Mass Customization: Balancing Customer Desires with Operational Reality

  • Hossam Ismail
  • Iain Reid
  • Jenny Poolton
  • Ivan Arokiam
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 87)


Driven by complex social, political, geographic and technological factors, the past decade has seen dramatic changes in the global market environments. Manufacturing companies have been under pressure to meet conflicting goals of efficiency and consumer choice. On one hand customers demand that orders are met faster and at lower cost. On the other hand, they are demanding highly customized products with a wide variety of options. This has led a growing number of economists and scholars to declare that the paradigm of mass production is no longer able to satisfy such demands. As a result new paradigms of agility, responsiveness and mass customization have emerged. Mass customization is the “application of technology and new management methods to provide product variety and customization through flexibility and quick responsiveness at prices comparable to mass-produced products”. Mass customization, in itself introduces new demands on firms. These include improved product development processes, flexible manufacturing planning and control systems, and closer supply chain management. Whilst larger organizations by their nature can afford the risk of making mistakes, small to medium enterprises (SME’s) are typically more vulnerable, and hence need a structured low risk approach. The second of these shifts is the more relevant to mass customization and often SME’s are not able to effectively balance the market needs on one hand and operational efficiencies on the other. In this paper, a method for feature-based mass customization is proposed that translates the voice of the customer into viable integrated product functional requirements, design features, component selection and reuse, and product design modules that are able to provide a better balance between customer requirements and company capabilities at an early stage of product design. The paper demonstrates, via a case study, how the principles of feature-based customization have been adopted by an SME within the context of agility. The paper explores a method for prioritizing the VOC in terms of similarity of functional requirements/features within product families. These consider the factors of design features, modular structures and product component in terms of cost and volume. The ‘feature-component matrix’ is introduced to represent product families and calculate these similarity coefficients. The goal is to present design and manufacturing engineers with insights into product similarity and feature-based customization. The paper demonstrates, via a case study, how the principles of balancing customer requirements using feature-based customization and how it has been adopted by an SME within the context of manufacturing agility.


Voice of the Customer Product Proliferation Feature Similarity New Product Development Agility 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    M.P. Bhandarkar and R. Nagi, STEP-based feature extraction from STEP geometry for agile manufacturing. Comput. Ind. 411 (2000), pp. 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    W.S. Newman, A. Podgurski, R.D. Quinn, F.L. Merat, M.S. Branicky, N.A. Barendt, G.C. Causey, E.L. Hasser, Y. Kim, J. Swaminathan and V.B. Velasco, Jr., Design lessons for building agile manufacturing systems. IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom. 163 (2000), pp. 228–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    T.F. Burgess, Making the Leap to Agility: Defining and Achieving Agile Manufacturing through Business Process Redesign and Business Network Redesign, International Journal of Operations and Production Management; Volume 14 No. 11; 1994Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    P.T. Kidd, Agile Manufacturing: Forging New Frontiers, Addison-Wesley, MA, 1994Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    H. Sharifi, Z. Zhang, “A Methodology for Achieving Agility in Manufacturing Organisations: An introduction International Journal of Production Economics, 1999, pp7–22.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    H. Ismail, S Snowdon, G Vasilakis, I Christian, M Toward “A Strategic Framework for Agility Implementation, IMLF 2002, Adelaide, Australia 2002Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. Poolton, H. Ismail, “A Marketing Agility Framework for Manufacturing-Based SME’s”, International Manufacturing Leaders Forum on Global Competitive Manufacturing, Adelaide, Australia, 2005Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    A. McKay, A. de Pennington and J. Baxter, Requirements management: a representation scheme for product. Comput-Aided Des 337 (2001), pp. 511–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Burn, G.R, 1990, “Quality function deployment”, Dale, B.G, Plunkett, J.J, Managing Quality, Philip Allan, London.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Sullivan, L.P., 1986, “Quality function deployment”, Quality Progress, 19,6, 39–50.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Hauser, J.R, Clausing, D, 1988, “The house of quality”, Harvard Business Review, 66,3, 63–73.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Zairi, M, Youssef, M.A, 1995, “Quality function deployment: a main pillar for successful total quality management and product development”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 12,6, 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    A. Griffin and J. Hauser, the voice of the customer, technical report, working paper 92-106, Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, MA 1992).Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Brown, N.M, 1991, “Value engineering helps improve products at the design stage”, Marketing News, 25,24, 18.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    P.L. Hauge and L.A. Stauffer. ELK. A method for eliciting knowledge from customers, Design and methodology DE-vol. 53 (1993) p. 73–81.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    H. Li and S. Azarm, An approach for product line design selection under uncertainty and competition. Trans ASME. J Mech Des 1243 (2002), pp. 385–392Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    N.P. Suh, The principle of design, Oxford series on Advanced Manufacturing, 1990.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Jiao and M.M. Tseng, Customizability analysis in design for mass customization. Comput-Aided Des 368 (2004), pp. 745–757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    N.P. Suh. Axiomatic design—advances and applications, Oxford University Press, New York (2001).Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    N. Kohlhase, H. Birkhofer, Development of modular structures: the prerequisite for successful modular products. Journal of Engineering Design, 7(3), pp.279–291, Sep 1996.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    C. Sheu, J.G. Wacker, The effects of purchased parts commonality on manufacturing lead time. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 17(8), pp.725–745, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    E. Feitzinger, H.L. Lee, Mass customization at Hewlett-Packard: the power of postponement. Harvard Business Review, 75(1), pp.116–121, Jan 1997.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    M.M. Tseng., M. Lei, C. Su, A collaborative control system for mass customization manufacturing. Annals CIRP, 46(1), pp.373–376, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    J.E. Mooney H. Ismail, S M.M. Shadhidipour “Mass Customisation: A Methodology and Support Tools for Low Risk Implementation in Small and Medium Enterprises, CE2000, Lyon, France 2000Google Scholar
  25. [23]
    G. Boothroyd, Product Design for Manufacture and Assembly, Marcel Dekker Inc. 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hossam Ismail
    • 1
  • Iain Reid
    • 1
  • Jenny Poolton
    • 1
  • Ivan Arokiam
    • 1
  1. 1.Agility Centre, University of Liverpool Management School (ULMS)University of LiverpoolLiverpool

Personalised recommendations