategy.

c) Distrust in on-line transactions among consumers would discourage purchases

due to lack of motivation.

Solution: well-programmed on-line presence and trustworthy information on the

site.

d) Providing guarantees and accepting returns is inefficient for mass customisers but

essential for consumers.

Solution: offer re-tailoring instead.

e) It takes longer to produce a single item on-demand when there is no stock.

Solution: invest into advanced technologies for quick single-item production, use

more labour, or market the process as a “can’t wait to get” experience.

f) People have hard times deciding what they want and communicating it to the

producer.

Solution: widen choices for customisation but set limited capabilities of custom

design. Also, provide inspiring ideas and visuals and offer stylistic advice.

10) Additional comments

• The main reasons people fail to purchase a garment is because it either does

not fit them well and does not compliment their body, so they feel

uncomfortable, or the item they chose is is too expensive, or the item was not

available in their size or the quality of the garment they liked was too low.

This means, if a mass customer can change all of the above to satisfy needs of

each individual, then customisation will be successful.

• Considering all of the above, smaller companies can succeed more in

providing customised services with minimal costs on production and with

maximum satisfaction with services for the consumer (Squire et al. (2006).

• The mass customisation of apparel on-line can be very successful but need to

be thought through in detail considering all major and minor factors and risks.


16/10/2015 73

V. Conclusion

Fashion trends are cyclical by nature. Before the Industrial Revolution, clothes were

custom-tailored; this trend has returned to the modern age in a new digital form. The

diversity of modern consumer tastes helps companies like Nike and Indochino gain revenue

and competitive advantage over more traditional competitors.

Mass customisation has been trending for some time and, consequently, the strategy

has been adopted by many companies. The trend has featured in the media and researched by

academics since the 1990s. However, there have been few updates on the topic since then,

and the findings have proven to be only partially relevant to understanding of mass

customisation and consumer preferences in the contemporary apparel market.

Despite the advantages to both parties, mass customisation is a risky strategy to adopt

as it presents a number of barriers. While its advantages have been explored extensively in

the literature, the risks remain under-researched. Previous studies have analysed the

phenomenon from a single angle: either from the producer’s or the consumer’s perspective.

In order to succeed as a mass customiser, companies must understand the conditions

under which customisation is successful, what kind of customisation consumers value and

what risks customisation of apparel involves (Franke et al; 2009; Gilmore and Pine, 1997).

Conversely, producers also have limited capabilities, which impedes the delivery of unlimited

mass customisation services. These limits need to be researched in order to ensure high–

quality services and customer satisfaction.

This research explores customisation of apparel on–line from both perspectives and

presents an improved attempt to understand mass customisation as a strategy for gaining

competitive advantage. It takes into account previous findings on the topic, recent

socioeconomic and attitudinal shifts, new technological innovations and recent fashion

trends, and aims to indicated shared characteristics of consumers that would buy custom-

made apparel online instead of cheap fast-fashion clothes.

This study not only fills in the current empirical gap regarding under researched areas

of the mass customisation concept, but also contributes to the existing literature by

integrating different theoretical models into one framework. The framework that summarises

a successful mass customisation approach was a result of a three-phase research strategy that

incorporates secondary resources for hypotheses building, and a two-phased empirical

research. The framework proceeds with the undertakings of Brannon et al (2002) and


16/10/2015 74

provides a summary of barriers to customisation and how they can be eliminated or

diminished.

As a first step, the secondary data research helped refine and narrow the focus of the

study. Assumptions made in the literature helped indicate the hypotheses for the primary

study. As a second step, an interview was conducted with a made-to-measure designer in

order to test some of the assumptions from the secondary data and to provide insights into the

customisation of apparel on-line from a producer’s perspective. A significant part of the

interview findings address most of the dissertation’s research questions, and these findings

are supported by the quantitative and qualitative data findings obtained from the

questionnaire, with the latter helping prove or disprove any contradictory findings revealed in

the previous steps.

Unlike in other studies, stratified random sampling was adapted and the research was

not limited to young females in certain geographic regions. Instead, the sample includes both

genders and a broader age range because demographics in relation to attitudes might have

changed over the past five years. The only criteria for participating in the questionnaire were:

computer literacy and at least some interest in fashion. As demand for customisation in an

online space was being observed, the location was not critical. The study was not limited to

specific product categories; rather, it explored the demand for specific types of customisation

pertaining to various garment categories.

Finally, the results were combined from all three methods. Some were unexpected; for

instance, apparently men are as interested as women in mass customisation of apparel on-

line. In addition, older and much younger consumers are also interested in such services;

thereby changing the dynamics of the target group. Moreover, it is assumed that consumers

are willing to pay much more for customised products that satisfy their individual needs;

however, analysis of overall results showed that consumers are willing to pay reasonably

more (20%-30% more from the average price.) The pricing strategy can be calculated by a

formula presented in this study.

The results also disprove the fact that consumers prefer bargains to long-term

satisfaction. On the contrary, the majority would rather choose more expensive clothes of

better quality. Interestingly, consumers are more concerned with fit and quality of the

garment rather than the end price. In addition, they prefer co-design mixed with custom fit


16/10/2015 75

and size option more than other types of customisation. Custom fit and size alone with design

on offer is a new level of customisation that was not previously explored in the literature.

Another important aspect that has changed is that consumers have much more

confidence to use CAD software and other technologies in order to construct and buy

customised apparel online. They are not apprehensive about participating in design processes

without professional assistance, but still prefer having the option of being advised. Many

need help in taking measurements.

To conclude, there is a growing demand for mass customisation in the apparel sector,

and the target consumers are those who want their clothes to fit perfectly and satisfy all of

their needs. They also want to reflect their personality by being unique. Some categories

require more customisation than others, but all were popular among the respondents, with the

exception of underwear and swimwear. Consumers still do not trust on-line transactions.

Therefore, if a company strives for success in a mass customisation market in the apparel

sector and wants to exploit technological opportunities, it should invest in software that

would enable best co-creation practices or into fast production-enabling advanced

technologies. An integrated technological approach is advised. If large companies cannot

invest in technologies due to limited resources, then it is easier for smaller companies to

manage mass customisation because they have fewer consumers; thus, individualisation is

possible with a smaller customer base. Companies can achieve greater success in providing

customised services with minimal production costs and maximum satisfaction with services

for the consumer (Squire et al.,2006).

The limitations and risks connected to customisation online can be omitted through

smart supply-chain development, a creative marketing approach and smart technologies, in

addition to a set of limited customisation options. The danger associated with the fast-fashion

trend can be eliminated by establishing a deep emotional connection with consumers through

a personalised approach and made-to-measure services.

The research results contribute significantly to the understanding of the customisation

of apparel online and its implications. The presented strategy summary provides a useful

framework for researchers and potential mass customisers that want to succeed in their

pursuit of on-line customisation.


16/10/2015 76

In no way is mass production an appropriate strategy for all companies. Neither

should it be the only strategy adopted by the company; rather, it is an additional feature that

provides a competitive advantage and satisfies a new target group of consumers (Radder and

Louw, 1999).

For future research

Despite all the useful insights yielded over the course of this study, the questionnaire

sample was too small; consequently, the results cannot be projected to the entire population.

Moreover, the 12-17 age group is completely absent from the study. Future research should

focus on the need for custom-made apparel for teenagers within this age group as they tend to

struggle with fit and size.

For future study, the questionnaire should be simpler and shorter. The questionnaire in

this research was too long and overwhelming for the respondents; thereby resulting in high

non-response and drop-out rates. As respondents exceeded the time they set aside mentally to

complete the survey, their responses are no longer an accurate account of their perceptions.

Another reason for drop-out was that the first question was too complex and discouraged the

respondents to proceed. Moreover, the hyperlink failed to work for some respondents.

Assumptions regarding the correlation between the fashion involvement and positive

attitude towards customisation processes that could not be tested in the context of this

research should be explored in further research. For this, a sample of fashion-aware

consumers should be recruited. Other hypotheses that could not be tested should be also

divided into categories and tested in separate studies (see page 72). Even though H20 and

H26 were discussed in the interview, they require further testing. Furthermore, gender

differences could be explored in greater depth in terms of the degree of customisation and

willingness to pay more, in addition to the connection between their country of residence and

interest in the customisation of clothes.


16/10/2015 77

VII. Bibliography

Abdelkafi, N. (2008). “Variety-induced complexity in mass customization: concepts and management.” Berlin, Erich Schmidt Verlag.

Alptekinoglu, A. and C. J. Corbett (2008). “Mass Customization vs. Mass Production: Variety and Price Competition.” Manufacturing & Service Operations Management 10(2): 204-217

Anderson, C. (2006). “The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More.” New York, Hyperion.

Bardakci, A. and J. Whitelock (2003). “Mass-customisation in marketing: the consumer perspective.” Journal of Consumer Marketing 20(5): 463-479.

Barnes L., Lea-Greenwood, (2006), “Fast fashioning the supply chain: Shaping the research agenda.” Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management 10, no.3:259-71

Blecker, T. and N. Abdelkafi (2006a). “Complexity and variety in mass customization systems: analysis and recommendations.” Management Decision 44(7): 908-929.

Blecker, T. and N. Abdelkafi (2006b). “Mass Customization: State-of-the-Art and Challenges. in: T. Blecker and G. Friedrich (Eds.): Mass Customization: Challenges and Solutions.” New York, Springer Science Business Media: 1-25.

Brannon L. E, Ulrich P. V., Anderson-Connell L.J, (2002), “A consumer-driven model for mass customization in the apparel market”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An international Journal, Vol.6 ISS 3 p 240-258

Brooke, (2015), “Tinker tailor shuts down its operations”, Fashionista, Breaking Media, Accessed on 29 August 2015 Available at: http://fashionista.com/2015/07/tinker-tailor-closes

Bryman A., Bell E., (2011), Business Research Methods, 3d edition, Oxford University Press, New York

Cachon G.P, Swinney R., (2011), “The Value of Fast Fashion: Quick response, Enhanced design, and strategic consumer behaviour,” Management Science, Vol 57, No.4, pp 778-795

Chamberlin, E. H. (1962). “The Theory of Monopolistic Competition: A Reorientation of the Theory of Value.” Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

Chen, S., Y. Wang and M. M. Tseng. (2009). “Mass Customization as a Collaborative Engineering Effort.” International Journal of Collaborative Engineering, 1(2): 152-167

Christopher M., Lowson R., and Peck H., (2004), “Creating agile supply chains in the fashion industry.” International Journal of retail and distribution management 32, no.8:367-76.


16/10/2015 78

Cline Elizabeth L., (2012),” Overdressed: The shockingly high cost of cheap fashion,” Penguin Group, NY

Crewe L., and Davenport E., (1992), “The puppet-show: Changing buyer-supply relationships within clothing retailing.” Transactions of Institute of British Geographers 17, no.2:183-97

Davis, Stanley M. (1987), “Future perfect, 10th edition,” Addison-Wesley Publishing, Pennsylvania State University

Doyle, S.A, Moore C.M, Morgan L., (2006), “Supplier Management in fast moving fashion retailing.” Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management 10, no.3:272-81

Fairhurst A., Bhardwaj V., (2010), “Fast fashion: response to changes in the fashion industry.”, The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 20, No.1, 165-173

Fernie, j., Sparks. L, (1998), “Logistics and retail management, insights into current practice and trends from leading experts.” London: Kogan Page

Field A., (2009), “Discovering Statistics Using SPSS”, 3d edition, SAGE Publication Ltd

Fits.me report, (2012), UK consumers, online survey conducted in two UK-based online stores in July 2012

Fits.me report, (2013), Back to the future: transforming the apparel purchase journey, client data: January-April 2013

Fits.me, (2015), “Suits you sir: why big data just doesn’t fit”, 11 August

Available at: http://fits.me/resources/articles/suits-you-sir-why-big-data-just-doesnt-fit/

Fits.me, (2015), “Talking Business: For retail experience, one size does not fit all”, 6 July

Available at: http://fits.me/resources/articles/talking-business/

Ford, H. and Crowther, S. (1922). “My Life and Work.” New York, Doubleday.

Fox, N. J., & Hunn, A. Mathers, N. J., (1998). “Using interviews in a research project.” NHS Executive, Trent.

Franke, N. and F. T. Piller (2004). "Value Creation by Toolkits for User Innovation and Design: The Case of the Watch Market." Journal of Product Innovation Management 21: 401- 415.

Franke, N., Keinz, P. and Steger C.J, (2010), “Customization: a goldmine or a wasteland”, Vol. 2, No2., 2010, pp. 26-33, New insight


16/10/2015 79

Franke, N., Keinz P and Steger C.J (2009). "Testing the Value of Customization: When Do Customers Really Prefer Products Tailored to Their Preferences?" Journal of Marketing 73(September 2009): 103-121.

Gandhi A., Magar C., Roberts R., (2013), “How technology can drive the next wave of mass customization”, McKinsey on Business technology, Number 32, Winter 2013

Gilmore, J. H. and Pine, B.J. (1997). "The Four Faces of Mass Customization." Harvard Business Review 75(January-February): 91-101.

Gilmore, J. H. and Pine, B.J. (2000). “Markets of One: Creating Customer-Unique Value through Mass Customization.” Boston, Harvard Business School Publishing.

Gordon R.L. (1975) “Interviewing: Strategy, Techniques and Tactics.” Dorsey Press, Illinois.

Haag S., Cummings M., McCubbrey, (2002), “Management Information Systems for the Information Age,” 3rd edition, Boston, McGraw - Hill, pp 331.

Harzer T.S, (2013), “Value Creation Through Mass Customization: An Empirical Analysis of the Requisite Strategic Capabilities” (Online), Accessed on 12 August 2015

Available at: http://publications.rwth-aachen.de/record/229868/files/4614.pdf

Heritage, J. (1984). “A change-of state token and aspects of its sequential placement. Structure of social action: Studies in conversation analysis”, 299-345.

Hines T., Bruce M., (2001), Fashion marketing-contemporary issues. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Hoffman W., (2007), “Logistics get trendy.” Traffic World 271, no. 5:15

Hollensen S., Schmidt M.J, (2006), “Marketing Research: An international approach,” Pearson Education Limited

Illieva, J., Baron S., and Healey, N.M (2002) “Online surveys in marketing research: pros and cons.” International Journal of Market Research. Vol 44, quarter 3, 361-382

Jiang, K., Lee, H.L. and Seifert, R.W. (2006). "Satisfying customer preferences via mass customization and mass production." IIE Transactions 38(1): 25-38.

Kamali N., Loker S., (2002) “Mass Customization: On-line consumer involvement in product design,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, vol. 7, no. 4

Kaplan, A. M. and Haenlein, M. (2006). "Toward a Parsimonious Definition of Traditional and Electronic Mass Customization." Product Innovation Management 23: 168-182.

Kaplan, A. M., Schoder, S and Haenlein, M. (2007). "Factors Influencing the


16/10/2015 80

Adoption of Mass Customization: The Impact of Base Category Consumption Frequency and Need Satisfaction." The Journal of Product Innovation Management 24: 101-116.

Kohli, A.K. and Jaworski, B.J. (1990), “Market orientation: the construct, research propositions,” Journal of Marketing, Vol.54, pp. 1-18 and managerial implication'', Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, pp. 1-18.

Kotha, S. (1995). "Mass Customization: Implementing the Emerging Paradigm for Competitive Advantage." Strategic Management Journal 16: 21-42.

Kotler, P. (1967). “Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, and Control.” Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall.

Kotler, P. (1977). "From sales obsession to marketing effectiveness." Harvard Business Review 55(6): 67-75.

Kotler, P. (1989). "From mass marketing to mass customization." Strategy & Leadership 17(5): 10-47.

Kumar, A. (2005). "Mass Customization: Metrics and Modularity." International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems 16: 287-311.

Kumar, A. (2007). "From mass customization to mass personalization: a strategic transformation." International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems 19(4): 533-547.

Kumar, A., S. Gattoufi and A. Reisman (2007). "Mass customization research: trends, directions, diffusion intensity, and taxonomic frameworks." International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems 19(4): 637-665.

Kurt Salmon Associates (1997), “Consumer Outlook,” Kurt Salmon Associates, Atlanta, G.A

Kvale S., (1996), An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Lancaster, K. J. (1966). "A New Approach to Consumer Theory." Journal of Political Economy 74(1): 132-157.

Lancaster, K. J. (1979). “Variety, Equity and Efficiency”, Oxford, Basil Blackwell.

Lee H., Chang E., (2011), “Consumer Attitudes Toward Online Mass Customization: An application of Extended Technology Acceptance Model,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 16, International Communications Association.

Lee, S. and Chen, J.C. (1999), “Mass-customization methodology for an apparel industry with a future”, Journal of Industrial Technology, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 2-8.

Louise Barriball, K., and While, A. (1994). “Collecting Data using a semi-‐‑structured interview: a discussion paper.” Journal of advanced nursing, 19(2), 328-335.


16/10/2015 81

Malone, S., (1998), “Custom food-falls into bankruptcy, but concept lives on, says founder,” Footwear News 54, no 23:5

Malone, S., (1999), “Mankind strides in mass customization.” Women’s Wear Daily, July: 12 National Post.2009, Fast Fashion., Accessed on 21 August 2015

Available at: www.trend watching.com/about/inmedia/articles/2009_fast_fashion.html

McManus, S. (2000). “As you like it.” Sean Accessed on 5 September 13, 2015

Available at: http://www.sean.co.uk/a/science/customisation.shtm

Piller, F. T., Moeslein, K. and Stotko, C.M. (2004). "Does mass customization pay? An economic approach to evaluate customer integration." Production Planning & Control 15(4): 435-444.

Piller, F. T. and Müller, M. (2004). "A new marketing approach to mass customization." International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 17(7): 583-593.

Piller, F. T., Moeslein, K. and Stotko, C.M. (2004). "Does mass customization pay? An economic approach to evaluate customer integration." Production Planning & Control 15(4): 435-444.

Piller, F. T. and Müller, M. (2004). "A new marketing approach to mass customization." International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 17(7): 583-593

Piller, F. T. (2004). “Mass Customization News: A Newsletter on Mass Customization, Personalization, and Customer Integration,” Vol. 7, No. 1. TUM Research Center on Mass Customization & Customer Integration, Munich.

Piller, F. T. and C. M. Stotko (2003). “Mass Customization und Kundenintegration: Neue Wege zum innovativen Produkt.” Düsseldorf, Symposion Publishing GmbH.

Pine, B.J. II. (1991), “Paradigm shift: from mass production to mass customization”, published master's thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.

Pine, B. J. (1993). “Mass customization: the new frontier in business competition.” Boston, Harvard Business School Press., 1-14

Pisut, G.R. (1998), “Mass customization: profiling consumer interests”, unpublished Master's thesis, Auburn University, Auburn, AL.

Porter, M. E. (1980). “Competitive Strategy.” New York, U.S., The Free Press

Porter, M. E. (1985). “Competitive Advantage.” New York, U.S., The Free Press.

Porter, M. E. (1996). "What is strategy?" Harvard Business Review 74(6): 61-78.

Prahalad, C. K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004). “The future of competition: co-creating


16/10/2015 82

unique value with customers.” Boston, MA, Harvard Business School Press.

Radder, L. and Louw, L. (1999). "Mass customization and mass production." The TQM Magazine 11(1): 35-40.

Redshift research report, (2014), “How fit is online fashion? Consumer attitudes towards clothes shopping online.”

Richards, 2015, Qualitative research Methods module, week 8- Interviewing, University of York

Richardson, J.,1996, “Vertical integration and rapid response in fashion apparel.” Organisation Science 7, no 4:400-12

Rogers, M. (1999), “You can learn from these blue jeans'”, 1to1media, Accessed on 15 April,2015

Available at: http://www.1to1media.com/view.aspx?docid=12018

Salvador, F. and Piller, F.T. (2009). "Cracking the Code of Mass Customization." Plenary Talk at the 5th World Conference on Mass Customization and Personalization (MCPC). Helsinki, Finland. October 4-8, 2009.

Sancton J.,2012, Book Review: 'Overdressed,' by Elizabeth L. Cline, .June 21, Accessed on 15 August 2015

Available at: http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2012-06-21/book-review-overdressed-by-elizabeth-l-dot-cline

Schreier, M. (2006). “The value increment of mass customized products: an empirical assessment.” Journal of Consumer Behaviour 5(4): 317-327.

Sheth, J. N., Sisodia, R.S. and Sharma, S. (2000). "The antecedents and consequences of customer-centric marketing." Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 28(1): 55-66.

Sherman L.,2014, “Customizable fashion is on the rise: A slew of new start-ups put the customer in the designer’s seat. but is that where they want to be?” Fashionista, Breaking Media, Accessed on 1 September 2015

Available at: http://fashionista.com/2014/06/customization-apparel-fashion

Shim, S. and Drake, M.F. (1990), “Consumer intention to purchase apparel by mail order: beliefs, attitudes, and decision process variables”, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 18-26.

SRI consulting, (1997),” Mass customization: custom capability in the era of the mass market”, Accessed on 2 September 2015

Available at: future.sri.com/BIP/datalog/didesc/2005.html


16/10/2015 83

Squire, B., Cousins, P.D. and Brown, S. (2006). "The impact of mass customisation on manufacturing trade-offs." Production and Operations Management 15(1): 10-21.

Squire, B., et al. (2006b). "The impact of mass customisation on manufacturing trade-offs." Production and Operations Management 15(1): 10-21.

Sull D., Turconi S., (2008), “Fast-fashion lessons”, Business Strategy Review, London Business school

Tokatli N., Wringley N., Kizilgün, Ö (2008), “Shifting global supply networks and fast fashion: Made in Turkey for Marks and Spencer.” Global Networks 8,no.3:261-80

Tseng, M. and Jiao, J (2001). “Mass Customization. Handbook of Industrial Engineering: Technology and Operations Management,” Third Edition. New York, Wiley: 684-709.

Tseng, M. M. and Piller, F.T. (2003). “The Customer Centric Enterprise: Advances in Mass Customization and Personalization.” Berlin Heidelberg New York, Springer Verlag.

Tyler D., Heeley J., and Bhamra T., (2006), “Supply chain influences on new product development in fashion clothing.” Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management 10, no 3:316-28

Ulrich P., Anderson-Cornell L.J, Wu W., (2003), “Consumer co-design of apparel for mass customization,” Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An international Journal, Vol. 7 ISS 4pp. 398-412

Udwadia, F.E. and Kumar, K.R. (1991), “Impact of customer construction in product/service markets'', Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 40, pp. 261-72.

Workman, J.E. and Lentz, E.S. (2000), “Measurement specifications for manufacturers' prototype bodies'” ,Clothing and Textiles Research Journal,Vol.18No.4,pp.251-9.


16/10/2015 84

VIII. Appendices

Appendix 1: Interview transcript with the designer Ksenia Svirid

Q1: How did you start making made-to-measure clothes?

A1: There is a percentage of people that don’t fit into standard sizes. I am one of those

people. When I was fifteen I could not find clothes that would fit me. Everything was too

big. I had and still do have a children’s size. I also lived in a small Ukrainian city that had

limited choices in terms of brands and clothing stores. So, it thought, why not make it

myself? There are other reasons than problems in size.

At first I bought clothes from children stores or ordered them from a tailor’s. I

bought XS size and then adjusted it myself or at tailor’s. It doesn’t look as nice anymore if

you adjust it. So, I though it was easier to make clothes from scratch right away by myself.

I do not like shopping or looking for something. I always know exactly what I want

to buy and it is easier for me to make it. It takes too much time for me to shop for something

specific. I don’t have energy for that.

I also wanted to be different, having something personal that nobody had. I used

tailoring services a lot. I wanted to feel individual and to have unique items that reflect my

personality. Originality and expressing personality is the utility of clothes for me.

Q2: Is there a demand for mass customization in the apparel market on-line?

A2: I think there is but the niche is really small. I think it is about 5% of such people

who buy customised items. I think these services work better for special occasions and for

upper-class customers. For instance, in Western countries people are more open to on-line

transactions. In Eastern countries people still do not trust this way of purchasing clothes.

The price will be a key figure in purchasing decisions, I think. If the price is not to high

people will be less scared to buy on-line. Returns and guarantees would also help

consumers to be more confident. But that would be problematic for the producer. It will be

hard to prove that the measurements were provided wrong by the customer, that it was not

the producer’s fault.

a) 1) demand d) h)7) price g)5) issues

c) 2) target group j) characteristics


16/10/2015 85

Q3: How big is the mass customisation market today?

A3: Not big but it is increasingly becoming more popular. In Western countries it is

more developed and accepted by the consumers. However, even there not everyone is

ready to put effort in ordering on-line and then wait for the order for 2-3 weeks.

Q4: You practice making made-to-measure clothes offline. Do you think doing so

on-line is possible?

A4: If the measurements are correct, ideally measured, then it is possible but it is

better for the producer to control this process. Consumers are very different and I am not

sure they will be able to measure themselves like a professional tailor would. Measuring

in in-store locations is ideal. Difficult to construct clothes need to be fitted twice. Easy

ones don’t. Slim dresses and men’s jackets and pants are the hardest to construct. Tops,

shirts and skirts are not so hard to construct.

Q 5: Who are the target consumers of the mass customisation brand in your

opinion?

A5: Middle and upper class men and women for whom clothes is something more

than just covering naked bodies with. It is their way of expressing themselves. They

should not care as much about the end price but rather about the fit and how it reflects

their personality. This a newly emerged target consumer group which keeps growing.

Q6: Does the fast-fashion trend contradict the need for customization?

A6: This trend and brands of such trend have significantly lowered the value of clothes

and the production processes of clothes. They distort real cost of clothes. Clothes that are

made in Europe loose popularity because of fast-fashion. Good quality products are

devaluated when compared to throwaway fashion products. In reality the dress cannot cost

10 euros. Only the fabric plus work (in a non–third –world country) at least cost three

times more. We should understand where these prices are coming from: this is the

cheapest quality and cheapest labour available worldwide. We are talking sweatshops

here, child labour and violation of human rights. For me it is an ethical issue. Fast-fashion

means clothes that should not and cannot be so cheap. Organic clothes by H&M is a silly

idea, in my opinion. They are trying to make it sound better but in reality natural fabrics

don’t last long. Synthetics need to be added for longer usage.

a) 1) demand g) 8) risks and issues

8) 5) g) risks and issues 4) d) relevant products

b) fast-fashion 5)g) issues and risks for customisation

j) characteristics 2) c) target group a)1)


16/10/2015 86

Q7: What type of consumers prefer fast-fashion products and what type of

consumers would rather buy customized clothing items? What characteristics target

consumers of a mass customized product should posses?

A7: People who don’t care much about how they look or do not know or care

much about fashion, they will buy fast-fashion. After all, it is an in-style –want to-

bees who lack their own imagination and fashion taste. People who see value in

fashion and express themselves through clothes would buy customised items. People

are tired of being all the same, blended in with the mass. People want to feel special

and if something is done specifically for them it boosts their ego. There are 2 types of

people: the ones that should tailor clothes and the ones that shouldn’t. Some enjoy the

whole process; some just can’t imagine clothes beyond what they see in stores. I think

younger consumers and women will be more interested. However, for men it is easier

to make- to- measure clothes. They are more open to online shopping and it is easier

with sizes for them.

Q8: Which products are relevant? What products and to what level should be

customized?

A8: People often do not know what they want and how to express their needs. Co-

design with Design options is the most viable type of customisation. Wider sizing options

is also a good way to customise on-line (by body type, for instance). Some people have

tops of M size but bottoms of XS. Everything ordered through on-line should have limited

capabilities because producers need to be prepared for the orders and adjustments

requested by the consumers. Customer’s fantasy can be unlimited sometimes.

Q9: What items have more demand to be customised?

A9: Women’s dresses, coats, underwear, men’s pants, jackets, suits, shirts. Some

things just have to fit perfectly and this is impossible to reach through mass production.

b) c) fast-fashion consumers 2) j) target consumers

3) d) types of customisation 8) g) risks and solutions

4) d)


16/10/2015 87

Q10: What are the production implications in producing a singular item for

minimum cost? What pricing strategy would be acceptable for customised apparel?

What price is the appropriate cost to charge for such services in order to make profit

as a company?

A10: Obviously, it can’t cost as products from mass market where garments are

produces in third world countries. If we count, then let’s say, it takes a day to create one

dress. Count the daily rate of the sewer somewhere in Europe, add the cost of the fabric,

and the profit you want to make. It cannot cost 10-20 dollars in the end.

It always depends and bases on fabrics. The labour always has the same rate. `The

customer needs to know what he is paying for. The easiest is to split different costs for a

better understanding what is paid for what and we get a formula:

Fabric+ production time per hour+ complexity of work+ profit

To widen the choices for the customer the producer needs to give the options of fabrics

with a different price range, so, the customers can choose for themselves. There is a need

for advanced explanation on the website about the fabrics and measuring techniques.

Q11: What are additional risks when providing mass customisation services on-line?

How can they be omitted?

A11: 1) Returning. How should the producer deal with returns? In some counties it is

ensured on the legislative level. What should the producer do with a returned customised

item? It is a loss of money.2) Measuring errors. Even if there are all types of support to

ensure that the measuring processes is understandable, the producer can’t guarantee that

the consumers did it properly. As a result, the customer might get a garment that has

wrong size and fit. Who is to blame? A good way to deal with that is having fitting spots

on the site or a body scanning technology. First is more realistic now 3) It will be hard to

keep prices for production low. There is no such thing as good quality, cheap, fast, and

customised. 4) It will take some 2-3 weeks to create a customised item. Not all customers

are patient enough. How omitted? That is something that can be overcome with creativity

only. 5) The niche of target consumer is very narrow and specific at the moment.

Q 12: In what way have technological advances contribute to customization?

7) h) price g) issues

5) 8) g)


16/10/2015 88

A12: For now it is hard to say. I see it in the nearest future but not now. However, it’s a

great idea, it should be developed. All will depend on the quality of software in terms of

virtual fitting rooms. It must be very realistic. Otherwise, the point of custom fit and

design is destroyed with the technology. The best way technology can help I think is not in

selection processes but production processes of garments.

Q13: Is online mass customisation a viable business option? How do you see the future

of customised clothes?

A13: Again, now it is not a viable option because of the cheap fast-fashion brands. People

think that a garment costs less than it actually should. To make a singular item it takes more

time because the construction would be made specifically for a person and not as a standard

size. It cannot be mass and low cost. Singular construction like that takes time.3D printers is

the answer to this but its still too expensive. Customisation works for small companies that

do not focus on selling big quantities of customised garments. Its about the deep connection

between the producer and consumer. It has more of a psychological satisfaction for the

consumer. It could be very popular now when people are too distant from being unique. All

trends are shifting toward self-expression.

The idea of mass customisation is that it cannot be brought to the masses because it

should be unique. It should be kept as a limited production. There can’t be many customers,

it is for a specific small niche. If 50% become consumers of it, its value will drop.

Customisation is about more attention per client I think. Ideologically, it is s anti-capitalistic

in some sense.

Q14: Why do you like being a producer of customised goods? A14: Good feedback brings satisfaction to the producer too. Customisation means some

level of freedom to be an artist in your field, go beyond the comfort zone, to see what comes

out of something new. Mass market can’t give that. Is sees the result in money and revenue?

I measure success in emotional scaling. In case with customisation you pay for the

experience and emotional utility that brings confidence and feeling special. Companies like

that are about the idea unlike the mass production that are about the money. It has great

future but only for those who understand how to enjoy life and what really matters.

6) e)

5) 8) g) 6) e) 9) i) 1) a) f)

i) j)


16/10/2015 89

Guide to questions that were answered:

9) How big the mass customization market is?

10) Who are the target consumers of the mass customization brand? What characteristics do

they posses?

11) What are the most successful types of customization?

12) What items have more demand to be customized?

13) What issues can the company face in delivering mass customized services?

14) What type of technologies the company should use to make the mass customization

more efficient?

15) What price is appropriate for such services to make profit?

16) What are additional risks when providing mass customization services (including fast-

fashion trend)?

Overall, the dissertation explores and aims to answer the following questions:

(a) Is there a demand for mass customization in the apparel market? How big is it?

(b) Does the fast-fashion trend contradict the need for customization?


rather buy customized clothing items? Which products are relevant?

(d) What products and to what level should be customized?

(e) In what way have technological advances contribute to customization? Can they solve

problems connected to customisation services?

How comfortable the consumers are with co-design software? Can they make design

decisions?

(f) How people view the possibility of customizing and buying products online? Can it

compete with shopping in malls?

(g) What key issues could arise from the customization of apparel online? How can it be

omitted?

(h) What pricing strategy would be acceptable for customized apparel (what price the

consumers are willing to pay)? Segmentation of mass market?


customization services? What are the key elements that would ensure mass customizer’s

success?

(k) What characteristics target consumers of a mass customized product should posses?


16/10/2015 90

Appendix 2: Interview consent form

TYMS Student Ethics form

(Sanctioned by Chair of HSSE Committee)

ü Informed consent will be sought from all research participants where appropriate

ü All data will be treated confidentially and stored in a secure place ü All quotes and other material obtained from participants will be anonymised in all reports/publications arising from the study where appropriate

ü All reasonable steps have been taken to minimise risk of physical/ psychological harm to study participants

ü All reasonable steps have been taken to minimise risk of physical/mental harm to researchers

ü Participants have been made aware of and consent to all potential futures uses of the research and data

ü There are no known conflicts of interest with respect to finance / funding Purpose: This e-mail interview is conveyed for research purposes for the postgraduate dissertation of the MSc in Global Marketing programme. The information provided by the interviewee will be used only for studying purposes. The research project title: Exploring the trend of customization in the digital age: Is there demand and potential for customized products in the fashion industry on-line?

Consent form This form is for you to state whether or not you agree to take part in the interview. Please read and answer every question. If there is anything you do not understand, or if you want more information, please ask me.

YES NO

Have I explained why I want to talk to you? r r

Do you agree to take part in the interview? r r

If yes, do you agree to your interview being recorded?

(You may take part in the study without agreeing to this). r r

Do you understand that the information you provide will be used in the dissertation? r r

May the researcher use your name in the paper?

r r

Interviewee name and position in the company (in BLOCK letters):

____Oksana_Svyryd__________________________________________________________________ Interviewer’s name: ________Kateryna Dedukh____________________________________________ Interviewee signature: Date: _____4/10/2015_____________

ONE COPY FOR INTERVIEWEE & ONE COPY TO BE RETAINED BY STUD


16/10/2015 91

Appendix 3: Construct of the questionnaire


16/10/2015 92


16/10/2015 93


16/10/2015 94


16/10/2015 95


16/10/2015 96


16/10/2015 97


16/10/2015 98


16/10/2015 99

Appendix 4: Analysis of crosstabulation


16/10/2015 100


16/10/2015 101

XI. Glossary

Co-design- “collaborative relationship between consumers and manufacturers” where a

product is designed “according to consumer specifications and based on manufacturing

components” (Anderson-Cornell et al 2002; Ulrich 2003:401).

CAD- computer-aided design software that enables co-creation of the product through

technological manipulation of parts and details. (Ulrich,2003:402).

TAM-technology acceptance model by the consumers (Lee, Chang, 2011).

Virtual fitting rooms- photo- accurate visualisation of fit, it is the online equivalent of a bricks-and-mortar fitting room in which shoppers may identify which size of garment fits them the way they prefer (Fits.me Report).

Made-to-measure clothes- clothes that is produces for a specific customer considering his or her unique measurements and preferences.

Fast-fashion trend- interpretation of high fashion designs made with cheaper fabric and sold for much less They are meant to last for one season and then be thrown way. Examples: H&M, Forever 21, Top Shop, and Zara (Sull, Turconi,2008:5).

Documents

MSc Dissertation For print copy