Ž.Journal of Operations Management 18 2000 605–625www.elsevier.comrlocaterdswApproaches to mass customization: configurations andempirical validationRebecca Duraya,), Peter T. Wardb, Glenn W. Milliganb, William L. BerrybaCollege of Business and Administration, UniÕersity of Colorado at Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO 80933-7150, USAbDepartment of Management Sciences, Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State UniÕersity, Columbus, OH 43210-1399, USAAbstractMass customization is a paradox-breaking manufacturing reality that combines the unique products of craft manufactur-ing with the cost-efficient manufacturing methods of mass production. Although this phenomenon is known to exist inpractice, academic research has not adequately investigated this new form of competition. In this research, we develop aconfigurational model for classifying mass customizers based on customer involvement in design and product modularity.We validate this typology through an empirical analysis and classification of 126 mass customizers. We also exploremanufacturing systems and performance implications of the various mass customization configurations. q 2000 ElsevierScience B.V. All rights reserved.Keywords: Mass customization; Process design; Technology; Marketingroperations interface1. IntroductionMass customization, once considered a paradox tobe resolved in the future, has become an everydayreality for many manufacturers. Stanley Davis coinedthe term Amass customizationB in his 1987 book,Future Perfect. Davis suggested that existing tech-nology constrained possibilities for mass-customizedproducts, markets, and organizations, although hesaid that the phenomenon would prevail in the fu-ture. More contemporary researches suggest that theadvances in manufacturing, information technology)Corresponding author. Tel.: q1-719-262-3673.Ž.E-mail address: [email protected] R. Duray .and management methods since the publication ofFuture Perfect in 1987 have made mass customiza-Žtion a standard business practice Kotha, 1995; Pine,.1993 . The confluence of these advances allowsproducers to customize at low cost and customers toreap the benefits of customized products with rela-tively low prices.The practice of mass customization does not fitthe conventional paradigm of manufacturing man-agement. Historically, companies chose processesthat supported the production of either customizedcrafted products or standardized mass-producedproducts. This traditional practice means that cus-tomized products usually are made using low volumeproduction processes that cope well with a greatvariety of products and with design processes that0272-6963r00r$ - see front matter q 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.Ž.PII: S0272-6963 00 00043-7()R. Duray et al.r Journal of Operations Management 18 2000 605–625606can accommodate a high degree of customer in-volvement in specifying the product. In contrast, amass production process is chosen for making stan-dardized products in a high volume environmentwhere great attention is paid to efficiency and captur-ing scale economies. Further, product variety is rela-tively low in mass production and customer involve-ment is sought through market research only tocapture standard product design attributes that havewide appeal. In contrast to the traditional paradigm,Ž.Davis 1987 envisioned a one-of-a-kind productmanufactured to customer specification without sac-rificing scale economies. In this way, customers areable to purchase a customized product for the cost ofŽ.a mass-produced item. Similarly, Pine 1993 definesthe goals of mass customization as providing enoughvariety in products and services so that nearly every-one finds exactly what they want at a reasonableprice.Although these definitions provided by Davis andPine sketch the essence of mass customization, theydo not possess the specificity required to identifycompanies as mass customizers or how a companycan achieve a mass customization capability. Ac-counts of mass customization practices in companiesdescribed in the literature label a broad range ofproduction practices mass customization; however,the diversity of the practices and the companiesfurther clouds the meaning of mass customization. Inshort, extant literature has not established good con-ceptual boundaries for mass customization, nor hasthat literature presented a means to distinguish amongthe vast array of mass customization practices in away that lends clarity.This paper addresses three important elementsmissing from the literature. First, we develop a con-ceptual model of mass customization to identify andclassify mass customizers. This model is based onthe key dimensions of mass customization and vali-dated through literature, field studies, and surveytesting. Second, we develop a classification schemeto group mass customizing companies according tothe way they achieve mass customization. Third, weexplore different approaches to mass customizationimplied by the typology by comparing the manufac-turing approach of each type. Our approach yieldsmass customization configurations that are empiri-cally validated.We establish the external validity of the modelthrough empirical investigation of companies in sixdifferent industries. By using a number of industriesin our sample, we address the issue of whether masscustomization is a robust concept applicable across arange of industries, or whether it can be applied onlyto a limited number of special cases. On the otherhand, by limiting the study to six industries, we areable to show that mass customization is a competi-tive choice open to a number of competitors in thesame industries. In addition, we are able to controland test for industry effects.2. Research propositionBecause mass customization is a relatively newidea; scholarly literature related to the topic is scant.In this research, we seek to uncover the importantdimensions of mass customization from an opera-tions perspective. We argue that the essence of masscustomization lies in resolving the seeming paradoxof mass producing custom products by finding effi-ciencies in two key dimensions. First, mass cus-tomizers must find a means for including each cus-tomer’s specifications in the product design. Second,mass customizers must utilize modular design toachieve manufacturing efficiencies that approximatethose of standard mass produced products. Choicesmade by mass customizers on how they approachthese two dimensions suggest a useful
View Full Document
Unlocking...