Product uniqueness as a driver of customer utility in mass customization

By Nikolaus Franke, Martin Schreier. 2008

371 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Mass customization (MC) constitutes a promising strategy for companies which aim to provide products which are better adapted to individual customers’ aesthetic and functional preferences. Drawing on commodity theory, we argue that the perceived uniqueness of a self-designed product is a second driver of utility in MC. We find that in addition to the significant effect of aesthetic and functional fit, the perceived uniqueness of a self-designed product (1) contributes independently to the utility a customer experiences, and (2) that this effect is moderated by the consumer’s need for uniqueness. In product categories which can serve this counterconformity motive for consumers, this suggests that MC toolkits should be constructed with the objective of facilitating the creation of unique products as well as providing affirmative feedback that this uniqueness has been achieved.

Subfields: Management of Technology and Innovation, Mechanical Engineering, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0c31bdb076d44c37c5bc251fbfff9898337d33d8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management of Technology and Innovation

In Mechanical Engineering

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

The Psychological Effects of Empowerment Strategies on Consumers’ Product Demand (2010, background): “This may be attributed to the notion that self-design (versus empowerment to select) allows for the highest level of preference fit as well as feelings of accomplishment from having designed a custom product oneself (Franke and Schreier 2008; Franke, Schreier and Kaiser 2010).”
Bolstering and restoring feelings of competence via the IKEA effect (2012, background): “Additionally, consumers gain utility from truly unique goods, which often result from co-creation (Franke & Schreier, 2008; Lynn & Harris, 1997; Michel, Kreuzer, Kuhn, Stringfellow, & Schumann, 2009).”
Ten years of value cocreation: An integrative review (2016, background): “However, these positive impacts depend on whether consumers regard participants as similar to themselves and skilled (Franke and Schreier, 2008; Fuchs et al., 2013; Mochon et al., 2012; Schreier et al., 2012; Thompson and Malaviya, 2013).”
Why Customers Value Mass-customized Products: The Importance of Process Effort and Enjoyment (2010, positive): “So far, the literature on toolkits and MC has primarily emphasized product-related beneﬁts as a source of value for self-designed products (Franke and Schreier, 2008; Pine, 1999; Randall et al., 2007; von Hippel, 2001).”
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and willingness to pay (2012, background): “Consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) is defined as “the maximum price a buyer is willing to pay” (Didier and Lucie, 2008; Franke and Schreier, 2008; Voelckner, 2006; Wertenbroch and Skiera, 2002).”
The effects of product scarcity and consumers' need for uniqueness on purchase intention (2012, background): “Based on the relevant literature (Lynn & Harris, 1997a; Snyder, 1992; Tian, et al., 2001), Franke and Schreier (2008) develop a new scale to measure perceived uniqueness.”
Is this for me? How Consumers Respond to Personalized Advertising on Social Network Sites (2015, background): “2008; Tam and Ho 2006), perceived uniqueness (Franke and Schreier 2008), and feelings of accomplishment (Franke, Schreier, and Kaiser 2010). Based on a review by Noar, Harrington, and Aldrich (2009), increased personal relevance is identified as the primary mediator of positive personalization effec”