**4. Results**

#### *4.1. Identification of Practices from the Literature*

Table 4 presents the 44 MC practices that were identified in the literature review concerned with core and customer integration areas, organised according to decision categories. It is noteworthy that 35 of those practices were discussed in up to three different papers out of the twenty four reviewed. The maximum number was seven papers per practice. Therefore, this investigation provides a much broader view of customer integration practices than previous studies. Furthermore, these practices do not overlap with each other, so they can be combined to formulate strategies. Some of the practices provide support to decision making regarding the definition of strategies, while some other practices support the operationalisation of the strategic decisions undertaken.


#### **Table 4.** List of Practices.


#### **Table 4.** *Cont.*


**Table 4.** *Cont.*

The descriptions of the decision categories proposed in this investigation are presented in Table 5. Some of them were subdivided into sub-categories or decision domains that characterise sets of processes that depend on similar preconditions [31].


**Table 5.** Decision categories, source and research contributions.


**Table 5.** *Cont.*

Four core decision categories for MC in house building were defined in this investigation (Table 5). In relation to the previous literature, a new core decision category related to knowledge managemen<sup>t</sup> was proposed, which is concerned with how to establish a knowledge-creating system to support MC. This decision category was based on contributions from several authors [17,22,24,35,36]. Three decision domains were proposed within the knowledge managemen<sup>t</sup> category: customer-based knowledge, organisational knowledge, and communication of customisation information.

Three customer integration decision categories were defined, including "visualisation approaches" and "configuration sequence", based on Rocha [30]. The "customer interaction and relationship category" was proposed to address decisions regarding how companies interact with customers, when and for which purpose, and establish a trustworthy relationship, during NPD. By contrast, the decision categories proposed by Rocha [30] were focused on defining the customer–company interface, by broadly specifying who visualises what during the customisation process, and the sequence of decisions to be made by customers when configuring a product. The adapted version of visualisation approaches decision category includes the decision on whether to use visualisation tools for displaying the solution space. Additionally, there seems to be a gap in the literature regarding configuration sequences, since no practices for the house building industry have been found.

#### *4.2. Empirical Study in Company P*

#### 4.2.1. Understanding the Customisation Process and Identifying Improvement Opportunities

Company P offers six different product types; each one of them focused on a different market segmen<sup>t</sup> with different customisation levels (Table 6). Most of the company's previous experience on customisation is related to A and B product types, which can be classified as tailored customisation. In those market segments, customers may hire their own architects to develop the interior design of their units. However, the focus of this investigation is on the D, E and F product types, in which customers can customise only a limited set of elements, mostly related to the finishings and fixtures of the residential unit. Product types D and E could be classified as a "segmented standardisation" level of customisation and F as a "point of delivery customisation".


#### **Table 6.** Company P product types and levels of customisation.

The customisation department is in charge of defining the solution space for each project within the boundaries established for each product type by the NPD department. During the conceptual stage, representatives of both departments discuss which customisation units regarding layout and finishings will be offered to customers. At the end of that stage, two customer decision-making deadlines for the layout and finishings are established at the project launch meeting, which involves several departments of the company. These deadlines are included in a brief that is delivered to the project designers. After the project launch into the market, the CT defines different alternatives to be offered as finishings.

The customisation offered involves four main touchpoints with customers, in which different customisation units are available and portrayed by different visualisation tools (Figure 3). At each of these points, the customisation department is in charge of: (i) establishing a dialogue with customers; (ii) collecting and processing customer orders; (iii) making design changes; and (iv) delivering that information to the construction site. The CRM department promotes open days for visits to construction sites by the clients. In those open days, the CT is available at the housing unit prototype to offer customisation services. The CT guides customers through the solution space by using different visualisation tools, such as illustrated blueprints and finishing material catalogues, and informs prices of product alternatives by using simulations based on a simplified choice menu. The visualisation tools highlighted in yellow were, in Figure 3, improvements carried out during the empirical study.

The display of product prototypes in the construction site open days was identified as a key element for the customisation strategy of Company P. These enabled the CT to guide customers to make decisions within the solution space offered, and provided an opportunity for creating a relationship with clients. The CT may also arrange individual meetings in case open days cannot be undertaken or if customers show an interest in product customisation after those events. If the customer opts for a customised unit, an additional contract is signed. During construction, the CT carries out routine visits to the site to check whether customers' orders have been fulfilled in the construction site.

**Figure 3.** Touchpoints and customisation units.

In Company P, customers initiate their journey with the company when they purchase a housing unit, being registered at the CRM department. That department has three communication channels with customers: (i) an area in the company's web site, (ii) an APP, and (iii) a call-centre that connects customers to different departments. Besides being in charge of promoting construction site visits and events with customers, the CRM department is responsible for carrying out customer satisfaction surveys in different moments: (i) in construction site open days; (ii) post-occupancy evaluation undertaken one-year after project delivery; (iii) after the response of the company to complaints after project delivery; and (iv) when completing five years, considering the possibility of providing references of the company to friends or family.

Table 7 summarises the identified improvement opportunities as well as the improvements implemented by Company P during this research study. Those opportunities were classified according to decision categories and practices. For instance, regarding the "knowledge management", the company carries out a POE, yet, it is mostly concerned with the overall customer satisfaction with the product, but no questions are asked about customised items. Another example is facilitating, standardising and digitalising customer order collection, which was carried out by the CT, who used to handwrite customers' requests during open days, before processing these back at the office and e-mailing them to be confirmed by customers. This opportunity, for instance, inspired the development of a simplified choice menu, which enabled the use of a digital tool for registering customers' orders and simulating the product alternative costs in real-time.

A critical barrier for improvements, identified in interviews and participant observations, was the lack of communication between departments, which occasionally confused customers. For instance, the sales department offered the "point of delivery customisation" of residential units that have not been sold yet, while the customisation department offered other options at different touchpoints. Moreover, different customisation units are offered in each touchpoint, so by making the early announcement of the "point of delivery customisation", the sales department has confused customers regarding the available customisation units, the timing and to whom report their decision.


**Table 7.** Improvement opportunities identified during the understanding of customisation process.

Lastly, the use of traditional construction methods and the outsourcing of product design created barriers for Company P in the adoption of modularity-related practices. As discussed by Fettermann et al. [25], the customisation of buildings that use traditional construction methods usually has little support from modularity, limiting the advantages of scale.

#### 4.2.2. Assessing the Level of Implementation of Practices

The level of implementation of practices was assessed by the CT considering a five-point scale: not applicable (1), not applied with intended adoption (2), partially applied (3), partially applied with intended improvement (4), applied (5). This assessment is presented in Figure 4. It is noteworthy that the adoption of practices depends on the context of each organisation. Therefore, practices that are "not applicable" are the ones that were not considered to be useful to Company P, while the practices that are "not adopted with intended adoption" are the ones that the company recognises the need to implement shortly. Some practices were assessed as "partially applied with intended improvement", meaning the company has adopted it, but there is still room and motivation to improve.

**Figure 4.** Practices by decision categories according to CT's assessment.

The number of fully applied practices is noticeably low. However, there was evidence that the company is motivated to continue improving, considering that many of the recommended practices changed to partially applied within the time frame of this research project. Further details on each decision category assessment are discussed in subsequent sections.

During the assessment of the level of implementation of MC practices, other improvement opportunities were identified (Table 8). Although many improvement opportunities remained from the previous research stage, the CT seemed motivated to improve. For example, the use of three-dimensional models to display product alternatives as a visualisation tool for meetings with customers was suggested during the discussions and shortly adopted two weeks later.


**Table 8.** Improvement opportunities identified during the assessment of the level of implementation of MC practices.

The CT mentioned some barriers that they face in the adoption of MC practices such as financial and human resources, and tools to develop and implement new solutions. Moreover, a challenge for the customisation department is to be perceived as an innovation and customer-oriented sector as the development of new product ideas is often assigned to them. Thus, the CT must embrace activities that were not always related to their scope of expertise, such as customising non-residential projects. Moreover, the uncertainty of the new product types and attempts to improve the existing ones can be overwhelming, since their scope is continuously increasing.

#### 4.2.3. Analysis of Decision Categories
