Type (2) problems are then assigned either toolkit software for automatic solution or to producers’ technical design specialists.
The house owner will know the functions they want their custom deck to serve – outdoor barbecues for up to 10 people, play space for their kids, etc.
For example, users might be asked to select and place images of items like chairs and tables on the deck surface they have sketched out.
If not, they can easily make adjustments directly on the computer screen to solve the usage problems they see, and then assess again to see if they are now satisfied.
Again, in this simple example, deck size and shape are the only function-related design problems for which user knowledge is essential.
Traditionally, in the product development process, producer firms assign market research specialists to determine users’ needs.
[6][7] In 2002, von Hippel and Katz conceptualized the role of toolkits in the innovation process in a more general way that extends far beyond customization.
For example, Franke and Piller[13] conducted an experiment in which they offered one group of individuals the opportunity to customize and buy a watch they designed themselves with the aid of a toolkit.
This high additional value has been confirmed in several studies using different toolkits and in different product areas such as breakfast cereals, carving skis, mobile phone covers, fountain pens, kitchens, newspapers, scarves, and t-shirts.
Given that these preferences are different and significantly matter to users, the individualization possibility will lead to a higher subjective value.
[15] The process of using toolkits to quickly try many design variations also enables consumers to more deeply understand their own preferences.
Even short self‐design processes with a relatively simple toolkit bring about significant and time‐stable enhancements of preference insight and allows users to obtain high value from new individual products.