代写留学生论文Introduction
基于全面质量管理的大规模定制与大规模生产的研究与概念，全面质量管理，共造成顾客满意今天可以意味着给每个客户产品专门为他或她的需要。在过去，通常是由制造业保持客户与经济规模。大规模定制生产环境可能导致一个典型的挑战。
The issue of change is the concern of muchresearch, debate and discussion. The importanceof transformational change to organizationsis increasing along with rates of technologicalobsolescence, mergers, acquisitionsand globalization (Dyck, 1997, p. 793). Organizationsare going through tremendous
changes to create environments where everyonecan contribute their best, where customerrequirements are not only met but exceededand where efficiency, effectiveness, productivity,
quality, customer satisfaction and competitivenessare taken seriously as critical success
factors (Edosomwan, 1996, p. xii). Longtermcompetitive advantages are said to be nolonger sustainable and suggestions are madeof continuous market disturbance in order tocreate “temporary” competitive advantages(d’Aveni quoted in Logman, 1997, p. 39).The reasons cited for the transformationand the accompanying emergence of newstrategic alternatives in pursuit of continuousperformance improvement and competitiveadvantage, are manifold. New manufacturingtechnologies such as computer aided designand manufacture (CAD/CAM) have fundamentallyaltered the economies of manufacturingand removed the factory as a barrier toproduct variety and flexibility (Meredith,1987). An increased pace of technological
change and the concomitant shortening ofproduct life cycles have led to an increasedproliferation of product varieties (Sanchez,1995). The nature of customer demand at thesame time shifted to requirements ofincreased product variety, more features, andhigher quality (Kotler, 1989). Firms competingin industries characterized by turbulentenvironments and intense competition findthat they can no longer compete on the basisof standardized products and services alone(Kotha, 1995, p. 21) and that being worldclassin manufacturing cannot sustain a competitiveadvantage either.
Transformation is also taking place in otherfields of the organization. Top-down marketinghas become bottom-up. Organizations arerealising the increasing importance of
The TQM Magazine
Research and concepts Mass customization and mass production
Laetitia Radder and
Lynette Louw
The authors
Laetitia Radder is a Senior Lecturer in the Department ofMarketing, PE Technikon, Private Bag X6011, Port Elizabeth,South Africa.
Lynette Louw is based in the Department of BusinessManagement, University of Port Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth,
South Africa.
Keywords
Customer satisfaction, Mass customization,Mass production
Abstract
Total quality management resulting from total customersatisfaction today can mean giving every customer a
product tailored specifically to his or her needs. In the past,manufacturing was usually characterized by keeping costsdown with economies of scale. Mass customization canresult in a challenging manufacturing environment typified
by both high volume and an excellent product mix, wherecustomers expect individualized products at the sameprice as they paid for mass-produced items. Meeting thischallenge requires profound changes in the manufacturingprocess and in organizational dynamics. Despite thepotential offered by mass customization it is necessary
hat organizations ensure that such a strategy is theoptimal route for their business before embarking on fullscale mass customization.
The financial assistance of the Centre for ScienceDevelopment towards this research is acknowledged.Opinions expressed in this article are thoseof the authors and are not necessarily to be attributedto the CSD.individually oriented marketing strategies andof the information flow between the customer
and the organization (Logman, 1997, p. 39).
The new role of marketers is to be the voice ofthe customer in the company (Oliva, 1997, p.8).
In view of the foregoing, it seems thatstrategic flexibility together with quickresponsiveness is essential. To a growing
number of researchers, such as Pine (1993)and Feitzinger and Lee (1997), the emerging
paradigm of mass customization is seen asproviding the means for attaining strategicflexibility and responsiveness.
What is mass customization?The notion of mass customization dates back
to 1970 when it was anticipated by AlvinToffler in Future Shock and delineated in 1987by Stan Davis (1987) in Future Perfect. Masscustomization is essentially an oxymoron,
putting together seemingly contradictorynotions – the production and distribution ofcustomized goods and services on a massbasis. The ultimate in mass customization ismanifested in a Nissan Corporation’s pronouncement:
“Any volume, any time, anybody,anywhere, and anything” (Pine and
Maskell, 1998, p. 1).
The ideal as put forward by Nissan, essentiallyconsists of two interrelated parts. Thefirst is a visionary approach, viz. the ability toprofitably provide customers with anythingthey want, any time they want it, any way theywant it and anywhere they want it. This goalmay, however, be hard to realize, even by themost dedicated mass customer. The secondaspect implied in this vision is the reality ofusing flexible processes and organizationalstructures geared to producing varied andindividually customized products and servicesat the low cost of a standardized, massproductionsystem. This implies that customizationis provided within a predeterminedvariety, where the goal is to ascertain,
from the customer’s perspective, the rangewithin which a given product or service can be
meaningfully customized or differentiated forthat customer, and then to facilitate the customer’schoice of options from within thatrange. The ultimate is, however, the ability to
provide uniquely individualized products andservices satisfying any requirement, but in a
cost-effective way.
Allowing firms to operate at maximumefficiency, while quickly meeting customers’orders at minimum cost, requires at leastthree basic organizational design principles asput forward by Feitzinger and Lee (1997, p.
117), viz.:
(1) a product design that consists of independentmodules that can be assembled intodifferent forms of the product easily andinexpensively.(2) manufacturing processes that consist ofindependent modules that can be movedor rearranged easily to support differentdistribution networks.
(3) supply networks (including positioning ofinventory and locations, number andstructure of manufacturing and distribution
facilities) designed to provide twocapabilities: the ability to supply the basic
product to the facilities performing thecustomization in a cost-effective manner,and the flexibility and the responsivenessto take individual customers’ orders andquickly deliver the customized goods.
A fourth principle, however, has to be added.An organization-wide commitment to masscustomization together with a mindset ofcontinuous improvement, innovation and coordination,organizational and individual
learning as well as the development of capabilities,is required. All the stakeholders of
the organization also need to be reassured ofthe viability and desirability of mass
customization.
From mass production to mass
customization
The forerunner of mass customization wasmass production. In following Pine (1993)who states that the system of mass productionhas become outmoded and is no longer effective,researchers of customization such asJelinek and Goldhar (1983) and Kotler(1989) focus on the contrast between massproduction and mass customization. Unlike
the foregoing, we argue that mass productionand mass customization should not necessarilybe viewed as incompatible opposites, butrather be seen as two positions on a continuumof continuous improvement, where eitherof the approaches may be more appropriateunder certain conditions. It may also beviable, even preferable, for an organization toMass customization and mass production
Laetitia Radder and Lynette Louw
The TQM Magazine
Volume 11 · Number 1 · 1999 · 35–40
practise both approaches, albeit in two differentfactories aimed at different target markets.
The conventional mass-production firm isoften typified as bureaucratic and hierarchical,where workers under close supervisionfulfil narrowly defined, repetitive tasks, resultingin low-cost, standardized products andservices (Pine et al., 1993, pp. 116-17). Masscustomization on the other hand calls forflexibility and quick responsiveness togetherwith a reconfiguration of environment, people,processes, units, and technology to givecustomers exactly what they want at relativelylow cost. Managers co-ordinate independent,capable individuals, within an efficient linkagesystem.
Under a system of mass production consumersgenerally accept standard products.
This acceptance facilitates the extension ofthe market and the reduction of pricesthrough increasing economies of scale. Theprice difference between mass-produced andcustomized goods as well as the focus on low
prices and low costs, further encourage theclustering of demand around homogeneousproducts. In the interplay between producersand consumers the paradigm of mass productionthus becomes a feedback loop that createsand reinforces standardized products,mass production techniques and large, homogeneousmarkets.
In situations of unstable environments andmarkets that are fragmented into many niches
consisting of customer needs which are notonly harder to generalize but also more and
more prone to changes and shifts, a strategy ofmass customization is said to make more
sense (Hart, 1995, p. 38). The organizationthat better knows and better satisfies its customers’individual needs will therefore havecomparatively better sales. A positive feedbackloop is created where higher profits and amore intimate knowledge and understandingof customer needs will assist the organizationin providing even more variety and customization,
which will in turn further fragment themarket. As mass customization is associated
with greater quality, flexibility and lowerprices, a continued focus on faster and faster
processes and procedures to turn customerrequests into products and services, is
required. To do this effectively, personal andelectronic integration of the value chain
through instant communication linkages,common databases, and multi-functional andcross-organizational teams, is required. Anagile software system is thus a necessity. Pineand Maskell (1998) identify five characteristicsof agile software, viz.:
(1) Integration. Systems must be fully integrated,so information is entered onlyonce, and is up-to-date and accurate.
(2) Simplicity. Programs, screens and reportsmust be designed to be simple and easy touse.
(3) Flexibility. Users must be able to introducenew techniques in one area whileretaining an old approach in others.
(4) Openness. Software must lend itself to
easy interfacing with other systems and
networking.
(5) Accessibility. Information must be readily
accessible to users of everything from
creating performance measures to ad hoc
analysis reports.
To facilitate a better understanding of themove along the continuum from mass productionto mass customization, the focus andimplications of these two approaches inrespect of different aspects of the organizationare summarized in the Appendix.
The next matter for consideration iswhether the organization is in the position tomake either a partial or a complete shift onthe continuum towards mass customization.
It also has to decide whether it is not moredesirable to simultaneously accommodateboth approaches.
Mass production, mass customization orboth?
The controlling focus of mass customizationis to create variety and customization throughflexibility and quick responsiveness. Thequestion is, however, whether all organizations
could, and indeed need, to make theshift to an approach which requires extreme
agility along the total value chain.Before embarking on a programme of masscustomization, the organization has to at least
carefully evaluate its potential for successagainst the conditions set out below. These
conditions should be viewed on a continuumbetween the extremes of complete mass customizationon the one hand and complete
mass production on the other.
Industry and competitive environments
• Are there competitive forces that wouldenhance the advantages the organizationwould derive from mass customization?
Mass customization and mass production
Laetitia Radder and Lynette Louw
The TQM Magazine
Volume 11 · Number 1 · 1999 · 35–40
• Is the industry environment turbulent,unstable and unpredictable?
• Is the industry characterized by increasedproduct proliferation and new product
introductions?
• Is there a viable group of customers whocan be persuaded to value customization?
• Is/are there a well-entrenchedcompetitor(s) in the industry who is/arealready pursuing mass customization?
• Will the organization enjoy considerablefirst-mover advantage?
• Is there a high potential for new competitive
rivalry?
• Are the loyalty levels of existing competitorsfairly low?
Resources and capabilities
• Does the organization’s process technologyallow it to tailor its products/services toindividual customer needs, or could suchtechnology be easily incorporated?
• Can the organization make long-terminvestments in advanced technology, suchas information technology?
• Would the impact on the cost structure ofincorporating and maintaining such technologybe reasonable?
• Would the increased cost still allow a competitiveprice for the customizedproduct/service?
• Are substantial in-house engineeringexpertise and manufacturing capabilitiesavailable?
• Are there access to a group of highlytrained, disciplined and skilled workers?
• Is the organization’s design conducive toand flexible enough to translate consumers’needs into specific specifications?
• Does the marketing department haveaccess to the level of detail regarding consumerneeds as required for mass customizationand is it capable of analysingsuch information?
• Are the intermediaries that the organizationhas to depend on part of and supportiveof mass customization?
• If there is no direct contact with the finalconsumer, are there sound collaborativerelationships with customers involvinghighly interactive communication?
• Are the organization’s suppliers locatedstrategically and can requirements be
supplied frequently and reliably, so that
minimum inventory can be carried?
Organizational readiness, leadership and
culture
• Does the organization’s culture focus on
knowledge creation and the development
of manufacturing capabilities?
• Does top management institute organizational
mechanisms that foster interactions
among focused plants?
• Is there integration across functions while
maintaining excellence within each function?
• Is there a high degree of fit between the
opportunity inherent in mass customization
and the organization’s ability to capitalize
on these?
• Are the leaders committed to mass customization?
• Is there a shared vision throughout the
organization?
• Is the organization ready for change?
• Is change consistent with the organizational
culture?
Customer orientation
• Do the customers really have unique
needs?
• Do the customers really care about more
customization of their products/services?
• Do they really want more choices or will
they be overwhelmed by a larger variety?
• Are the customers prepared to accept
certain sacrifices in order to buy from the
specific organization?
• Will they be prepared to pay more/wait
longer for a customized product/service?
• Is there a positive growth potential in the
customized market?
Although the guidelines above do not indicate
the exact timing of implementing a strategy of
mass customization, they indicate the degree
of readiness of the organization for coping
with the demands of mass customization. As a
simplistic rule of thumb it could be stated that
the more the organization can confidently
agree with the questions posed in the list
above, the higher the potential for successful
implementation of a strategy of mass customization.
Simultaneously implementing mass
customization and mass production
It was pointed out earlier that mass
customization and mass production could be
viewed as different placings on a continuum
of continuous improvement and not
38
Mass customization and mass production
Laetitia Radder and Lynette Louw
The TQM Magazine
Volume 11 · Number 1 · 1999 · 35–40
necessarily as opposites. With this argument
in mind, together with the guidelines set out
in the list of conditions shown earlier, the
question arises whether the particular challenges
of mass customization, the organizational
dynamics and capabilities and the
particular characteristics of the target markets
would also allow an organization to simultaneously
practise both mass customization and
mass production, albeit in two separate factories.
Such a strategy could allow for a progressive
move along the continuum until the
market requirements and/or the organization’s
capabilities call for a strategy of mass
customization only.
In a study by Kotha (1996) of the NBG’s
strategy in the Japanese bicycle industry, it
was found that the interaction between mass
production and mass customization can be a
source of knowledge creation and in the
process create a strong competitive advantage
to reap superior performance benefits.
Mass customization is not for everyone
Mass customization offers numerous opportunities
and advantages to both producers and
consumers. A strategy of mass customization
cannot, however, be followed blindly. A
number of companies have already run into
problems while trying to make the leap to
mass customization (Pine et al., 1993). An
example is that of Nissan, which reportedly
had 87 different varieties of steering wheels,
most of which were great engineering feats.
But customers did not want many of them
and disliked having to choose from so many
options. Toyota experienced problems when
they invested heavily in robots and instituted
measures which deprived employees of opportunities
to learn and think about processes
and thus reduced their ability to improve
them. Amdahl did not achieve its goal of
delivering a custom-built mainframe within a
week. It stocked inventory for every possible
combination that customers could order and
was saddled with hundreds of millions of
dollars in excess inventory.
It is thus important that the organization
ensures that its customers really desire customized
products or services and that it has
access to the required processes, procedures
and capabilities before embarking on the shift
to mass customization. Mass production may
be outmoded, but it is still the most viable
strategy in some instances.
References
Davis, S. (1987), Future Perfect, Addison-Wesley, Reading,
MA.
Dyck, B. (1997), “Understanding configuration and
transformation through a multiple rationalities
approach”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 34
No. 5, pp. 793-823.
Edosomwan, J.A. (1996), Organizational Transformation
and Process Reengineering, St Lucie Press, FL.
Feitzinger, E. and Lee, H.L. (1997), “Mass customization at
Hewlett-Packard: the power of postponement”,
Harvard Business Review, January/February,
pp. 116-21.
Hart, C.W.L. (1995), “Mass customization: conceptual
underpinnings, opportunities and limits”, International
Journal of Service Industry Management,
Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 36-45.
Jelinek, M. and Goldhar, J.D. (1983), “The strategic implications
of the factory of the future”, Sloan Management
Review, Summer, pp. 29-37.
Kotha, S. (1995), “Mass customization: implementing the
emerging paradigm for competitive advantage”,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16, pp. 21-42.
Kotha, S. (1996), “Mass customization: a strategy for
knowledge creation and organizational learning”,
Special Issue on Unlearning and Learning for
Technological Innovation, Vol. 11 No. 7/8,
pp. 846-58.
Kotler, P. (1989), “From mass marketing to mass customization”,
Planning Review, Vol. 17, pp. 10-13.
Logman, M. (1997), “Marketing mix customization and
customizability”, Business Horizons, Vol. 40 No. 6,
pp. 39-44.
Meredith, J. (1987), “The strategic advantages of new
manufacturing technologies for small firms”,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 8 No. 3,
pp. 249-58.
Oliva, R.A. (1997), “Business markets face seven key
challenges”, Business Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 13,
p. 8.
Pine, B.J. II (1993), Mass Customization: The New Frontier
in Business Competition, Harvard School Press,
Boston, MA.
Pine, B.J. II and Maskell, B. (1998), “If mass customization
is the future of manufacturing, can your company be
agile enough to compete?”, Output, URL:
/
10 March.
Pine, B.J., Victor, B. and Boynton, A.C. (1993), “Making
mass customization work”, Harvard Business
Review, September-October, pp. 108-19.
Sanchez, R. (1995), “Strategic flexibility in product competition:
an options perspective on resource-based
competition”, Strategic Management Journal,
Summer Special Issue, Vol. 16, pp. 135-59.
Toffler, A. (1970), Future Shock, Bantam Books, New York,
NY.
39
Mass customization and mass production
Laetitia Radder and Lynette Louw
The TQM Magazine
Volume 11 · Number 1 · 1999 · 35–40
40
Mass customization and mass production
Laetitia Radder and Lynette Louw
The TQM Magazine
Volume 11 · Number 1 · 1999 · 35–40
Commentary
A sensible study which balances customer orientation with commercial necessity.
Table AI Continuum of mass production and mass customization
Mass production Mass customization
Product and production orientation
Consistent quality standardized products and Focus High quality customized products and services
services via production/operational efficiency via integrated process efficiency
Low variable costs; affordable prices because of Beneficial implications High production flexibility; low inventory
high volumes carrying costs – even zero inventories;
continual process improvement; optimum
utilization of production assets
Reliance on suppliers; production inflexibility; Detrimental implications Reliance on interaction with all stakeholders;
high cost of variety; relatively lower productivity possible demanding and stressful environments
of production assets
Research and technological development
Breakthrough innovations Focus Continual incremental innovations
Great technological advances Beneficial implications Continual improvements, eventual
technological superiority; shorter cycle times;
better fulfilment of customer needs
Longer cycle times; less customer focus Detrimental implications Lack of breakthrough innovations?
Marketing orientation
Selling low-cost, standardized products to large, Focus Gaining market share by fulfilling customer
homogeneous markets needs in fragmented, niche markets
Stable, predictable demand Beneficial implications Quick response to changing customer needs;
meeting exact needs
Disregard of some consumer needs; segment retreat Detrimental implications Too much reliance on technological advances
and avoidance
Structural and managerial orientation
Efficiency and economies of scale through stability Focus Variety, customization and economies of scope
代写留学生论文and control through flexibility and quick response
Lower cost through increased efficiency based on Beneficial implications Management attention focused on core
specialization competencies; organic, flexible and relatively
less hierarchical structures; cross-functional
teams; positive feedback loops
Managerial attention often diverted towards Detrimental implications Possible loss of focus; competitive mediocrity
diversification and conglomeration; mechanistic,
bureaucratic and hierarchical structures; division of
labour; negative feedback loops
Source: Adapted from Pine (1993, pp. 126-8)
Appendix