“Do consumers want to design unique products on the internet? A ...

“The use of flexible process and organizational structures <strong>to</strong> produce varied and often
individually cus<strong>to</strong>mized <strong>products</strong> and services at the low cost of a standardized, mass
produced system.” (Hart 1995:1)
The key difference in this second definition is the idea of not promising <strong>to</strong> produce
anything a cus<strong>to</strong>mer may desire but introducing flexibility, variety and where
possible individualisation <strong>to</strong> the experience. Note that this definition does suggest the
possibility <strong>to</strong> “maintain the efficiency of mass production” (Pine et al 1993; Piller
2003). Research suggests that in most industries this is at present unrealistic, even
with advances in manufacturing (such as CAD) and telecommunications (e-
commerce etc) technologies reducing the trade-off between variants and production
cost (Piller 2003) at present adding variety results in additional operational costs
(Brabazon and McCarthy 2004).
Davis (1996) suggests that as technology advances markets become ever increasingly
differentiated. The ultimate form of this differentiation he suggests is the idea of
“markets of one”, where an individuals needs are met with mass efficiency.
Definitions of MC in the academic literature have tended <strong>to</strong> overplay the need for MC
<strong>to</strong> create a <strong>unique</strong> product or service. This paper rejects this and suggests that its
cus<strong>to</strong>mer involvement that is the fundamental principal of MC (Piller et al 2004). The
experience itself more than what is created provides the <strong>unique</strong> value for each
individual (Prahalad and Ramaswamy 2004). The key differences between MC and
MP are highlighted below in Table 1
Adam Fletcher – Do <strong>consumers</strong> <strong>want</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>design</strong> <strong>unique</strong> product on the internet.
2006
14