The nature of choice in mass customized house building

Abstract

There is a need to explore the actual uptake of specification options by clients in the context of the self-build housing industry. In so doing all the components in a house that can be customized were categorized so as to highlight the features that must be customizable and those that can be standardized. Through a longitudinal study of a German house builder, data from 16 projects over a 35-year time horizon have been collected. The extent of choice made in these projects has been determined by comparing the original standard building specification with the actual finalized fit-out specification of the project. In scrutinizing the collected data it became apparent that the number of changes made by the clients increased considerably over the timespan studied. More importantly, clients appreciated the freedom of choice as they were prepared to spend increasing amounts on customization. In particular specification options were made in the sanitary, internal design and façade categories. Moreover the results revealed that offering a high degree of choice is appropriate for most, but not all, components for the case house builder. Key areas for choice include those relating to sanitary ware and the façade.

Local Building Regulators’ Institutionalised Behaviour Towards Mass Customised Housing (MCH)

“…In construction, the customisation element may reduce construction waste and enhance customer satisfaction (Barlow, 1999;Tseng & Du, 1998). Thus, MCH can be a good business strategy for developers in the long run if developers succeed in offering the right 'specification options' such as spatial configurations and options for lighting, finishes, appliances and energy producing components (Schoenwitz et al, 2012).…”

“…This innovation in housing production encompasses the post-modern idea of the home as a combination of physical, financial, social and psychological aspects of dwelling (Schoenwitz et al, 2012). Houses that are built according to some, if not all, of the individual customer's preferences has driven the efforts to transform the house building industry .…”

“…Ball (1986) provides a practical platform to study phenomena in housing provision by proposing that the structure of housing provision, which comprises the dimensions of production, consumption and exchange, may be studied holistically or according to each dimension. The production dimension is the focus of MCH whereby a selection of options will be chosen by the user and conveyed to the producer to be incorporated in the final product (Schoenwitz et al, 2012). Thus, a key feature of MCH is process flexibility to allow for customisation of housing features (Barlow, 1999;.…”

“…With many economies having acknowledged the many benefits carried by MCH, the question for countries that have yet to offer MCH is no longer if MCH is going to be introduced, but when and to what extent will MCH be implemented. e-issn: 2229-8568 2229-8568 e-issn: 2229-8568 MCH can be considered a recent concept in house building as evidenced by the promulgation of MCH research (see among others Andújar-Montoya et al, 2015;Duarte, 2005;Gao, 2014;Noguchi, 2003;Noguchi & Hadjri, 2009;Schoenwitz et al, 2012;Shin et al, 2008). With costs being the main concern for developers, it is important for MCH to be technically and economically viable.…”

“…With costs being the main concern for developers, it is important for MCH to be technically and economically viable. Among the vast amount of literature, studies on the implementation of MCH are discerned to have focused either on the technical side -for instance, determining the shape grammar (for instance Duarte, 2005), exploring computing in design (for instance Gao, 2014;Shin et al, 2008) and devising a construction management system towards MCH (for instance Andújar-Montoya et al, 2015), or the financial side, for instance, determining the specification options to be offered (for instance Schoenwitz et al, 2012).…”