 |
Spring
2003 Focus
|
 |
Sizing Up the Apparel Industry
Susan Ashdown, Professor of Textiles and Apparel
Survey results by Kurt Salmon (1999) show that 50% of people say
their clothing doesn’t fit.
Return rates on catalog clothing sales often hits 40-50% due to
fit issues.
 Sizing
and fit are two interrelated issues costing apparel manufacturers and
retailers millions of dollars. At the center of the problem are the methods
we use to devise sizing systems and size categories. Consider these four
underlying facts:
- U.S. sizing systems were originally based on anthropometric studies
of large numbers of our population
- For men, soldiers during the 1860 Civil War
- For women, a 1941 study for the apparel industry
- Today, sizing systems vary by manufacturer
- Each brand or line has its own fit model with a body shape appropriate
for its target market
- Grading rules are developed to create smaller and larger sizes
proportionally based on this fit model
- Women’s size numbers do not correspond to body measurements
while men’s size numbers do
- Fashion, style and fit preferences affect consumer size selections.
Improved sizing systems based on current population studies (military
and civilian) and implemented through advanced technologies and strategies
can make sizing a competitive strategy for apparel firms. First, let’s
define sizing variables and place them in context.
A sizing system is defined as a set of sizes derived
using common assumptions and methods of development, and size
categories (or size classifications) within
a system are defined as the various groupings of sizes as they would
be presented in a retail situation. Thus the sizing system
most commonly used for ready-to-wear in the United States makes use
of a base size, fitted to a fit model, and a set of sizes proportionately
graded from this size. Examples of size categories include misses sizes,
petite sizes, plus sizes, etc. Modern technologies and methods of producing
and distributing clothing make it possible to develop sizing systems
based on entirely different concepts today. A sizing system can be as
simple as one-fits-all or SML, or as complex as a system that provides
a custom fitted garment for each individual.
Following the Conceptual Sizing Systems Model above, we see that four
variables contribute to the effectiveness of sizing systems:
- population measures used as the basis
- fit issues related to the wearer, designer, and producer
- design features related to style, materials, and functions
- communication of sizes and fit by the apparel producer to the consumer
Let’s discuss each one to highlight some possible directions you
can take with sizes in your own company.
Population Measures. Population measures can be used
to determine both the range (smallest to largest) and the variation (differences
in proportions) of people in the population. However, the cost of conducting
an anthropometric study has limited its use in the development of sizing.
Identification of a representative sample of the population is critical
in order to collect data that reflect the population as a whole. Age,
ethnicity, and body type must all be considered. Recent technologies such
as 3D body scanning and automated measurement have made collection of
population data more affordable and available for apparel companies.
In addition to on-going military studies, two recent major data collection
studies have been conducted by industry consortiums using body scan technology—the
Caesar study and SizeUSA. The Caesar study (Civilian American and European
Surface Anthropometry Resource Project—http://www.sae.org/technicalcommittees/caesumm.htm)
collected scans from 2,500 US men and women and 2,500 European men and
women for a group of apparel, automotives, and airline industry participants
for their exclusive use in improving their sizing systems. Size USA (www.sizeusa.com)
is currently collecting scan data from 12,000 men and women in over 20
U.S. cities with a variety of age, ethnic, and shape characteristics.
These data will be provided to member companies for their use based on
their funding support.
Fit Issues. The definition of good fit is a complex
issue confounded by the lack of agreement among the various stakeholders
in the process: the designer of the clothing, the patternmaker/grader,
and the customer. The designer is interested in creating a specific aesthetic
look in relationship to the body, the patternmaker/grader must maintain
this aesthetic over a range of different bodies (generally with a limited
number of sizes), and the consumer has his or her own personal preferences
about how their clothing should fit. As the sizing systems developed by
different companies in the apparel industry are not standardized, each
system delivers a different fit. The effectiveness of a sizing system
is dependent on the skill of individual patternmakers and graders and
the amount of effort a company puts into defining and producing the type
of fit appropriate for their own target market.
New tools such as the body scanner, and new strategies, such as target
market surveys, virtual fit assessment,and wear testing, show promise
for providing better fit.
Design Features. The relationship between design and
the fit of clothing is a complex interaction based on style, materials,
and production variables. Each new style of garment that is produced has
its own ideal relationship to the body, and each garment style fits a
different range of bodies in an acceptable manner. A general rule of thumb
is that the more style ease a garment has (ease is the difference between
the body and garment measurement at the same location) the greater the
range of body variations the garment will fit. Materials that have stretch
in one or both directions will need less ease and can fit a wider range
of body.
Production methods can significantly affect the final specifications
of a garment. Fabric distortion, shrinkage, errors in marker making and
cutting, and/or inaccurate sewing can lead to significant differences
in the garment size. Savvy consumers are familiar with this variation
and will sometimes take several garments of the same style and size in
the fitting room in order to find the one that fits them best. Quality
design and production are needed in order to offer consumers consistent
measurements within styles and sizes.
 Communication
of Size and Fit. Communication of women's clothing sizes is particularly
difficult as the size numbers used for women are not correlated to body
measurements and are not standardized among manufacturers. Manufacturers
attempt to alleviate consumer confusion by using terms such as classic,
slim, or relaxed fit in their garment labeling and store marketing, but
the underlying problem is in the lack of logic of size labeling. Women’s
clothing is frequently labeled using size numbers (6, 8, 10, 12) that
do not relate to any particular dimension of the body or garment. Men's
sizing in the United States normally corresponds to body measurements
(a pants size is labeled with waist and inseam measurements and a jacket
size is labeled with the chest dimensions and the length).
Sizing systems are generally designed to fit a subset of the population,
i.e., the target market, defined by demographic data such as age, income,
socio/economic status, and lifestyle. Unfortunately, until the most recent
anthropometric studies, measurements were not collected based on these
characteristics. Matching the body measurements and demographic characteristics
of these specific target markets will bring new information to the development
of individual apparel firm’s sizing systems that will go a long
way towards improving garment fit.
What can my firm do NOW to improve the sizing and fit of its products?
The main disconnect between sizing and fit seems to be knowledge
of consumers—their body measurements, fit preferences, and demographic
profile. Let’s revisit the issues surrounding sizing and fit.
- Sizing systems have typically been based on proportional sizing systems
that may not reflect the variety of body shapes in the target market.
- Manufacturers and retailers don’t have complete information
about how their styles fit their target markets.
- Size labeling is confusing to consumers due to lack of consistency
and lack of any connection to body measurements.
- Consumers base their perception of fit on cultural, fashion, style,
and comfort considerations and these vary from one consumer to the next.
- Consumers react to poor fit in a variety of ways: alterations, wearing
it anyway, not buying, returning it, never buying brand again.
Once you know more about the consumers in your target market, how can
you use this information to improve your sizing systems?
New Technologies
Information on body sizes related to different target market demographics
is being collected by Size USA using body scans. If you are a member,
this can help your firm address the range and variety of body sizes in
your target market. These data could lead to changes in your choice of
fit model, basic size specifications, or grade rules to modify your current
sizing system. Or, you could decide to change the number of sizes or their
labels based on the analysis of these scan data.
Manufacture and Distribution Methods
The mass customization business strategy involves customers in the design
process by allowing them to adjust some features to their individual measurements
and to choose style elements and fabrics from a limited selection. It
reduces warehousing costs and unsold inventory. True customization of
sizes utilizes the newly available custom fit software to alter patterns
based on an individual’s unique measurements.
New Strategies
Fit Tests. A fit test of the first sample garment on
the fit model is an essential step in the process of creating a new style.
An experienced fit model can recognize fit issues that are difficult to
see from just viewing the garment. More extensive fit testing can be conducted
by trying garments from the full size range on a variety of people in
your target market, possibly employees, but sometimes it is difficult
to interpret the results of these fit tests
Wear tests. can also be conducted with employees or
customers. By giving participants garments to wear and clean for a week
or two, you can test for other quality issues along with fit under real
conditions. A focus group discussion about fit and wear perceptions by
the testers should lead to immediate, valuable information about the garment
fit and performance.
Consumer Surveys. Consumers can be surveyed at point
of purchase at retailers or followed up later via hang-tag special offers
or purchase records for Internet sales or catalog purchases . Keep your
questions specific to a particular garment and short in number to increase
the value of the information to sizing system improvement.
Labeling. Consider adding some subjective descriptor
fit terms to your sizing labels. “Relaxed fit” or “oversized"
can help consumers select the appropriate size based on their fit preference
and style.
Industry legend says that women do not want to see body size information
on a hangtag, but is this a myth? Pantyhose and jeans have been labeled
with body categories and size information for decades.
Don’t lose sight of current customers who find the existing system
satisfactory when making a size system change. Communicate changes in
your sizing systems or labels through a marketing campaign to your loyal
and potential customers.
|
