The Target Consumers for Mass Customization in the Korean Apparel Industry◆研究論文◆The Target Consumers for
Mass Customizationin the Korean Apparel Industry
韓国におけるマス・カスタマイズド・アパレル市場のターゲット消費者に対する研究
Jina Park
Doctoral Program, Graduate School of Media and Governance, Keio University
朴 眞娥
慶應義塾大学大学院政策・メディア研究科後期博士課程

Joohyeon Lee
Professor, Clothing and Textiles, Yonsei University
李 株炫
延世大学生活科学部衣類環境学教授

The purpose of this study was to research the target market for mass customized fashion products
in Korea. This study proposed two models for mass customized fashion design processes andcompared their efficiencies and appropriateness with those of the existing fashion design process.
A survey was conducted with a sample of 150 females in their twenties and thirties living in Korea.
The collected data were analyzed using a range of statistical methods. This study classified target
consumers according to the levels of customization (low customization, medium customization, highcustomization), identified their characteristics, and analyzed the relationship between satisfaction anddesign elements. In sum, guidelines to develop the target market for mass customized fashion products
in Korea were suggested.
本稿では、韓国におけるマス・カスタマイズド・アパレル市場のターゲット消費者に対するリサーチを行った。本研究ではマス・カスタマイゼーションのレベルが異なる二つのファッションデザ
インプロセスモデルを提案し、その効率性と適合性を既存の大量生産式デザインモデルのものと比べてみた。また、本稿ではマス・カスタマイゼーションのレベルによってターゲット消費者を分類し、その消費者群の特徴を調べ、商品に対する満足度とデザイン要素との関係を分析した。
Keywords: Mass Customization, Target Consumer, Customized Level, Design Element

KEIO SFC JOURNAL Vol.8 No.1 200855

(1997) propose a continuous framework upon which

1 What is Mass Customization?
Pine (1999) defined mass customization as themass customization may be developed; namely,use of mass production techniques to assemble goods

mass customization can occur at various points

and services quickly that are also uniquely tailoredalong the value chain, ranging from the simple

to the demands of individual customers at prices

adaptation of products delivered by customers

comparable to mass-produced goods and services.

themselves, up to the total customization of product

Mass producers seek large volumes and repetition insale, design, fabrication, assembly, and delivery.

production to drive down per-unit costs, and appeal

Figure 1 illustrates the intervention of the customer

to large customer groups or average customers

in the manufacturing process. The degree of mass

(Berman, 2002). In contrast, mass customizing

customization is determined by the stage in thefirms rely on small production lot sizes, appeal to

manufacturing process at which the customer

the unique preferences of individual consumers,

becomes involved. It is certain that the product willseek very low levels of inventory, and attempt to cut

be customized very well if customers participate in

the costs of small production runs by reducing boththe initial stage (for example, design or fabrication)

set-up and changeover times. The end consumersof the value chain. That is, when a customer candetermine what is produced based on their specificparticipate in the stage of the design, the product isorders.

not only the most suitable for the customer, but can

Determining the level of individualization

also become cheaper. In this research, we studied

characterizing truly mass-customized products

the characteristics of groups that prefer each design

seems to be a major point of contention in the massprocess of mass customization.

customization debate. Westbrook and Williamson

Gilmore and Pine (1997) identified four custom-(1993) argue that successful mass customization

ization levels based mostly on empirical observation:systems should be able to mix true individualization

collaborative (designers’ dialogue with customers),

with high part variety and standardized processes.

adaptive (customers can alter standard products

Lampel and Mintzberg (1996) and Gilmore and Pine

during use), cosmetic (standard products are

Figure 1 Point of involvement (Duray et al. 1999)

56

The Target Consumers for Mass Customization in the Korean Apparel Industry

packaged specially for each customer), andan average of only twenty articles on customizationtransparent (products are adapted to individual

appeared annually; from 1981 to 1990, 234 articles;

needs). Spira (1996) developed a framework withand after 1990, 2,324 articles. Mass customization isfour types of customization: customized packaging,growing in importance. Through mass customization,customized services, additional custom work,

marketers can improve the product’s fit with eachand modular assembly. The combination of thesecustomer’s unique needs, raise the price of the final

frameworks led to eight generic levels of mass

goods or services due to the degree of customization,customization, ranging from pure customization

and analyze opportunities due to continual dialogues(individually designed products) to pure standard-with consumers (Berman, 2002). Customers demand

ization. Yang and Lee (2007) compared apparelvariety when they differ in their preferences forbrands’ current status with consumers’ expectations;a product’s particular attributes. When products

consumers’ expectations of mass customization wererequire matching different physical dimensions,significantly higher than the level of implementation

customization may truly add value. Clothing is a goodby apparel brands in the creation of customized

example; people have different body shapes, and they

products.

care deeply about a garment’s fit (Zipkin, 2001).

However, these studies do not provide sufficient

However, it is clear that not everyone wants

information on the degree of customization required

mass customization. Rather, each consumer demandsby the consumers, or the consumers’ needs whendifferent levels of customization (low, medium, high)they opt for product customization. Furthermore, it

according to the products or time of purchasing.

is not always good to raise the level of customization

Sometimes, consumers are easily overwhelmed inin mass-produced products; high-level customizationhigh variety categories because there are numerous

has significant competitive benefits, but also involves

options to consider. For example, Choice Seation

complexity in the order process owing to too many

Gallery, a customized sofa shop, made the following

combinations. It is important to determine theoffer:“Choose from 500 styles, choose from 3000

optimal level of customization, but there are few

fabrics, choose from 350 leathers.”The problem isstudies about existing groups who prefer a low-levelthat each customer ultimately only wants one sofa. To

customization process, especially concerning thedesign that ideal sofa, the customer needs to know

design process. In this study, we assessed whether

what the attributes of sofas are, his/her preferences

there are groups who prefer a low-level customization

within those attributes, and which attributes areprocess and determined which design elements

more or less important. Non-experts, or consumers

improve consumers’ satisfaction according to the

new to the category, may not have that knowledge

mass customized design process. We based ourand thus may have difficulty in finding what theyfindings on experiments conducted on data fromwant. Accordingly, the huge number of potential

consumers shopping from an online store that was

options (150,000 fabric sofas, 17,500 leather sofas)

created for the purpose of this study.

may be confusing and overwhelming rather thanbeneficial (Huffman and Kahn, 1998). Therefore,

2 Research Purpose

companies need to research the characteristics of

A flood of recent publications attests to theconsumers who have a future requirement for massadvent of the customization era. Lampel andcustomization, and optimize their design processes to

Mintzberg (1996) indicated that from 1971 to 1980,

their consumers. That is, companies have to measure

KEIO SFC JOURNAL Vol.8 No.1 200857

the preferences of consumers and tailor productin the design process; in Model A, firstly, designers

offerings to these individual specifications.

decide the season concept and plan styles, fabrics,

The purposes of this study are to identify thecolors and details. In the following stage, designers

characteristics of the target consumers for mass

show their style plans to a consumer and ask thecustomized fashion products and to furnish apparelconsumer to choose the style that she likes most.

companies with data to plan mass customization. In

The designers then display the combinations

addition, to determine the kinds of design elements

available in the style that the consumer chose in thethat have strong influences on the consumers of eachpreceding stage and the fabrics that they planned for,group (the groups that prefers the model of mass

allowing the consumer to choose the combination

production, Model A or Model B where the levels ofthat she likes prefers. Finally, the designers add

customization are different in each).

the colors that they planned to the combinations of

The study hypotheses are as follows.

the style and the fabric that the consumer chose in
the preceding stage; following which, the consumer

H1: Maximizing levels of customization in the design

chooses and evaluates the combination that she likes

process is not always the best.

most (Figure 2).

H2: The design element that improves consumer
satisfaction is different according to the mass

3.1.3 Model B

customized design process that the consumer

Model B is a process that is more customized thanprefers.

Model A; namely, Model B adds details to the choice.
Like Model A, first, designers decide on the season

3 Methodology

concept and plan styles, fabrics, colors and details.

3.1 Study model

In the following stage, the designers show their style

In this study, models were established by theplans to a consumer and ask the consumer to selectdegree to which each consumer participates in thethe style that she prefers. Then, the designers display

design process. We set three study models the model

the style combinations that the consumer chose inof mass production, Model A and Model B, where thethe preceding stage and the fabrics that they plannedlevels of customization are different in each.

for, and let the consumer choose the combinationthat she likes most. In addition, the designers add
the details that they planned to the combinations of

3.1.1 The model of mass production
In the fashion industry, the mass production

the style and the fabric that the consumer chose inprocess is the process of creating ready-made clothes

the preceding stage; then, the consumer chooses the(Figure 2); in this process, designers decide on

combination that she prefers. Finally, the designers

the season concept and plan styles, fabrics, colors,

add colors to the combinations of the style , theand details (for the purpose of this study, detailfabric and the detail that the consumer chose inrefers to a belt ). In addition, they select the mostthe preceding stage, and the consumer selects andsuitable designs to reflect trends and that have highevaluates these combinations (Figure 2).

popularity.
3.2 Data source and instrument
The data were obtained from a survey of 150

3.1.2 Model A
Model A includes the participation of consumers

females in their twenties and thirties who were

58

The Target Consumers for Mass Customization in the Korean Apparel Industry

Figure 2 Study model

living in Seoul and Gyeonggi Province because

there were 475,941 female residents of Gangnam,

they were considered to have high interest in mass

forming 9.3% of the 5,135,689 women living in Seoul.

customization. They were selected based on the

We intentionally collected data from Gangnam topurposeful sampling method via Seoul statistics

represent a greater proportion of the population

data and the data of Dr. Lee.J, a professor at Yonsei(28.0%), as the focus of this study was on women

University. We approached people who were livingfrom Gangnam. Therefore, we regulated the ratio

in Gangnam in Seoul in order to compare them withof the subjects and secured their willingness to

those living in the rest of Seoul (to determine theparticipate in the research project. In addition, we

relations of the residence area and income level

administered questionnaires online and they provided

1

with the mass customization model) . In 2002,

their answers through a homepage specifically set up

KEIO SFC JOURNAL Vol.8 No.1 200859

for the study.

each design process (two pieces per each design

We administered the survey using fashion design

process). In addition, she answered questions asking

examples (Figure 3); we specified that a subject

about issues such as her satisfaction with eachshould choose each article of clothing in relation

piece that she ordered. For the research method,

to one piece, rather than the set, when she chose aaccording to each study model, firstly, in the mass

jacket or a skirt. The content of the questionnaire

production design process, the subject could choose

was related to the preference for mass customized

two pieces of clothing (one jacket and one skirt)

products (5 questions). In addition, the questionnairefrom a total of six designs (three jackets and threeincluded questions that evaluated preferences, theskirts), where a designer had already combined

degree to which interviewees wanted to buy and wear

the style, material, detail, and color. Secondly, inthe clothes provided in the fashion design examples

mass customization design process A (lower-levelin this study, and their preferences in relation to eachcustomization), the subject could choose two pieces

design element. The constructs were measured with(one jacket and one skirt) from a total of fifty-foura 7- point Likert scale.

designs (two kinds of clothing × three styles × three

The research method was as follows. We createdmaterials × three colors); the subject could choosea virtual online store, selling clothes that could be

the style, material, and color in the order. Lastly, incustomized. The subject ordered a total of 6 pieces

the mass customization design process B (higher-(three jackets and three skirts) of clothing throughlevel customization), the subject could choose two

Figure 3 Research method (choice organization)

60

The Target Consumers for Mass Customization in the Korean Apparel Industry

pieces (one jacket and one skirt) from a total of one1) the model of mass production, 2) Model A, 3)

hundred sixty-two designs (two kinds of clothing ×

Model B was called the group who prefers the model

three styles × three materials × three details × threeof mass production . The group who preferred 1)

colors); the subject could choose the style, material,

Model A, 2) Model B, and then 3) the model of massdetail and color in the order (Figure 3).

production was called Group A (Model A is moreof a customized design process model than a mass
production process). Lastly, the group who preferred

3.3 Data collection and analysis
The distribution and collection of the quest-

1) Model B, 2) Model A, and then 3) the model ofionnaires were conducted through the Internet.

mass production is called Group B (Model B is theInterviewees can experience a psychological burden

most customized design process model) (Figure 4).

or fatigue if the survey is paper-based because there

We distributed the groups based on a standard

was a total of 222 fashion design examples usedaccording to the kind of design process that eachin this survey; therefore, we created the survey insubject preferred. In other words, the group did not

Photoshop and PowerPoint. The data were analyzed

change unless the first-ranked model that the subject

by frequency, correlation and multiple-regression,

preferred most changed, even if the second-ranked

using SPSS 11.0 and Excel.

and the third-ranked model were in inverse order.
In the responses to the survey, there were

4 Results and discussion

two subjects who preferred the model of mass

4.1 Definition of the target consumer group accord
to the design process

production, but we excluded them from the analysis,as the number of observations who fall into the group

We classified the target consumers of mass

was too small. We analyzed the characteristics of thecustomization according to the type of customized

target consumer groups to examine the appropriate

design process that they preferred (Figure 4). The

groups for the mass customization design process.

group who preferred the models in the order of

Figure 4 Definition of the target consumer group

KEIO SFC JOURNAL Vol.8 No.1 200861

B preferred the most customized process, where

4.2 The characteristic of Group A and Group B
Group A preferred the mass customized system,

consumers could choose the style, fabric, color, andbut took more satisfaction when in choosing clothes

detail. Group B was satisfied with the process whenthrough Model A rather than Model B. In the end,

consumers could take part in the design throughGroup A preferred a medium-level customizationcomparatively more steps.

where consumers can choose the style, fabric, andcolor. The existence of Group A supports H1. That

4.2.1 Demographics characteristics of target consumers

is, maximizing levels of customization is not always

Group A included 22.7 % of the respondents; 44.1%

the best strategy to satisfy the consumers. Groupof Group A were in their early twenties while 47.1%

Table 1 Demographic characteristics of the Group A and the Group B

Age

Marital status
Occupation

Place of residence

Education

Monthly
average incomeof all familyMonthly
average incomeof the person
in question

Monthly
average expense
to buy clothes

Characteristic
20 〜 24
25 〜 29
30 〜 39
Never-married
MarriedStudent
Housewife

the Group A
Number
Percent
15
44.1
16
47.1
3
8.8
32
94.1
2
5.9
12
35.3
1
2.9

the Group B
Number
Percent
54
52.4
46
44.7
3
2.9
94
91.3
9
8.7
54
52.4
3
2.9

Self-employedService
Professional
Office worker
Jobless person
Others

0
1
7
10
1
2

0
2.9
20.6
29.4
2.9
5.9

1
3
13
22
3
4

1.0
2.9
12.6
21.4
2.9
3.9

Seoul Gangnam
Seoul except Gangnam
Gyeonggi Province
OthersHigh school diploma
College student

4
25
5
0
0
8

11.8
73.5
14.7
0
0
23.5

33
15
10
5
1
36

32.0
53.4
9.7
4.9
1.0
35.0

College graduate
Graduate student or above
Under US $2,000
US $2,000 〜$3,999
US $4,000 〜$5,999

17
9
5
10
7

50.0
26.5
14.7
29.4
20.6

42
24
10
16
22

40.8
23.3
9.7
15.5
21.4

US $6,000 〜$7,999
US $8,000 〜$9,999
US $10,000 or above
None
Under US $1,000
US $1,000 〜 1,999
US $2,000 〜 3,999
US $4,000 〜 5,999

6
3
3
4
14
8
8
0

17.6
8.8
8.8
11.8
41.2
23.5
23.5
0

26
11
18
28
28
36
9
1

25.2
10.7
17.5
27.2
27.2
35.0
8.7
1.0

US $6,000 or above
Under US $100
US $100 〜 249
US $250 〜 399
US $400 〜 699
US $700 or above

0
11
13
7
1
2

0
32.4
38.2
20.6
2.9
5.9

1
23
43
25
7
5

1.0
22.3
41.7
24.3
6.8
4.9

62

The Target Consumers for Mass Customization in the Korean Apparel Industry

were in their late twenties (Table 1). The residents

occupation was student (52.4%); the percentage

who were living in Seoul, except for Gangnam,of college students rose in comparison to Group A

made up the majority ( 73.5%). In the monthly

by as much as 35.0%. Therefore, it is possible that

average income of the family, people who were had

the early twenties college student group will accept

a monthly salary of US $2,000~$5,999 formed 50%

the customized design process. Residents of Seoulof the respondents. In addition, the average monthly

Gangnam made up 32.0%. Seoul Gangnam is theincome of the subject was usually under US $1,000.

representative residential area of the higher-income

In other words, there were few people with a higher

bracket in Korea. The average monthly family income

income in Group A. Furthermore, the greater partwas US $6,000~$7,999. Moreover, judging fromof the respondents had lower monthly expenses

the statistics, those who earned US $10,000 or overincluding clothing expenditure (under US $100 andmade up 17.5%; this is a higher proportion that in the

US $100~249).

Group A. However, the monthly average income of

68.7% of the respondents belonged to Groupthe respondents was comparatively low overall; we

B (Table 1). This percentage increased (i.e. theassume this was because many respondents werepreference for mass customization products

college students in their early twenties.

increased) by comparison with a preceding study’s
53% (Lee, 2001). 52.4% were in their early twenties,

4.2.2 Satisfaction measurement with design elements

and 44.7% in their late twenties. The most common

In the case of Group A, we analyzed satisfaction

Table 2 Means and standard deviations of the design element preference for the Model A of the Group A
Mean (ranking)5.22 (1)
4.91 (2)4.87 (3)4.84 (4)Style
FabricColor
DetailMedian
5.25
4.50
4.50
5.00

Mode
5.50
4.50
5.50
5.50

Standard deviation
.85
.91
.99
.93

Table 3 Regression analyses between satisfaction and design elements of the Group AaRegression model (color)
Regression modelb (color/detail)

Model summary
R
.881
.922

R2
.777
.849

ANOVA
Linear regression
analysisSignificance probability F-variation.000***.001**

Regression modela (color)F
111.304

Significance probability.000***

Regression modelb (color/detail)87.367.000***

Coefficients
B
1.425
.715
.782
.569
.280

Significance probability.000***.881.000***
Regression modelb.023*(color/detail).701.000***.324.001***p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001
a: Regression model 1: model that included color (a statistically significant variable) by multiple-regression
b: Regression model 2: model that included color and detail (statistically significant variables) by multiple-regression
Regression modela(color)Constant
Color
Constant
Color
Detail

Beta

t
4.236
10.550
2.393
8.365
3.865

KEIO SFC JOURNAL Vol.8 No.1 200863

with the design elements in Model A because it was

coefficient was .806, .616, .881, and .714, respectively.

the most suitable process for Group A. As a result,

Color especially showed the highest Pearson’sGroup A took satisfaction in order of style, fabric,correlation coefficient, and the result was statisticallycolor, and detail (Table 2).

significantly (r=.881, p<.001). We performed a

In this study, we measured satisfaction in relation

stepwise regression analysis that included all

to style, fabric, color, and detail (4 questions), andelements. The regression analysis revealed athe clothes as a whole (3 questions). In the case ofstatistically significant relationship between color

Group A, there were strong correlations between

and detail , and design satisfaction (Table 3). The

preferences for the style, fabric, color, and detail,regression model including color and detail showed aand design satisfaction; Pearson’s correlation

statistically significant strong correlation with design

Table 4 Means and standard deviations of the design element preference for the Model B of the Group B
Mean (ranking)5.16 (1)4.85 (2)4.84 (3)4.80 (4)Style
FabricColor
DetailMedian
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00

Mode
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00

Standard deviation
.91
.95
.92
1.04

Table 5 Regression analyses between satisfaction and design elements of the Group BaRegression model (style)
Regression modelb (style/fabric)
Regression modelc (style/fabric/detail)

Model summary
R
.848
.857
.864

R2
.719
.730
.746

ANOVA
Linearregression
analysisF
258.672
138.853
96.836Regression modela (style)
Regression modelb (style/fabric)
Regression modelc (style/fabric/detail)
Coefficients

Constant
Style
Constant
Style
FabricConstant
Style
Fabric
Detail

64

Beta

t
3.393
16.083
2.859
9.005
2.463
2.800
6.619
2.077
2.031

Significance probability.000***.000***.000***

Significance probability.001**.848.000***
Rregression modelb.005**(style/fabric).703.000***.192.016*
Rregression modelc.006**(style/fabric/detail).604.000***
.163
.040*
.161
.045*
*p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001
a: Regression model 1: model that included style (a statistically significant variable) by multiple-regression
b: Regression model 2: model that included style and fabric (statistically significant variables) by multiple-regression
c: Regression model 3: model that included style, fabric and detail (statistically significant variables) by multiple-regression
Rregression modela(style)

B
.854
.773
.719
.641
.168
.695
.550
.142
.129

Significance probability F-variation.000***
.016*
.045*

The Target Consumers for Mass Customization in the Korean Apparel Industry

satisfaction (r=.922, p<.001). The predictive validity

prefers.

of this multiple regression analysis was 84.9%. In theThis study presents the following managerialcase of Group A, color had the strongest influence on

implications for mass customized apparel companies.

design satisfaction (Beta=.701).

Firstly, the target consumer groups were classified

In the case of Group B, we analyzed theas Group A or Group B, according to preference

satisfaction with design elements in Model B

for a particular design process. The results showedbecause it was the most suitable process forthat maximizing the level of customization is not

Group B. Consequently, Group B preferred design

always the best strategy to satisfy the consumer,

characteristics in the following order: style, fabric,

as demonstrated by the fact that the consumers incolor, and detail (Table 4).

Group A preferred medium-level customization. The

In the case of Group B, there were strong

consumers in a different group desire a different level

correlations between preferences for the style,of customization; therefore, apparel companies needfabric, and detail, and design satisfaction; Pearson’s

to give different levels of opportunity for selecting

correlation coefficients were .848, .721, and .725

design elements in the design process.

respectively; by contrast, color showed a weaker

Secondly, the characteristics of Group A, whichcorrelation with satisfaction (r=.609) compared withpreferred a medium-level of customization, wereGroup A (r=.881). The regression analysis revealed

as follows; the majority was middle-class, and thea statistically significant relationship between style,greater part of the respondents had lower disposablefabric, and detail , and design satisfaction (Table

income and lower monthly budgets for buying

5). The regression model including style, fabric,

clothing. In addition, the design process models thatand detail showed a statistically significant strong

were used in this study need to be corrected to attachcorrelation with design satisfaction (r=.864, p<.05). In

importance to color relative to other design elements;

the case of Group B, style had the strongest influence

because color had the strongest influence on design

on design satisfaction (Beta=.604). Moreover, thesatisfaction in this group. For instance, there could

results showed a significant relationship between

be a design process in which consumers choose

the customized process where the consumer canother design elements after they choose color. The

select detail, and satisfaction in the case of Groupcharacteristics of Group B, which preferred high-level

B; therefore, if the opportunity to choose design

customization, were as follows; the majority was inelements is added, consumers’satisfaction will rise.

the high-income bracket; the majority was composed

Therefore, color and style had the strongest

college students in their early twenties; style had theinfluence on design satisfaction in the case of Groupstrongest influence on design satisfaction.

A and Group B, respectively; this supports H2.

This study contributes to the apparel industry
by providing information about a future demand for

5 Conclusions

mass customization. Furthermore, the analysis of

The companies that customize their products

the relationship between consumers’satisfaction

must know their target customers. This study

and design elements informs the factors that should

identified the characteristics of the target consumers

be most emphasized in marketing for the targetof mass customized fashion products and theconsumers.

design elements that improve consumer satisfaction

We think that this study has limitations in that we

according to each design process that a consumer

cannot generalize its conclusions as characteristics

KEIO SFC JOURNAL Vol.8 No.1 200865

of the total consumer group in Seoul, because

Notepurposeful sampling and quota sampling were used

1 Seoul Gangnam (Seocho-gu and Gangnam-gu) is therepresentative residential area of well-off people in Korea;
the amount of property tax levied of Gangnam was 32.7% ofthat collected from all of Seoul in 2002. In addition, Gangnam
provided 38.0% of the integrated land tax levied (Kim, S.J.,
Kim, S.K., and Lee, Y., 2004).

in sample selection. However, it is clear that a groupthat prefers the medium-level customization exists,
and the study also clarified the characteristics ofthe group that prefers each design process. This
information will be useful for effective positioning

References

and promotional strategies. In addition, it will beBerman, B., Should your firm adopt a mass customization strategy?.
Business Horizons, 4, 2002, pp.51-60.
Gilmore, J. and Pine, B., The Four Faces of Mass Customization.
Harvard Business Review, 75 (1), 1997, pp.91-101.
Huffman, C. and Kahn, B., Variety for sale: Mass Customizationor Mass Confusion?. Journal of Retailing, 74(4), 1998,
pp.491-513.
Lampel, J. and Mintzberg, H., Customizing Customization. MIT
Sloan Management Review, 38, 1996, pp.21-30.
Lee, J., A Study on the Fashion Design Process Model for Mass
Customized Clothing. Unpublished master thesis, Yonsei
University, 2002.
Pine, B. and Davis, S., Mass Customization: The New Frontier inBusiness Competition. Harvard Business School Press, 1999.
Kim, S. J., Kim, S. K., and Lee, Y., The present conditions analysis
and the policy alternative plan about the economic differencesof Gangnam and Gangbuk of Seoul City. Seoul Development
Institute, 2004.
Spira, J., Mass customization through training at Lutron Electronics,
Computers in Industry, 30(3), 1996, pp.171-174.
Westbrook, R. and Williamson, P., Mass customization: Japan’s
new frontier. European Journal of Management, 11(1), 1993,
pp.38-45.
Yang, H. and Lee, Y., Apparel Brands’ Implementation andCustomers’ Expectation of Mass Customization. The Korean
Society of Clothing and Textile, 31(5), 2007, pp.753-764.
Zipkin, P., The Limits of Mass Customization. MIT Sloan
Management Review, 42(3), 2001, pp.81-87.

particularly effective as a reference when carrying out
consumer research on mass customization on a large
scale.

〔2008. 1. 25 受理〕〔2008. 8. 26 採録〕

66