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