Markus A. Hagenmaier, Michael A. Zaggl and Christina Raasch

12th Annual Open and User Innovation Conference

July 28-30, 2014

Harvard Business School, Boston

To be unique or not to be unique?

How product characteristics affect choice behavior in

mass customization

7/30/2014 2

Feet like no one else. Personalize your ZX 700 and stand out from the crowd.1

Discover our individual city car. Get in and enjoy the feeling of being unique.2

1. Source: http://www.adidas.de 2. Source: http://www.opel.de

Choice behavior in mass customizationMarkus Hagenmaier / Michael Zaggl / Christina Raasch

Central question: When do customers want to be unique in their choices and when do they prefer to conform with others?

3

Our main hypothesis and theoretical foundations

Our main hypothesis and theoretical foundations

Customers' preferences for uniqueness depend on personal needs and the

characteristics of the product attributes.

• Need for uniqueness (Snyder 1980, Tian et al. 2001), especially in MC (Schreier 2006, Franke 2008, Merle et al. 2010)

• Concept of regulatory focus (Higgins 1997): People pursue promotion (excitement) and prevention goals (security)

• These goals are linked to hedonic and utilitarian product attributes (Chernev 2004, Chitturi 2008)

• We propose that people pursue uniqueness in hedonic attributes (promotion-oriented) and prefer to conform with others in utilitarian attributes (prevention-oriented)

Choice behavior in mass customizationMarkus Hagenmaier / Michael Zaggl / Christina Raasch

Example from car configurationExample from car configuration

...Engine

Utilitarian

Color

Hedonic

Customers prefer

conformity

Customers prefer

uniqueness

7/30/2014

We use experiments to investigate the choice behavior of users of mass customization toolkits

4

135 participants in lab

Participants configured a car

Choices covered two attribute types:

Treatment group got information on the popularity of options by ranking them from:

• 1 – MOST frequently chosen by others to• 6 or 8 – LEAST frequently chosen by

others

We tested for differences in choice behavior

Hedonic attributes

• Exterior color• Seat design• Wheels design

Utilitarian attributes

• Engine• Extras• Services

... using toolkits that visualize participants' configuration

... using toolkits that visualize participants' configuration

Method: Online and lab experiments...

Method: Online and lab experiments...

Choice behavior in mass customizationMarkus Hagenmaier / Michael Zaggl / Christina Raasch

7/30/2014

Hedonic attributes (example: Exterior color)Utilitarian attributes (example: Engine)

Tendency towards conformity

Results support our hypothesis: users prefer conformity in utilitarian and uniqueness in hedonic product dimensions

5Choice behavior in mass customization

Markus Hagenmaier / Michael Zaggl / Christina Raasch

1. Absolute numbers, no. of participants in control group: 67, no. of participants in treatment group: 68 2. Average value, Likert Scale from 1 to 7; n = 68 (treatment group)

-17

-1

+9+5

+2+3

Difference in choices between control and treatment group1

conforming ----------------------------------------- unique

Chi-Square: 23.283*** Utilitarian value2: 5.70 (max.: 7)

-1-2

+6+4

+8

-3

0

-11

Chi-Square: 35.370*** Hedonic value2: 5.11 (max.: 7)

Difference in choices between control and treatment group1

conforming ------------------------------------------ unique

Tendency towards uniqueness

Implications: • Customers' preferences in product customization are influenced by the choices of

others• Customers pursue uniqueness AND conformity, even in customization procedures• Attribute type is an additional reason for this differing choice behavior

7/30/2014