ZEMCH 2015 - International Conference Proceedings | Page 516
Table 3: Main opportunities and challenges for introducing mass customization
CCA
PAR
Costumers are involved early in the PDP
GENERAL ASPECTS
Custom-tailor
or comb.
Components
Process focused mainly on one stakeholder
Fragmented process, governed by rules
Close contact costumers and product
developers
No contact costumers and product developers
Design driven by market analysis (high
competition)
Design driven by prescriptive rules
Dwelling prices can be diverse
All dwellings need to have same price
Production is carried out in small batches
Production is carried out on one large batch
Concern to develop attractive products
Concern to meet government specifications at low
costs
Use of techniques that allow some flexibility
Flexibility is not taken into consideration
No changes allowed on plan after approval
High occupancy ratio to achieve lower costs
Use of an integral product architecture
Additional work
Costumers in close contact during the production
process
No contact costumers during production
Adding elements is possible due to const.
techniques
Changes in plan are not considered
Obligation to deliver house with approved finishing materials (kitchen/bathroom)
Materials are bought in large batches at low costs
Enable
customization
in use
Ownership is passed to costumers on the delivery
point
Changes in houses are prohibited for 15 years
Used const. techniques can provide later
flexibility
Need for changes are not considered in design
Dry areas can be left without floor covering
Some schemes can be left without finishing
materials
Wet areas delivered with some previous
defined finishes
Use of integral architecture – structural restrictions
Legal restrictions concerning site occupancy
Condominium regulations
Challenges
Opportunities
Considering a Custom-tailor or a Combination of components approach, one of the major barriers
is the high costs of land, which limits design to achieve a high occupancy ratio, thus inhibiting
the development of different solutions. Moreover, the need for early approval of plans restricts
further changes. As a consequence, an integral architecture has been adopted to reduce costs,
providing very limited flexibility on systems in which changes are allowed.
Program rules should stimulate design variety, allowing dwellings with different prices and focusing the evaluation and approval of products platforms instead of crystallized solutions. In both
programs the early involvement of costumers is an opportunity for product co-development. A
product with a modular architecture would enable standardization, repetitiveness and economy
of scale while also providing variety (Duray et al. 2000; Collina, 2004). Along with that, the production system has to be designed to support flexibility. In this sense, the CCA case provides a more
supporting system as the production is carried on in small batches.
Barriers related to the programs regulations could partially restrain an Additional work approach,
as well, as dwellings need to be built as planned and delivered with previously specified materials. However, in the CCA program, the close contact with costumers during the production phase
514
ZEMCH 2015 | International Conference | Bari - Lecce, Italy