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).
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
Source: Created by the author of the dissertation in Qualtrics as a part of a survey report Number of respondents
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
Source:CreatedbytheauthorofthedissertationinQualtricsasapartofasurveyreport
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)
characteri
stics

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
custom
isation
j)
characteri
stics
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
consum
ers
2) j)
target
consum
ers
3) d)
types
of
custo
misat
ion
8) g)
risks
and
soluti
ons
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)
issue
s
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).

MSc Dissertation For print copy

More Related Content

Similar to MSc Dissertation For print copy

MSc Dissertation For print copy