How do you evaluate the trade-offs between standardization and customization in DFM?

For firms considering customization, it is important to understand what the customer really values. Customization in the design and production stages is likely to work well if customers don’t mind paying higher prices or waiting longer for their products. When companies use partial customization, they can avoid some of the trade-offs between cost and benefits. This means they can offer products that better meet customers' needs without making big sacrifices. This approach can increase the overall value of the product. If customers are willing to pay more, the company can make higher profits, as the extra cost of customization is minimal.

Standardization can simplify many things, if it has the right market. In the automation world I have found standardization can happen with modular concepts in mind, but having the ability to customize always helps broaden the market and not be limited to selling a straight commodity (with expectation for lower prices). I like to call them "Standards with a Twist", and those solutions are the easiest to sell to a broad market, give some commonality for ease of procurement and fabrication especially for long lead components, while still giving a flexible solution to the end clients to fit their needs exactly, and not just close enough.

Standardization can be highly effective when the right market conditions are in place. In the automation sector, I’ve seen that adopting modular designs can support standardization. However, it's essential to maintain the option for customization, as it allows for a broader market reach and prevents the risk of being stuck selling a simple commodity, which typically leads to price competition. It offers the benefits of standardization—such as easier procurement and fabrication, particularly for long-lead components—while still giving clients the flexibility to get solutions that are perfectly suited to their specific needs. This balance ensures that the offering is both efficient and highly adaptable.

At Andalusia Design, we balance standardization and customization by leveraging parametric design capabilities to achieve the best of both — we develop custom Grasshopper + Python scripts to translate unique client designs to manufacturing-constrained standardized fabrication. We standardize the core elements that ensure manufacturing efficiency and quality (materials, hardware, and fabrication processes); while using generative design to enable nearly unlimited design customization within preset frameworks. We can maintain the cost benefits and quality consistency of standardization in our core processes while offering the creative freedom that architects and designers need.

At Andalusia Design, we've discovered that the traditional view of standardization as the key to market growth actually limits our potential in the architectural products industry. Our experience shows that customization, when properly implemented through parametric design, becomes a powerful market advantage. While many manufacturers see standardization as a path to efficiency and scale, we've found that architects and designers increasingly demand unique solutions that reflect their creative vision and project requirements. By leveraging parametric design, we can marry the architect's desire for creative freedom with manufacturing constraints and standardization benefits; that's been a key competitive advantage.

Standardization works best in the early and mature stages of the product life cycle when the market is stable, helping to establish your product, grow market share, and improve efficiency. However, in the later stages, when the market becomes dynamic, it can limit innovation. Customization is more beneficial in the declining phase, as it helps differentiate the product and extend its life, but it can increase complexity and cost in earlier stages when the market is more uniform. Balancing both approaches at the right times is key to success.

Standardization and customization are two distinct approaches to product development and customer feedback, each offering unique advantages and challenges depending on the stage of the product life cycle and the nature of the market. Balancing these approaches effectively can help businesses optimize their product offerings, enhance customer satisfaction, and drive growth. This type of feedback typically highlights the core features and functions that most customers value. By focusing on these common needs, businesses can streamline their product design and production processes, which increases efficiency and reduces costs.

I've mentioned parametric design as the enabler for balancing standardization and customization. One thing to consider is that, for that to be true, certain constants need to be shared per product family/category. For instance, for our Perforate family of ceiling and wall products, a constant is the material (metal sheet) with maximum predefined panel dimensions; and two well-thought mounting systems, one for walls and one for ceilings. Our variables are in the design process though, we create a multi-step modular design workflow that enables two applications (wall/ceiling), and dozens of pattern design categories (each with unlimited design possibilities), but all within a well-understood design and fabrication framework.