Sizing Strategies for Contactless Shopping

Source: ellowimages.com

The pandemic has boosted contactless shopping by 202%, but if sales rise, returns grow too: now 58% of customers are ready to send their purchases back. The problem resides in the COVID-19-related change of consumer behavior and the absence of the standardized apparel size system. Seeking a fit outfit, buyers order the same clothing in different sizes and hand back either some of them or everything. To prevent the discomfort of returns, retailers should analyze the changes in customers’ needs and learn the travails of sizing.

Consumer Behavior

Apart from the COVID-related sales growth, the market faced a dramatic change in consumer behavior.⁶ To increase conversion, retailers need to learn the key tendencies and adopt marketing strategies to the new needs with a special focus on sizing.

Decreased Brand Loyalty

Influenced by the stress of COVID-19, customers fight their fear of death by seeking multiplicity and experimenting with new brands. 36% of online buyers tried new labels during the pandemic, 73% of them are not going to stick to what they have bought and are going to search for new opportunities. In most cases this happens because of ill-fitting clothes: during the pandemic, consumers are losing and gaining weight faster.

To steal the scene and to support clients’ loyalty, online shops need to boost the visual representation of their products, improve sizing strategies, and constantly broaden the range of goods.

Items Availability

Limited by COVID-related rules and regulations 64% of customers require the availability of items. To meet clients’ needs, retailers should provide them with realistic sizing, create a 360-degree view of a product, develop FAQs, and keep popular goods in stock.¹

Fresh Experiences

Customers became more interested in new ways of shopping. Nearly 75% of US consumers have tried a new shopping behavior. Clients seek convenience but also regard shopping as a form of entertainment. This trend is especially common for Millennials and Gen Z who make the most of the online market.

Retailers have to work on contemporary marketing tricks, write proficient descriptions of items, and integrate augmented reality (AR) into their platforms. This will satisfy the emotional needs of potential buyers and appeal to their shopping preferences.

Solutions

A rapid change in customer behavior has increased the discomfort of sizing-related returns that cause huge market losses. To keep on the safe side, retailers can adapt their business to one of the following strategies: elastic fabrics, made-to-measure, safer brands, sales assistants, size guides, and even AI-driven technologies.

Elastic Fabrics

Photo by SHVETS production from Pexels

The concept of elastic clothing that will fit all and everyone is chasing the marketing departments of dress shops. Meanwhile, the concept of all shapes framed in the same template is still disputable.

Pros

1. Body-positive and client-oriented brand representation meets contemporary consumer behavior: the idea of visual equality motivates customers to buy more by 12%.²
2. Production is easier with a limited number of elastic fabrics used and standardized measurements applied. For example, elastic clothing for American women is based on these metrics: bust — 28 inches, waist — 22 inches, and height — 67 inches.

Cons

1. Standards of average sizes for elastic clothing are fluctuating. For example, ​​a CDC report in 2012 showed that a typical American 16-year-old had a 31 inches waist. A few years later, a CDC 2016 study demonstrated other figures with 32.6 inches average waist size.³
2. This strategy causes a limited assortment of goods and increases logistics costs. Retailers have either to select elastic-oriented labels to work with or money-losingly produce clothing themselves.
3. Narrower audiences are attracted to the brand. Clothing items made of predominantly elastic materials tend to have specific designs that don’t appeal to the overwhelming majority.
   Such special cases of elastic clothing as one-size never fit everyone. Disenchanted buyers may still make returns and blame retailers for hypocrisy⁷.

Source: shutterstock.com

Made-to-measure

Clothes had always been made-to-measure before the mass market was introduced. Today the lack of individual apparel brings bespoke tailoring in vogue again with customers nuts about expressing themselves and retailers seeking the absence of returns.

Pros

Made-to-measure is trending on social media and attracts vast audiences with nearly 73% of customers interested in conscious consumption and 60% willing to get unique garments⁸.

Cons

1. Time and money count. Bespoke tailoring cannot be a part of a business concept, it is always its core. An already existing shop with ready-to-wear garments will have to change its strategy, and it may take up to two years to break even.
2. Competitors are numerous with such brands as SuitKits and Careste already recognized by customers. To win the audience’s confidence, impressive investments in marketing are needed.
3. Production costs on made-to-measure clothing are 10 times higher than on mass-market items. Consequently, prices will bite customers and the business will not become a part of mainstream fashion.
4. Buyers are prone to try individual products and get back to the common fashion. The enthusiasm is ruined by the issues of price (50%), quality (20%), and habit of buying ready-to-wear outfits (30%).²
5. Returns are still on board: clients have the final say, and, if they are not happy with the pricey designs or cutouts, they will send it back.

Safer Brands

Fashion brands have different sizing, but, in concept, retailers can select and sell reliable labels.

Pros

1. Simple procurement of goods with a few contracts to be signed.
2. Such a conceptual attitude to customers may boost public interest in social media.

Cons

1. A deep analysis of different brands’ sizing is needed. This method is time-consuming.
2. The constant search for new labels and items will be caused by the decreasing brand loyalty.
3. The pandemic requires goods availability that is hard to preserve with a limited number of items.
4. A selection of brands results in specific clothing and a smaller audience.
5. Inconsistent sizing within the same brand is still a challenge. The same client may have to buy S and M of the same label depending on the silhouette of the item and the fabrics it is made of.

Source: pikdone.com

Sales Assistants

Sales assistants welcome customers in offline shops. To stimulate sales, they analyze clients’ preferences, estimate their metrics, and make recommendations. This efficient practice can be taken online via instant support service.

Pros

Such a humane approach to customers positively influences brand identity.

Cons

1. Retailers have either to inundate support managers with new tasks or hire new professionals. The higher the traffic of inquiries gets, the more workers are needed, and the more money is spent on salaries.
2. A dialogue with a shopping assistant never means that the purchase will be undoubtedly made. Unfortunately, offline strategies of persuasion can not be applied online.⁴
3. Human element can fail the sale. No face-to-face contact can lead to communications gaps and incorrect sizing.
4. Online customers are not prone to wait for a long time for a response from a salesman. Malfunctions and slow answers can make the deal fall through.
5. Bad UX-made dialogue boxes are off-putting customers. Up to 52% of potential buyers are ready to leave shops if they don’t like their design or find the web structure spammy. Consequently, brand credibility is hurt and sales drop. To prevent the problem, huge investments in user-friendly visuals are required.

Size Guides

Detailed descriptions of apparels and sizing guides can give customers a comparatively clear idea of how items will fit them.

Pros

A caring approach to buyers has a positive effect on brand representation.

Cons

1. Extra efforts kill interest in shopping. Most customers have no sizing tapes and are not much into spending time to buy them during the pandemic.

People are not good at applying measurements. Average errors vary from -4.54 cm (1.79 in) to +6.15 cm (2.42 in). Wrong metrics lead to returns.

Sizolution

Source: sizolution.com

Apart from a radical trading perspective switch, retailers are blessed with IT technologies reshaping the industry. Sizolution is a modern sizing tool for clients to forget about returns.

Pros

1. Sizolution stands for the client-oriented service. Individual sizes and style preferences are applied to the actual product data. Consequently, buyers make the right choices and are less prone to send their purchases back. This is efficient for the supply and logistics issues.
2. The revolutionary selfie mode boosts marketing buzz. Customers enjoy trying clothes online and nearly 20% of them are eager to introduce their acquaintances to the dress game.
3. The tool increases revenue. For example, KUPIVIP experienced growth of revenue by 30%.
   Sizolution decreases returns: HIRMER store’s returns dropped by 33%.
4. Marketing strategies are on velvet: absorbed in the fancy process of trying on, clients buy up to 25% more items.²
5. The service marks brand recognition up: 8 out of 10 customers return back to the reliable store for more purchases to be made⁸.
6. Sizolution saves time. The widget is simple to use and quick to integrate into every online store. Retailers can focus on other duties.
7. The contemporary approach of the service meets the needs of the primary audience represented by Gen Z and Millennials.
8. Sizolution is the key way to keep made-to-measure clothing efficient. Selfie-based body scanning accommodates tailors with accurate metrics, and custom-made brands are saved from sizing-related returns.
9. Precise and contactless measuring enables dress-making studios to make a profit during the pandemics.
10. Easy to use and quick, it will be more convenient than usual measuring when offline shops and tailor houses welcome customers again.

Conclusion

The uplift of contactless shopping doesn’t cheer retailers up due to the rapid increase in returns. Old-fashioned marketers resolve the problem with elastic fabrics, safer brands, and made-to-measure strategies. Unfortunately, they are far cry from efficient conversion. Those who keep up with the times seek AI solutions.

Sizolution meets the needs of contemporary consumer behavior and works as the key one with individual sizes figured out, clients glad, and revenues advanced.

References

1. Chandan, A., (2019), Factors Affecting Consumer Buying Behaviour, International Journal of Advanced Research, 7, pp. 563–568.
2. Chayapa, K., and Cheng, L., (2011), Online Shopper Behavior: Influences of Online Shopping Decision, Asian Journal of Business Research, 1(2), pp. 66–72.
3. Fryar, C., Carroll, M., Gu, Q., Afful, J., and Ogden, C., (2021), Anthropometric Reference Data For Children and Adults: United States, 2015–2018, National Center for Health Statistics, Vital Health Stat 3(46), p. 23.
4. Saxe, R., and Barton, W., (1982), The SOCO Scale: A Measure of The Customer Orientation of Salespeople, Journal of Marketing Research, 19(3), pp. 343–351.
5. Sheth, J., (2020), Impact of Covid-19 on Consumer Behavior: Will the Old Habits Return or Die, Journal of Business Research, 117(2020), pp. 280–283.
6. Svajdova, L., (2021), Consumer Behaviour during Pandemic of COVID-19. Journal of International Business Research and Marketing, 6(3), pp. 34–37.
7. Whysall, P., (2000), Retailing and the Internet: a Review of Ethical Issues, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 28(11), pp. 481–489.
8. Yu, U., Damhorst, M., and Russell, D., (2011), The Impact of Body Image on Consumers’ Perceptions of Idealized Advertising Images and Brand Attitudes, Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal 40, pp. 58–73.
9. Yoon, J., and Radwin, R., (1994),The Accuracy of Consumer-Made Body Measurements for Women’s Mail-Order Clothing, Human Factors, 36(3), pp. 557–568.
10. Yu, T., and Wu, G., (2007), Determinants of Internet Shopping Behavior: An Application of Reasoned Behavior Theory, International Journal of Management, 24(4), pp. 744–762.