Mass Customization: NikeID and Puma Mongolian Shoe BBQ

In the second generation of the Internet, as power shifts from sellers to buyers, businesses are focusing on developing digital, highly-interactive relationships with consumers: Embracing online mass customization versus, previous methods of mass production. As increases the involvement consumers have in the making of their own, unique product(s). By involving consumers on a higher level through digital technology purchasing of their products, businesses can establish a more intimate attachment with its target audience. Nike and Puma, two major competitors in the athletic shoe industry, have each developed attractive marketing approaches that allow them to profit from the execution of an online mass customization strategy.

NikeID

The theory behind Nike’s NikeID Studio in New York City is the idea that there is an extremely vast selection of colors and styles of shoes to choose from and with which to create and purchase. The overall theme of NikeID appears to target an urban culture-flashy colors, city atmosphere, and offering multiple ways of designing the prime customized shoe, in terms of customizing both looks (color, size, style) and performance (wide/narrow, independent siding, pick your outsoles). NikeID sells this idea of “show your colors on the field and your style on the street,” appealing to this young adult, urban, hip-hop demographic that are asked to add a little personality to their athletic shoes. The NikeID interactive experience focuses mainly on choosing a color basis for your shoe design. Nike offers a wide variety of possible design styles to test out in several colorful expressions from which to choose.


Puma Mongolian Shoe BBQ

Whereas Nike created NikeID as a unique way to personalize one’s athletic shoes with an individual, unique ID, Puma took a much more thematic approach to the concept of “preheating your creativity” in the sense of designing the right shoe recipe. Puma’s digitally interactive site, Puma Mongolian BBQ, received its highly unusual name from a historical reference to Ghengis Khan’s Mongolian army in the Far East many centuries ago. The soldiers of the Mongolian army would individually gather meat and vegetables and were then asked to create a personalized meal comprised of their medley of ingredients. The design of the Puma website, including images of restaurant-size kitchens and signs listing the daily specials of the Mongolian BBQ, further solidifies the cooking theme of Puma’s marketing strategy. In contrast to the wide variety of styles offered by Nike for shoe customization, Puma offers fewer options as far as templates from which you, as a consumer, are to build your shoe design. The Puma website seems much less flashy than the Nike one, targeting young professionals. The website uses less bright and bold colors, and focuses on a simple, clean and crisp image.

First-Hand Customer Experience: Time, Quality, Performance and Service, and Cost

Time
In analyzing the customer experience, first-hand, I chose to consider the customer experience from four different perspectives: time, quality, performance and service, and cost. I spent about twenty minutes on NikeID’s website and I thought that in that time I was able to grasp a good understanding of the website and the different options I had in customizing my own shoes. I spent roughly the same amount of time on Puma’s website, but I felt that there was less information to absorb, fewer navigational tools, and drop menus. I also realized that the Puma site took longer to load certain pages, even when it was finalizing the design of my shoe, the website voiceover asked me to be patient for up to five minutes.

Quality
The quality of both sites was really very impressive. The theme and creativity involved in designing the Puma website really give the brand something to make it stand out from Nike and possibly other competitors. Both companies appear to successfully manage their brand image-Nike appears more urban and vibrant while Puma seems to target creative young-professionals. The quality of design was about the same for each site, concerning how much of the design the consumer is actually able to contribute. Both sites are using the same form of technology-the Adobe Flash. However I believe that both sites equally apply their technology well for the chosen target audiences they intend to attract.

Performance and Service
Both sites performed well in the actual designing and customization of the shoes. However, Puma did seem to take longer to refresh, load, and register information. Also, I found it difficult to navigate around the site when I wanted to go back to the Home page. These obstacles made using the Puma site more time-consuming.

Cost
Neither site charges the consumers for designing their own shoes. The prices also do not noticeably vary from one brand to the other.

Both Nike and Puma effectively employed an online mass customization strategy. I personally preferred the shoe that I made on Puma more so than the one I made on Nike, which really just boiled down to my liking of the color purple. However, I preferred the NikeID site because I felt it was easier to use and more fun to look around the additional sites that gave insights into related affairs, events, and products.