Fit Analysis - Sampada Rawat PDF

Assessment of Customers’ Perception of Fit for Global Desi
A dissertation submitted in partial Fulfillment

of the requirement for the award of Degree in
Bachelor of Fashion Technology (Apparel Production)
Submitted By
SAMPADA RAWAT
Under the Guidance of
MS. ABOLI NAIK
Department of Fashion Technology

National Institute of Fashion Technology, Mumbai
May, 2017
i
Abstract
Garment fit is an important criterion for today’s fashion dominated era where one looks for
something that does not just look good but even feels good to wear. This ―feel good‖ factor is a
result of good fit. This report is an attempt to understand what a customer perceives as good fit
for themselves by taking real time feedback from certain respondents for a particular brand’s
garments.
During the project, fit trials were conducted with some respondents in the head office. A
questionnaire containing questions regarding the fit of the garment was prepared before hand and
the respondents were interviewed personally with the help of the questionnaire. The
questionnaire consisted of close ended as well as open ended questions. The feedback received
from those interviews was analysed and the possible causes as well as solutions for various
issues occurring in all the garments were noted. Some of the major issues noted were gaping of
collar, turning of collar ends, gaping at armhole, excess fabric in the back panel at the waist and
hip level and length of the maxi dresses. In addition to the fit trials some store visits were
conducted to gain a wider and more unbiased feedback regarding the various styles offered in the
stores. From those store visits the major issues noted were puckering, gaping at armhole and the
need for length alterations.
It was concluded that with some alterations in the specifications and patterns as well as
precautions taken at production level the issues could be resolved. But the bottom line was that
the issues occurring in all the garments were not the same. There were certain issues that were
occurring in a lot of garments and there were other issues which occurred in other garments.
Overall, issues were observed in various garment components. To overcome this entire problem
it was concluded that the specifications of all the different types of garments needed to be
improvised on and new garments needed to be made based on the new specifications. Once
made, the garments would have to be tried again in order to verify if the changes actually
improved the customers’ perception of the brand’s garments’ fit. During the tenure of the project
however, only the issues were highlighted and the problem area was defined. The scope of the
study was also mentioned.
Key words: Fit, fit trials, respondents, style, specifications
ii
Certificate
“This is to certify that this Project Report titled “Assessment of Customers’ Perception of Fit
for Global Desi” is based on my ( Sampada Rawat) original research work, conducted under
the guidance of Ms. Aboli Naik towards partial fulfillment of the requirement for award of
the Bachelor’s Degree in Fashion Technology (Apparel Production) of the National Institute of
Fashion Technology, Mumbai.
No part of this work has been copied from any other source. Material, wherever borrowed
has been duly acknowledged.”
Signature of Author/Researchers
Signature of Guide
iii
Acknowledgement
I would like to thank my faculty mentor Ms. Aboli Naik for her immense support, guidance and
valuable feedback throughout the duration of my Graduation Project. Without her guidance this
compilation would have been incomplete.
I would like to sincerely thank Dr. A. K. Khare for his guidance and for connecting me to
experienced people in the industry who in turn guided me in my project as well. His experience
in this field helped me throughout the project.
I would like to extend my gratitude towards Mr. T. S. Prakash for his inputs on fit which helped
shape up my project well and I also thank all the faculty members of the B.F.Tech. Department
for their guidance and support.
My industry mentors Ms. Sumita Srivastava (Technical Design, HOADL), Ms. Leena Elios
(Technical Design, HOADL) and Mr. Himadri Datta (Head Sourcing and Operations, HOADL)
were very supportive and gave me invaluable insight into this industry during the tenure of my
Graduation Project. I thank them for their time and for giving me this wonderful opportunity to
learn from them. I thank Mr. Sumit Kumar (Technical Design, HOADL) for his guidance as
well.
I also thank other members of the HOADL family who took out time from their busy schedules
for my fit trials and those who gave me unbiased feedback regarding the project. The project
would have been incomplete without their help and support.
I would also like to extend my gratitude to all the respondents who came all the way from
different parts of Mumbai for the fit trials and other students who helped me in my project in
some way or the other. Their contribution and support, no matter how big or small, is
immeasurable. The names of those students are given as follows:
iv
Ms. Amrita Gaur- BFT Sem. II Ms. Phalguni Sood- BFT Sem. IV
Ms.Aastha Sharma- BFT Sem. II Ms. Pritika Menon- FD Sem. IV
Ms. Bhavika Bisht- BFT Sem. II Ms. Sunayani Bhattacharya- FC Sem. IV
Ms. Ishika Sharma- BFT Sem. II Ms. Swati Shukla- BFT Sem. IV
Ms. Nikita Jain- KD Sem. II Ms. Yugeshwari Khairkar- Diploma FFS Sem IV
Ms. Aanchal Saxena- BFT Sem. IV Ms. Manisha Barla- BFT Sem. VI
Ms. Akansha Sharma- BFT Sem. IV Ms. Simran Harbola- BFT Sem. VI
Ms. Drishti Singh- FD Sem IV Ms. Priyanka Lalwani- FD Sem. VIII
Ms. Jia Rathore- BFT Sem. IV Ms. Suyasha Jolly- FD Sem. VIII
Ms. Mansi Verma- BFT Sem. IV Ms. Vaishnavi Bhatt- FD Sem. VIII
My parents and friends kept me motivated throughout the project and hence, I would like to
thank them for their patience and care.
v
Contents
1. Introduction ................................................................................................. 1
2. Objective of the study .................................................................................. 3
3. Review of Literature .................................................................................... 4
3.1 Understanding Apparel and Fit ................................................................ 4
3.2 Perception of Fit ....................................................................................... 4
3.3 Exploring Consumers’ Perception of Fit and Satisfaction with Apparel Fit
in General (Shin, 2013) ...................................................................................... 4
3.4 Analysis of Consumer’s Visual Perception of Garment Fit: Eye Tracking

Study (Pi, 2011) ................................................................................................. 7
4. Research Design and Methodology ........................................................... 13
4.1 Brands, Product Categories and Sizes Offered ...................................... 13
4.2 Sampling Scheme ................................................................................... 13
4.3 Arrangement of Garments ...................................................................... 14
4.4 Fit Trials ................................................................................................. 14
4.5 Possible Cause(s) and Solutions of Issues Highlighted ......................... 14
5. Findings ..................................................................................................... 15
5.1 Style Wise Findings................................................................................ 15
5.2 Height Wise Findings ............................................................................. 45
5.3 Store Visit Findings ................................................................................ 49
6. Results & Discussion ................................................................................. 53
vi
6.1 Style Wise Results & Discussion ........................................................... 53
6.2 Height Wise Results & Discussion ........................................................ 55
6.3 Store Visit Results & Discussion ........................................................... 56
7. Conclusion ................................................................................................. 58
8. Limitations & Scope of the Study ............................................................. 59
Bibliography .................................................................................................... 60
Annexure ............................................................................................................ i
Annexure 1- Pilot Questionnaire 1 ....................................................................ii
Annexure 2- Pilot Questionnaire 2 ...................................................................iv
Annexure 3- Pilot Questionnaire 3 ...................................................................ix
Annexure 4- Final Questionnaire..................................................................... xv
Annexure 5- Style Wise Photos ......................................................................xix
Annexure 6- Respondents’ Details ............................................................... xxii
Annexure 7- Specification Sheets ............................................................... xxiii
Appendix .................................................................................................... xxxii
Appendix 1- House of Anita Dongre Limited (Formerly known as AND Designs

India Limited) ............................................................................................ xxxiii
Appendix 2- Global Desi ............................................................................xxxiv
vii
List of Tables
Table 1 : Size wise distribution of respondents..................................................... 15

Table 2: Height wise and size wise distribution of respondents ............................ 45
Table 3: Changes required for SS17GR109KURD ............................................... 45
Table 4: Changes required for 25115-KU-PK ..................................................... 45
Table 5: Changes required for 23903D-KU-314 .................................................. 46
Table 6: Changes required for SS17GN012TUMUL ............................................ 46
Table 7: Changes required for 56890-TU-852 ..................................................... 46
Table 8: Changes required for AW1639298TU718 .............................................. 47
Table 9: Changes required for AW1625096MX180 ............................................. 47
Table 10: Changes required for IM26406-MX-496 .............................................. 47
Table 11: Changes required for GJ56092-MX-500 .............................................. 48
Table 12: Store Visit Data ................................................................................... 52
Table 13: Details of respondents......................................................................... xxii
viii
List of Figures
Exhibit 1: An example of stimulus divided into Area of Interests (AOIs) ................................................... 10
Exhibit 2: An example of “hot-spot” graph ................................................................................................ 10
Exhibit 3: An example of “scan-path” graph ............................................................................................. 11
Exhibit 4: Hypotheses tested in this study ................................................................................................... 11
Exhibit 5: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: SS17GR109KURD.......................... 16
Exhibit 6: Gaping of collar and waviness in placket .................................................................................. 17
Exhibit 7: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: SS17GR109KURD .............. 18
Exhibit 8: Excess fabric in the back panel at waist level ............................................................................ 18
Exhibit 9: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: 25115-KU-PK ................................ 19
Exhibit 10: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: 25115-KU-PK ................... 20
Exhibit 11: Length and print were unsatisfactory for 60% respondents .................................................... 20
Exhibit 12: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: 23903D-KU-314 .......................... 21
Exhibit 13: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: 23903D-KU-314 ............... 22
Exhibit 14: Loose fitting at waist ................................................................................................................ 23
Exhibit 15: Loose fitting at hip ................................................................................................................... 24
Exhibit 16: Centre Front hiking by 1”-2” .................................................................................................. 25
Exhibit 17: Puckering in various seams ..................................................................................................... 25
Exhibit 18: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: SS17GN012TUMUL .................... 26
Exhibit 19: Gaping of collar at HPS and at collar ends ............................................................................. 27
Exhibit 20: Loose fitting in the across back region .................................................................................... 27
Exhibit 21: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: SS17GN012TUMUL ......... 28
Exhibit 23: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: 56890-TU-852.............................. 30
Exhibit 24: Stretching of fabric above bust level near the button placket .................................................. 30
Exhibit 25: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: 56890-TU-852 ................... 31
Exhibit 26: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: AW1639298TU718 ...................... 32
Exhibit 27: Fabric stretching near the button placket & shoulders drooping ............................................ 33
Exhibit 28: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.:AW1639298TU718............. 34
Exhibit 29: Loose fitting at waist and hip level .......................................................................................... 35
ix
Exhibit 30: Uneven bottom hem .................................................................................................................. 35
Exhibit 31: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: AW1625096MX180 ...................... 36
Exhibit 32: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.:AW1625096MX180 ............ 37
Exhibit 33: Back neck embroidery missing in “S” sample ......................................................................... 37
Exhibit 34: Lining visible through the slit .................................................................................................. 38
Exhibit 35: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: IM26406MX496 ........................... 39
Exhibit 36: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: IM26406MX496 ................ 39
Exhibit 37: Length was more than necessary. ............................................................................................ 40
Exhibit 38: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: GJ56092MX500 ........................... 41
Exhibit 39: Gaping in the neckline ............................................................................................................. 41
Exhibit 40: Gaping in armhole ................................................................................................................... 41
Exhibit 41: Loose fitting at bust .................................................................................................................. 42
Exhibit 42: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: GJ56092MX500 ................ 42
Exhibit 44: Puckering in seams .................................................................................................................. 43
Exhibit 45: Most preferred styles per product category ............................................................................. 44
Exhibit 46: Style No. - SS17GZ089TUNET Exhibit 47: Style No. - SS17GR138KULD ......................... 57
Exhibit 48: Style No.- SS17GR211TUMO .................................................................................................. 57
Exhibit 49: Style No.: SS17GR109KURD (Kurti) ....................................................................................... xix
Exhibit 50: 25115-KU-PK (Kurti) .............................................................................................................. xix
Exhibit 51: 23903D-KU-314 (Kurti)........................................................................................................... xix
Exhibit 52: SS17GN012TUMUL (Tunic) .....................................................................................................xx
Exhibit 53: 56890-TU-852 (Tunic) ..............................................................................................................xx
Exhibit 54: AW1639298TU718 (Tunic) .......................................................................................................xx
Exhibit 55: AW1625096MX180 (Maxi Dress) ............................................................................................ xxi
Exhibit 56: IM26406-MX-496 (Maxi Dress) .............................................................................................. xxi
Exhibit 57: GJ56092-MX-500 (Maxi Dress) .............................................................................................. xxi
x
1. Introduction
In today’s era when fashion plays a pivotal role in conveying one’s status and personality,
everyone is looking for the trendiest of clothes with the best of quality, more often than not,
meaning branded clothes. But what do consumers really mean when they say they are looking for
clothing with good quality? Quality could mean many things. It differs from person to person
and is dependent on their personal taste. Some consider fabric with a soft feel as good quality as
it could be the right type and content of fabric they are looking for in clothes. Some people might
consider a unique or attractive design as good quality and some may feel that clothing with the
right fit is good quality. Often a combination of any two or all of these could mean good quality
to a consumer. What is often observed now is that a person would prefer buying something that
―fits‖ them well as opposed to what just ―looks‖ or ―feels‖ right; or at least something that is
perceived as well fitting. Consumers’ perception of garment fit is often influenced by traditional
cultural characteristics and also depends on the economic, technological and social conditions.
Fit doesn’t have a fixed criterion based on which it could be judged as right or wrong as there is
no garment that fits ―right‖ to all. Even within a certain community or culture or country people
vary in body shapes and sizes due to which they fit differently in garments. Sizes are created or
established to put people of similar measurements under the same bracket. If one body
measurement matches for all size S women then another body part’s measurement may vary. But
overall all those size S women may turn out to feel that a size S garment fits them well and hence
would consider it the ―right‖ fit for them. Although all the people belonging to the same culture
or country may not exactly be the same in body measurements but they may share the same body
shapes. For example, Indian women are considered to be more voluptuous, especially below the
waist and usually fit in the pear-shaped category but since India doesn’t have its own size charts
many Indian brands follow either the US or UK sizing system. Many of those brands have also
customized the international size charts to fulfill Indian requirements. This is very necessary as
Indian body types are very different from International body types. Global Desi, a Boho-Chic
brand of House of Anita Dongre Limited, is one such brand which has attempted to customize
international size charts according to Indian body types.
1
The focus here in this study has been on Global Desi’s garments’ fit. The brand had recently
been receiving a lot of customer complaints related to fit as reported by the management. It had
raised concerns for the brand as a good fit is not something that is easy to achieve given the fact
that India doesn’t have its own size chart. Global Desi (GD) follows the UK size chart broadly
but has adapted and customized the chart according to Indian silhouettes. Its USPs have helped it
attain a stable position in the market but to be a leader GD has to set a benchmark and presently
―fit‖ is an obstacle. To resolve the issue a sample population had to be studied and their
perception of GD’s garments had to be analyzed.
2
2. Objective of the study
The study conducted was to understand the perception of fit of certain garments of a particular
brand called Global Desi - from its customers’ (Women’s) point of view to know the major
issues arising in their recent collections which lead to numerous customer complaints and to also
understand the reasons behind those issues. The objective was to identify the problem area(s) and
suggest possible causes and solutions for the same.
3
3. Review of Literature
3.1 Understanding Apparel and Fit
Any piece of clothing, especially one that is worn as a garment/attire/outerwear and covers one’s
body or is used for superficial appearance is defined as apparel. (Dictionary.com) But for an
apparel to be worthy of buying one must feel comfortable in it. Such comfort would be felt only
if the fit of the apparel or at least the perception of fit of that particular piece is considered
positive by the customer. But before one tries to ask whether a piece is fit or not one needs to
understand what is meant by fit.
Fit means something that’s right with respect to an end use or circumstance and meets the
specified requirements. (Merriam-Webster) Fit in garments or apparel products refers to the level
of comfort that a consumer feels when he/she tries on the garment.
3.2 Perception of Fit

An individual’s perception of fit depends directly on the surrounding culture, the wearer’s
physical experience and psychology towards the society. Consumers judge a garment’s fit and
comfort level based on visual and tactile information. The comfort level of a garment affects the
consumer’s perception of fit. The smallest difference in fit that can actually be perceived by a
consumer is called fit threshold. A proper understanding of the fit threshold could be a valuable
tool in setting manufacturing tolerances, specifying the needed increments between different
sizes and improving custom-fit manufacturing. (Fit Issues- Perception of fit)
Consumers’ confidence in fit judgment refers to how certain an individual is regarding her
knowledge of fit and how confident she believes the selected garment would fit the body.
Researchers found that consumers’ confidence for selecting a product was related to consumers’
previous shopping experience (Laroche et al., 1996), the amount of information available about
the product (Peterson & Pitz, 1988; Urbany et al., 1989), and the perceived risk relevant to
purchasing the product (Cox & Stuart, 1964; Bennett & Harrell, 1975). (Pi, 2011)
3.3 Exploring Consumers’ Perception of Fit and Satisfaction with Apparel Fit in
General (Shin, 2013)
The purposes of this study were:
1. To develop an understanding of young consumers’ overall apparel fit satisfaction
4
2. To explore the meaning of garment fit in general from the consumer perspective
3. To qualitatively investigate the factors that may affect clothing fit satisfaction when
consumers evaluate their apparel fit.
The following research objectives were established for the study:
1. Assess young consumers’ overall satisfactions with apparel fit in general

2. Assess young consumers’ perceptions of apparel fit in general
3. Identify possible factors that young consumers consider in determining whether they are
dissatisfied/satisfied with fit
4. Identify the consequences of dissatisfaction with apparel fit
5. Identify gender differences in consumers’ perceptions and satisfaction regarding apparel
fit
The principle aim of this study was to enhance understanding of consumer satisfaction with
apparel fit in general (i.e., the perception of clothing fit in general which is achievable when
purchasing apparel in the marketplace).
The research design methodology for the study involved a mixture of qualitative as well as
quantitative methods with the former being more dominant since the objective of the study was
to gain an in-depth knowledge of the consumers’ perception and satisfaction with fit. The
sampling scheme used was convenience sampling (involving a focus group) wherein 70% of
the respondents were college undergraduate students. For the qualitative phase the audio
recordings from each interview were transcribed and then major themes were identified in the
data.
For the quantitative phase a paper based survey was conducted to measure the overall
satisfaction level of consumers using statistical methods. SPSS was used to collect the data.
Descriptive analysis included means, standard deviations and frequencies. The survey included
questions regarding the respondents’ personal background (like age, gender, ethnic background,
status, etc.).
Based on the interviews conducted five main themes were identified across the internship
transcripts:
 Physical fit- This refers to features of fit that are physically perceived when evaluating fit
in terms of the relationship between clothing and body, such as tightness and length.
5
Physical fit as described by participants consisted of tightness and length of clothing.
Participants unanimously mentioned garment length and tightness when asked what
good/bad fit in clothing meant to them. Participants described good fit in clothing as
when clothing met their desired tightness and length, depending on individual body
characteristics (i.e., height and body build) and clothing type.
 Aesthetic fit- This refers to aesthetic features of fit that are visually perceived and
assessed when looking at an individual’s dressed body, such as overall appearance related
to the body and attractiveness.
Aesthetic fit involves a garment's overall appearance related to body proportions, which
affects perceptions of attractiveness and which is often highly related to fashion trends.
Participant responses indicated that good fit in clothing was determined by whether the
clothing looked good in general, showed their body in a positive way and looked
attractive. Conversely, bad fit in clothing was defined as when the clothing looked bad or
showed the body in a negative way.
 Functional fit- This refers to features of fit that are perceived when the dressed body is
moving for activities, related to restriction or lack of restriction of movement.
Participants reported that good fit in clothing would not restrict their movement in
activities and that they would feel physically comfortable moving about while wearing it.
 Social context- This refers to a surrounding social situation, including social feedback
from others about fit.
Most participants reported that the desired fit performance in terms of physical, aesthetic, and
functional fit differed based on the social situation or occasion they were in.
 Social comfort- This refers to a feeling of well-being resulting from dissatisfaction or
satisfaction with fit within a given social context.
A socially comfortable feeling was expressed as a consequence of positive social feedback and
whether clothing was adequate to a social situation.
In addition to the four dimensions of consumers’ perceptions of fit, discussed above, many other
factors were found to have an effect on fit satisfaction, both before purchasing clothing (i.e.,
during shopping for clothing) and after purchasing clothing (i.e., in a use-situation). Those
6
factors were inconsistent size, price, the need for fit alteration, comfort, physical comfort related
to fit and psychological comfort related to fit.
Strategies for achieving good fit were also explored and the following factors were found to have
a positive impact on fit satisfaction:
a. Buying certain brands of clothing that participants have previously experienced as
providing good fit
b. Buying one-size-bigger clothing to accommodate shrinkage and size changes after
washing
c. Trying clothing on before buying it.
When asked what the consequences of ill fitting clothes were the respondents said they would
not purchase the item and stated the following reasons for avoiding ill fitting clothing:
a. Poor appearance
b. Bad feeling such as decreased confidence and comfort level
c. Money wastage
The quantitative and qualitative data combined revealed that male respondents were more likely
to report negative aspects of fit as compared to female respondents.
3.4 Analysis of Consumer’s Visual Perception of Garment Fit: Eye Tracking Study (Pi,
2011)
The objective of the study was to improve the ability to present fit and size information and
thereby reduce the return rates of apparel products. Computer aided design (CAD) companies,
such as ―Optitex.com‖ and ―My virtual model.com,‖ have developed virtual-try-on techniques
for the apparel industry, enabling visualization of garments on three dimensional (3D) avatars.
Virtual try-on is defined as a computer simulation that enables customers to select their
garments, and try them on 3D virtual models. The online virtual model was a visual tool that can
improve the ability to represent garment information (colour, design, texture, and fit) and
simulate the garment’s look on a consumer’s body. In addition, with the development of the 3D
body scanner (TC2, 2010), 3D body measurements of consumers could be easily obtained.
Two criteria were proposed to measure the functional realism of computer graphics:
a. Accuracy (natural object’s physically measurable properties were correctly represented in

the image)
7
b. Fidelity (the image could provide enough information so that the viewers were able to
perform tasks with the image as they did in the real world.
The purposes of the study were to:
a. Examine the effect of body sites on female consumers’ visual perceptions of a garment
b. Examine the relationship among female consumers’ body image discrepancy, body
satisfaction and visual perception of garment fit
c. Examine the relationship among female consumers’ visual perception, concern with
garment fit, confidence in fit judgement and purchase intent.
Eight hypotheses were investigated in this study:
Hypothesis 1- Participants’ total body image discrepancy will be negatively related to their
total body satisfaction;
Hypothesis 2a -Participants’ total body image discrepancy will be positively related to the
total duration of fixations over the garment when making judgments of fit;
Hypothesis 2b -Participants’ total body image discrepancy will be positively related to the
total number of fixations over the garment when making judgments of fit;
Hypothesis 3a - Participants’ total body satisfaction will be negatively related to the total
duration of fixations over the garment when making judgments of fit;
Hypothesis 3b - Participants’ total body satisfaction will be negatively related to the total
number of fixations over the garment when making judgments of fit;
Hypothesis 4a - Duration of fixations on human model will be negatively related to concern

with fit;
Hypothesis 4b - Number of fixations on human model will be negatively related to concern

with fit;
Hypothesis 5 - Consumers’ concern with garment fit will be negatively related to their
confidence in fit judgments;
8
Hypothesis 6 - Consumers’ concern with fit will be negatively related to their purchase
intent.
Hypothesis 7 - Consumers’ confidence with fit judgments will be positively related to their
purchase intent;
Hypothesis 8a - There is a significant difference among the body sites of the human model on
duration of fixations when judging the garment fit;
Hypothesis 8b - There is a significant difference among the body sites of the human model
on number of fixations when judging the garment fit.
Data were collected from a convenience sample of female college students from a medium-
sized mid-Atlantic university who were recruited by making class announcements. Individual
appointments were scheduled with the researcher.
A business blazer was chosen as the garment stimulus because it could cover most of the
body and was more fitting than other types of garments. Different sized blazers were used to
observe their fitting on one respondent each of all the sizes. Participants were asked to pay
attention to all the body sites of the human model visually and their attention was recorded
by an eye tracker. Various variables were used to judge and assess the comfort and fit of the
four sizes of blazers and scores were given. The scores were used to test whether
participants’ overall visual attention was related to their concern with fit and to examine the
relationship among those variables. Later the measures of body cathexis and body
discrepancy were recorded.
Participants’ visual attention was captured in the eye tracker. The following results were
obtained:
9
Exhibit 1: An example of stimulus divided into Area of Interests (AOIs)
Exhibit 2: An example of “hot-spot” graph
10
Exhibit 3: An example of “scan-path” graph
Exhibit 4: Hypotheses tested in this study
SPSS computer programs were used for statistical data analysis.
The results of the present study indicated:
1. There is significant relationship between female college consumers’ body image

discrepancy and their body satisfaction-Hypothesis 1 was supported.
11
2. Female consumers’ body image discrepancy and body satisfaction significantly predicted
their visual attention over the garments (how long and how often they looked at the
garments) when making garment fit judgments-Hypotheses 2 and 3 were supported.
3. No relationships between female consumers’ visual attention and their concern with
garment fit- Hypothesis 4 was not supported.
4. There is no significant relationship between female consumers’ concern with garment fit
and their confidence in fit judgment-Hypothesis 5 was not supported.
5. There is no significant relationship between female consumers’ concern with fit and
purchase intention- Hypothesis 7 was not supported.
6. Female consumers’ concern with fit was a significant predictor of their purchase intent
for the garment- Hypothesis 6 was supported.
7. Consumers attend to some human body sites more than others- Hypothesis 8 was
supported.
Despite certain useful results, there were some limitations as well:
1. More body related variables should have been included.

2. The visual differences caused by the four size differences were not examined.
3. The sample size was too small which could have led to skewed data.
4. The eye tracker used was a desk mounted setting. Results could have been more accurate
if a head mounted eye tracked could be used.
12
4. Research Design and Methodology
The study involved the application of Qualitative Research since the objective was to gain a
detailed insight into the consumers’ perception of fit and their understanding of the term for an
apparel product. The perception of garment fit was checked for the garments of a brand called
Global Desi which caters to Upper Class women and offers various categories of Indo-Western
clothing.
4.1 Brands, Product Categories and Sizes Offered

The first step involved listing the following:
1. Different product categories offered at Global Desi (GD).
This step was required to gather some basic data about the brand. The products
studied belonged anywhere between Spring-Summer & Autumn-Winter collections of
2015 and Spring Summer collection of 2017. The sizes offered were also noted.
2. The most selling products and sizes.
Once the major selling products and sizes were known it was easier to choose the
specific garments and sizes which had to be studied in detail. Focusing on certain
areas would bring about a clearer result. Given the time period available to complete
the project studying all products was not possible.
The above points were noted based on secondary data available in the company.
4.2 Sampling Scheme

The given brand offers garments with a starting price suitable mostly to women belonging to the
Upper Class. The target area for the study was been limited to Mumbai city.
1. The three most selling sizes noted were - S, M and L.

2. The three major selling garments were- Kurtis, Tunics and Maxi dresses.
3. Three styles were chosen to be studied per product category (3 kurtis, 3 tunics, 3 maxi
dresses).
4. The method of Convenience sampling in proportion to the population was used.
13
4.3 Arrangement of Garments
The garments for fit trials were arranged by the sponsoring company. Total of 27 garments were
arranged.
4.4 Fit Trials

Once the garments were arranged and the respondents were shortlisted, the fit trials began. For
the fit trials the respondents were called to the head office of the sponsoring company due to ease
of availability of resources, guidance, time and space for the study. They were of any of the 3
sizes selected.
The remaining trials which were evaluated from the store walk-ins were done during the store
visits although those trials were not evaluated in as detailed a method as the trials in the office.
They were done for the purpose of gaining more unbiased customer feedback. For those trials
size was not a criterion of selection.
First, a structured questionnaire was prepared to understand the respondents’ perception of

quality and fit of garments in detail.
Secondly, the respondents were called for the fit trials.
The respondent was then asked to wear one of the garments and show it to the researcher
followed by completion of the questionnaire.
The same procedure was followed for all the samples.
4.5 Possible Cause(s) and Solutions of Issues Highlighted

After completion of the personal interviews and fit trials the collected feedback was analyzed
over and again in order to understand the most occurring and impactful issues. The possible
causes and solutions of those issues were noted.
14
5. Findings
Here, the size category refers to the size of top wear.
1. The number and percentage of respondents per size are given as follows:
No. Of
Size % of Respondents
Respondents
S 12 48
M 8 32
L 5 20
Table 1 : Size wise distribution of respondents
2. Out of all the 25 respondents, given the size they wore in top wear like Kurtis and ladies’
tops, 24% respondents said that they wore a size smaller in GD as compared to the size
they usually wore in other brands. For example, if a respondent wore M in other brands
then she was found to fit into the S sample of GD. 24% respondents said that they fit into
the same size of GD as in other brands.
3. 36% respondents said they fit into either of two consecutive sizes in other brands
depending on the style of kurti or top (For example, they wore XS/S, M/L, L/XL, etc. in
other brands). Out of this 36%, 55% respondents said they fit into the lower of the two
sizes in GD (For example, if they usually fit in to either M or L size of other brands, then
they fit into the M size of GD).
4. 4% respondents did not know which size they fit into in other brands. 4% respondents
wore an XS in other brands and XS/S in GD. 4% respondents wore L/XL in other brands
but M in GD. 4% respondents wore M in other brands but L in GD.
5.1 Style Wise Findings

To understand the responses given for each style, graphs were plotted wherein the X-axis
displayed the Question Label, i.e., the component of the garment or the area of interest under
focus and the Y-axis displayed the percentage of respondents which answered. Please refer the
annexed Final Questionnaire as reference for options.
15
Style No. Code: 1 Style No.: SS17GR109KURD (Kurti with Sleeves)
Style No. Code: 1 (Part 1)

120
Percentage of Respondents
96
100 88
76 76 76
80 68 64 64
60 48 52 52 52 52
44 44 44
44 36 36
40 32 32 28 Option 1
24 20 24
16 16 12 12 12 12
20 8 8 8 8 8 Option 2
04 4 0 0 0 0
0 Option 3
Collar Look
Armhole
Bust
Across Back
Fit After Wearing
Collar Fit
Shoulder Length
Difficulty in Wearing
Reason for the Poor Fit
Neck Gaping
Button Placket Spacing
Sleeve Opening
Neck Width
Neck Drop
Blank
Question Label
Exhibit 5: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: SS17GR109KURD
Findings from the Fit Trials
Neck Width and Neck drop
1. Out of the 25 respondents, 32% respondents felt that the neckline was gaping a lot, 52%
felt that it was gaping a little and 16% felt that it wasn’t gaping at all.
2. Keeping the neckline and neck drop in mind, majority of the respondents felt that the
neckline was gaping a little although the neck drop and neck width seemed to fit fine or
extremely well.
16
Collar and Placket
1. 14 out of 25 respondents (nearly 50%) felt that the collar was gaping either at HPS, near
CF or at the back panel which often caused the collar to keep shifting back, leading to a
poor neck fit.
2. Fabric near the placket was stretching in almost all the 3 sizes which could be a result of
poor stitching or poor tension control during stitching.
3. In 60% of the fit trials the placket was found to be wavy, puckering and/or gaping at the
collar ends giving a very unappealing look aesthetically. The puckering or waviness
could be due to the light weight of the fabric which was not compatible with the weight
of the buttons used.
4. The distance between the buttons was found to be appropriate by most of the
respondents.
Collar is gaping at HPS

and collar ends.
Placket is stretching and

wavy and is also
puckering.
Exhibit 6: Gaping of collar and waviness in placket
17
Style No. Code : 1 (Part 2)
120
96
100 92
76 80 80 80
80 72 68
56 60 60 56
60 48 52
44 44 40
36 32 32
40 24 28 24
16 16 12 16 128
20 4 4 8 4 8 4 44 Option 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
Option 2
Hip
Garment Look
Age Bracket
Waist
Slit Length
Bottom Sweep
Garment Fit
Fabric Quality
Willingness to Buy the
Height Bracket
Overall Length
Overall Rating
Frequency
Sleeve Biceps
Option 3
Garment
Option 4
Question Label
Exhibit 7: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: SS17GR109KURD
Waist
1. In nearly 48% cases the fitting at waist was only partially

satisfactory. A lot of excess was found in the back panel at
waist level. Of these 48% respondents 58% said they wanted
the waist to be reduced by 0.8‖. The rest 42% didn’t say
anything.
Exhibit 8: Excess fabric in

the back panel at waist level
General Observation
1. The percentage of L size respondents was 20% and out of the 40% respondents felt that
the fit was okay for M except that the bust could be a little too fitted.
2. The slit length was preferred to start from where the pocket bags end for ease of
movement and to hide the pocket bags in 68% of the cases.
3. The location of the pockets was lower than necessary.
4. Nearly 60% respondents were not entirely satisfied with the overall fit.
18
Findings from Verification of Specification Sheets
1. Waist measurement according to the spec sheet and measurement checking was already
less by ¼‖ in S sample and there was still excess fabric found at the waist in the back
panel.
2. Collar band circumferences of samples were less than the required measurements by
almost ½‖. Collars ends were still gaping.
3. CF placket length was exceeding the required length in spec sheet by 3/8‖ in S sample.
4. Side pocket placement was lower than required by ½‖ in S and L samples according to
measurement check with spec sheet.
Style No. Code: 2 Style No.: 25115-KU-PK (Kurti Sleeveless)
120
100
100 96
92
88 88
80 76 76
68 68
60 56 Option 1
52
48
Option 2
40 32 Option 3
24 24 24 24
20 Blank
20 12
8 8 8
4 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
Difficulty Fit After Reason Neck Neck Drop Neck Shoulder Armhole Bust Across Waist
in Wearing for the Width Gaping Length Back
Wearing Poor Fit
Question Label
Exhibit 9: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: 25115-KU-PK
Armhole
1. Nearly 30% felt that the armhole was gaping. The shape of the armhole in-cut may have
to be reconsidered.
19
120
96
100
76 76 80
80
56 60 60 56
60 52 Option 1
44 40 40 44 40 Option 2
40 32 32 28
20 24 24 Option 3
16 12 12 12 12
20 8
4 0 0 0 4 0 2 415 Option 4
0 Option 5
Hip
Garment Look
Willingness to
Age Bracket
Garment Fit
Fabric Quality
Bottom Sweep
Height Bracket
Frequency
Overall Length
Overall Rating
Garment
Buy the
Question Label
Exhibit 10: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: 25115-KU-PK
Length
1. 60% of the respondents felt that the length was neither fine nor very
unsatisfactory and required an average decrease in length of about 4.46‖.
Exhibit 11: Length and print were

unsatisfactory for 60% respondents
General Observation
1. 76% of the respondents said that they won’t be willing to buy the garment even
though it fit them fine. 68% of them stated the reason being the fit or the prints and
colours which didn’t seem aesthetically appealing.
2. 60% respondents rated the garment as average.
3. It was observed that the side seam was hiking in the ―S‖ sample, affecting the look.
4. The neckline was cut well but while stitching the top stitch was not uniform.
20
1. Length from HPS to bottom edge was less by 1 ½‖ in S sample and 2‖ in L sample
but was still considered too long by 60% respondents overall.
2. Across back measurement was less by ¼‖ each in S as well as M samples and by ¾‖
in L sample but was acceptable to the respondents. Increasing the measurements
according to spec sheet could have led to gaping.
Style No. Code: 3 Style No.: 23903D-KU-314 (Kurti with Sleeves)
90 84
80 76
72 72
68
70
64 64
60
60
52 52
48
50 Option 1
40
40 36 36 Option 2
32 32 32
28 28
30 24 24 24 Option 3
20
20 16 Blank
12 12 12 12
9 8
10 4 4 4 4 4
0 0 1
0
Difficulty Fit After Reason Neck Neck Neck Shoulder Armhole Bust Across Sleeve Sleeve
in Wearing for the Width Drop Gaping Length Back Opening Biceps
Wearing Poor Fit
Question Label
Exhibit 12: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: 23903D-KU-314
Shoulder Length
1. 12% respondents felt that the shoulder length fit them extremely poor and should be
increased by an average of 0.7‖.
2. 40% felt that the shoulder length fit them neither too well nor too poor.
3. 48% felt it fit them extremely well.
21
120
96
100 88
80 Option 1
76 72 72
80 68 68 Option 2
64 60
56 Option 3
60
4036 44 40
36 Option 4
40 32 28
24 20 24 20 20 20 24 24
20 12 8 8 12
0 0 4 4 0 0 4 0 2 41
0
Waist
Hip
Garment Look
Height Bracket
Overall Length
Overall Rating
Slit Length
Willingness to
Age Bracket
Garment Fit
Bottom Sweep
Fabric Quality
Frequency
Buy the…
Question Label
Exhibit 13: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: 23903D-KU-314
Waist
1. 40% of the respondents felt that the fitting at waist was too poor and thought that the
overall waist measurements could be reduced by 1 ½‖ approximately.
2. 36% of the total respondents felt that the waist felt neither too well fitting nor too poor
fitting. 67% of the 36% respondents felt that the waist measurement could be reduced by
an average of 1 ½‖ and 22% felt that it could be increased by 1/4‖.
3. The remaining 24% respondents did not have any complaints regarding this issue.
22
S M L
Exhibit 14: Loose fitting at waist

Hip
1. 20% of all the respondents felt that the hip fitting was extremely poor and that its
measurement must be reduced by an average of approximately 1‖, as shown in the figure
below.
2. 44% respondents felt that the hip fitting was fine but not too impressive and the
measurement could be reduced by an average of 0.9‖.
3. The remaining 36% respondents felt that the hip fit well.
23
S M L
Exhibit 15: Loose fitting at hip

General Observation
1. 20% felt that the garment fit was too poor, 52% felt that the fit was neither too good nor
too poor and the rest 20% felt it fit them very well.
2. Out of the 52% respondents 15.4% respondents thought that the fit wasn’t either too good
or too bad as it was too loose, 61.5% felt that it was because the garment was somewhat
loose and 7.7% felt it was somewhat tight. The remaining 15.4% did not give any definite
response.
3. Some respondents felt that the fabric quality was not worth the price while others felt that
the fitting at torso was okay but from the waist the sample was too loose.
4. In 84% of the trials it was noticed that the CF was hiking. Out of that in 50% of the trials
an average hiking of 1‖ was noticed in samples of all the sizes. The hiking could have
been around 2‖ though.
24
Exhibit 16: Centre Front hiking by 1”-2”
5. In 60% of the trials puckering was noticed in the side seams and/or slit seams. The
puckering was noticed even after ironing the samples. The seams were wavy too. All
these samples belonged to all the 3 sizes chosen. In one ―M‖ sized sample slight
puckering was noticed at the embroidery.
Exhibit 17: Puckering in various seams

6. 80% of the ―L‖ size respondents felt that the overall fit was too loose of which 75% fit
well into the ―M‖ sample instead of ―L‖.
7. Around 12% of the ―M‖ size respondents felt that they would fit into an ―S‖ of the
sample.
8. It was observed that the chest measurement was too much and should have been reduced
by approximately 1‖ overall.
25
1. All measurements except for the length from HPS to bottom edge were within
tolerance according to the spec sheet.
2. Length from HPS to bottom edge was less than the required length by 1 ¼‖ in S
sample, 1 ¾‖ in M sample and 1 ½‖ in L sample.
Style No. Code: 4 Style No.: SS17GN012TUMUL (Tunic with Sleeves)
90 84
80 76 76
72 72 Option 1
68 68
70 64 64 64
60
60 52 Option 2
48 48
50 44 Option 3
40 36 36
32 32
28 28 28 28 28 Blank
30 24 24 24
20
20 12 12 12
10 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
0 0 0 0 0
0
Collar Look
Armhole
Bust
Across Back
Fit After Wearing
Collar Fit
Shoulder Length
Sleeve Opening
Difficulty in Wearing
Reason for the Poor Fit
Neck Gaping
Button Placket Spacing

Neck Drop
Neck Width
Question Label
Exhibit 18: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: SS17GN012TUMUL
Neck Width and Neck Drop
1. 12% respondents felt that the neckline was gaping a lot, while 60% felt that it was gaping
a little. The rest 28% felt that the neckline wasn’t gaping at all. Therefore, in 72% of the
cases the neckline was found to be gaping. There was no correlation between the
satisfaction with the neck drop and the gaping in neckline as in many cases where the
respondent was satisfied the neck drop, the neckline was found to be gaping a little.
26
Collar
1. 4% felt the collar looked ugly, 76% felt it looked average and the rest 20% felt it looked
attractive. Overall, the collar looked fine.
2. 12% respondents consisting of M and L respondents felt
that the collar fit extremely poor while 64% respondents
felt it fit average as it was gaping in some cases, mostly at
the Centre Front or High Point Shoulder. The rest 24%
respondents didn’t have any complaints regarding the
collar’s fit.
Exhibit 19: Gaping of collar

at HPS and at collar ends
Armhole
1. Only 4% respondents didn’t like the fit of the armhole and preferred its location to be
lowered by ½‖. The armhole was found to be too tight.
2. 48% respondents had a lukewarm response towards its fit. It included respondents of all
the three sizes and most of them said that the armhole was slightly tight. They preferred
it to be lowered/ increased by an average of 0.4‖.
3. The remaining 48% respondents felt that the armhole fit extremely well.
Across Back
1. 52% respondents had an average response towards the fitting

at across back. Out of this 52%, 38.46% respondents wanted
the measurement to be increased by an average of 0.58‖.
2. The rest 48% respondents were satisfied with the fit at across
back.
Exhibit 20: Loose fitting

in the across back region
27
120
96
100
80 80
76
80 72 72 72
64
60 60
56
60 52
48 48 Option 1
44 44
36 36 36
40 32 32 Option 2
28
24 24
20 20 Option 3
16
20 12 12
8 8
4 4 4 4 4 Option 4
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 Option 5
Hip
Garment Look
Waist
Slit Length
Age Bracket
Garment Fit
Willingness to Buy
Fabric Quality
Bottom Sweep
Height Bracket
Frequency
Sleeve Biceps
Overall Length
Overall Rating
the Garment
Question Label
Exhibit 21: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: SS17GN012TUMUL
Waist
1. 8% respondents were very dissatisfied with the fitting at waist and

required the fitting to be reduced by 2‖.
2. 48% respondents said that the fitting at waist was neither too
satisfactory nor too unsatisfactory. Out of this 48%, 25%
respondents wanted an average increase of 0.42‖ while 41.66%
respondents wanted an average decrease of 1.14‖.
3. The rest 44% respondents were very satisfied with the fitting at
waist.

General Observation
1. While 4% respondents felt that the garment fit very poor as it was somewhat tight, 64%
respondents were not entirely satisfied with the fit but weren’t too disappointed either.
43.75% of this 64% said it was because the garment was somewhat loose while another
28
43.75% respondents said it was somewhat tight. The remaining respondents did not
justify the reason. The rest 32% of the total respondents were satisfied with the fit.
2. Most of the respondents rated the garment average. 48% respondents said they wouldn’t
be willing to buy the garment due to reasons like loose fit and unsatisfactory prints and
colours.
3. The neckline was found to be gaping in at least 20% of the cases.
4. The placket was found to be wavy and gaping at collar ends in around 28% of the cases.
5. There was slight excess at chest in 20% of the cases, especially in the S and M sized
samples. There was excess at waist level as well.
1. Waist, hip and across back measurements were within tolerance limit but still looked very
loose in many cases.
2. First button placement was according to specs.
29
Style No. Code: 5 Style No.: 56890-TU-852 (Tunic with Sleeves)
120
96 92
100
80 80
80 72 72 Option 1
60 60 64
56 56 52 56
60 48 Option 2
40 36 40 36 36 40
40 Option 3
24 20 20 24 24 20
20 16 12 8 8 12 12 Blank
4 4 4 4 0 4 0 4 0 4 0
0
Question Label
Exhibit 23: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: 56890-TU-852
1. Nearly 60% respondents felt that the neckline was gaping either a lot or a little. 4%
respondents said that the neckline was gaping a lot while 56% respondents said that the
neckline was gaping a little irrespective of whether the neck drop and neck width fit fine
or not.
Exhibit 24: Stretching of fabric above bust level near the button placket
Collar
1. 96% respondents said that the collar looked fine while only 4% respondents said that it
looked very attractive.
30
2. 12% respondents said that the collar fit extremely poor due to its ends not matching on
the same level or gaping. 52% respondents said that the collar was fitting average as the
neckline was gaping slightly. The remaining 36% respondents said that the collar fit
extremely well.
Across Back
1. 12% respondents felt that the fitting at across back was too tight and needed to be
increased by ½‖.
48% respondents said the fitting was fine though not too satisfactory out of which 33.3%
respondents said that they would like the measurement to be increased by 0.63‖ overall at across
back. The remaining 40% respondents said they were very satisfied with its fitting.

120
96
100 84
80 76 80 76
80 68 68 64 Option 1
56 60 56
60 48 48
40 40 36 36 Option 2
40 32 32
20 20 24 24
16 12 16 20 16 12
20 Option 3
20 4 8
0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4
0
Question Label
Exhibit 25: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: 56890-TU-852
General Observation
1. 4% respondents (size S) felt the garment fit extremely poor as it was too loose. 56%
respondents said the garment fitting was average, of which 64.28% respondents said it
was because the garment was slightly loose while 35.71% said it was because it was
slightly tight. 40% respondents said that the garment fit them extremely well.
31
2. Overall the garment received an average rating each for looks, fabric quality, fit and
overall experience.
3. 76% respondents said they wouldn’t be willing to buy the garment due to its unappealing
look, the prints, colours and in some cases, due to the poor fit as well.
4. Distance between the buttons was found to be irregular in the size S sample. The placket
was also found to be stretching in some cases.
5. In 24% cases the collar and/or neckline was found to be gaping.
6. Armhole needed to be reshaped.
7. Slight excess was found above the bust level and at waist level in some cases.
1. Length from HPS to bottom edge was less than the measurements mentioned on the spec
sheet by 3-3 ½‖, exceeding the tolerance limit, but the length looked satisfying according
to the respondents.
Style No. Code: 6 Style No.: AW1639298TU718 (Tunic with Sleeves)
120 Style No. Code: 6 (Part 1)
100 96
88
80 76 76
68 68 68
64 64
60 Option 1
60 52
44 Option 2
40 36 Option 3
32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32
28
24 24 24 24 Blank
20
20 16 16
12 12
8 8 8 8 8
4 4 4
0 0 0 0
0
Placket…
Collar Look
Difficulty in
Armhole
Bust
Button
Across Back
Wearing
Opening
Collar Fit
Neck Gaping
Shoulder
the Poor Fit
Fit After
Reason for
Neck Drop
Neck Width
Sleeve
Length
Wearing
Question Label
Exhibit 26: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: AW1639298TU718
32
1. 32% respondents felt that the neck width fit was extremely poor while 32% more felt it
fit neither too well nor too poor.
2. While 16% respondents felt the neck line was gaping a lot, 64% felt it was gaping a little.
Hence, in 80% cases the neckline was gaping.
Collar
1. In 72% cases the collar fit was found to be either too poor or average. The collar ends
were found to be turning.
Shoulder Length
1. The shoulder length was found to be extremely poor in 52% cases and partially
unsatisfactory in 36% cases.
2. 68% respondents felt that the shoulders were drooping by approximately 0.5‖.
Exhibit 27: Fabric stretching near the button placket & shoulders drooping
33
120
100 96
80
80 76
72
68
64
60
60 56 56
48 48 Option 1
44 44
4040
36 36 Option 2
40 32 32 32 32
28 28 28
24 24 24 Option 3
20 20 20 20
20 12 12 12 Option 4
8 8 8
4 4
0 0 0 0 0
0 Option 5
Hip
Garment Look
Age Bracket
Waist
Slit Length
Willingness to Buy
Bottom Sweep
Garment Fit
Height Bracket
Fabric Quality
Overall Length
Overall Rating
Frequency
Sleeve Biceps
the Garment
Question Label
Exhibit 28: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.:AW1639298TU718
Waist
1. 32% respondents felt that the fitting at waist was extremely poor and demanded a
decrease of approximately 1.9‖.
2. 48% respondents felt that the fitting was neither too good nor too bad of which 50%
demanded and average decrease of 0.75‖.
3. The remaining 20% felt that fit was extremely well.
Hip
1. 60% respondents were dissatisfied with the fit at hip level of which 20% felt that the hip
fit them extremely poor and the remaining 40% it fit them average. 60% of these
respondents felt that an average decrease of 1.3‖ was required.
34
Exhibit 29: Loose fitting at waist and hip level
Slit Length
1. 68% respondents were dissatisfied with the slit length.
General Observation
1. Nearly 80% respondents graded the garments look as average or poor.

2. 64% respondents weren’t satisfied with the overall fit of the garment. It was found to be
too loose. The neckline was falling to one side or backwards in many cases.
3. 76% respondents said they weren’t willing to purchase the garment.
4. Lot of excess was found in the back panel at waist level.
5. The length of the back panel was considered too long for a tunic.
6. The button plackets were overlapping at the bottom hem.
7. Bottom hem was uneven.
Exhibit 30: Uneven bottom hem
35
1. Length of back panel according to spec sheet should have been 41‖ and was exceeding by
½‖ and 1‖ in the M and L samples respectively.
2. Across back measurement was past the tolerance limit in S sample, but was loose for all
sizes.
3. Waist and hip measurements were within tolerance limit for all sizes but were loose for
many respondents
Style No. Code: 7 Style No.: AW1625096MX180 (Maxi Dress with Sleeves)

90 84
80 80 80
76
80 72 72 72 72 72
68
70 60 Option 1
60 Option 2
50
36 Option 3
40
28 28 28 28 28
30 20 20 Blank
16 16
20 12 12 12
8
10 4 4 4 4 4
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
Armhole
Bust
Difficulty in
Across Back
Fit After Wearing
Shoulder Length
Reason for the
Sleeve Biceps
Neck Gaping
Sleeve Opening
Neck Drop
Neck Width
Wearing
Poor Fit
Question Label
Exhibit 31: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: AW1625096MX180
36
120
96
100 88
80 80 84 84
76
80 68 68
60 64
56 Option 1
60
44 44 40 Option 2
36 36
40 28
24 24 Option 3
16 20 16
20 12 8 12 8 8 8 Option 4
4 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 0 0
Option 5
0
Waist
Hip
Garment Look
Height Bracket
Overall Length
Overall Rating
Slit Length
Willingness to
Age Bracket
Garment Fit
Bottom Sweep
Fabric Quality
Frequency
Buy the…
Question Label
Exhibit 32: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.:AW1625096MX180
Fabric Quality
1. 44% respondents felt the fabric quality was average while 44% more said they were
satisfied with the fabric quality and the remaining 12% felt that the quality was poor.
General Observation
1. The overall feedback of the garment was positive.

2. 64% respondents said they would be willing to buy the garment.
3. The back neck embroidery was missing in the ―S‖ sample.
S M L
Exhibit 33: Back neck embroidery missing in “S” sample
37
4. The lining was visible through the slit opening. It should have been
1‖ shorter.
Exhibit 34: Lining

visible through the slit
1. Length for S and L samples was -2‖ and for M sample it was -1 ½‖. Measurement in spec
sheet was 52‖.
2. For respondents of height 5’5‖ and over, the length was falling short by 2‖ and for
respondents of height 5’5‖ and below, the present height was fine but could have been
longer.
3. Neck width measurement was +3/4‖ in S and L samples.
4. ½ bust measurement was -1/2‖ for M and L samples.
5. Hence, 75% of M respondents faced difficulty in wearing the garment and 40% of L
respondents faced difficulty in doing the same.
38
Style No. Code: 8 Style No.: IM26406MX496 (Maxi Dress Sleeveless)

100 92 92
90 84 84
80 80
80
68
70 64 64
60 52 Option 1
48
50 44 Option 2
40 32
28 Option 3
30 24 24
20 20 Blank
20 16 16
12 12
8 8 8
10 4 4 4 4 4
0 0 0 0
0
Waist
Difficulty in
Armhole
Bust
Wearing
Across Back
Reason for the
Neck Gaping
Shoulder
Fit After
Neck Drop
Neck Width
Length
Wearing
Poor Fit
Question Label
Exhibit 35: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: IM26406MX496

120
96
100 Option 1
80 80
80 Option 2
68 68 68
56 Option 3
60 52 52
40 44 44 4448 44 Option 4
40 28 28 28 Option 5
20 20 20
20 12 8 12 8 12
4 4 4 4 0 0 4 0 00
0
Hip
Garment Look
Age Bracket
Garment Fit
Willingness to Buy
Bottom Sweep
Fabric Quality
Height Bracket
Overall Length
Overall Rating
Frequency
the Garment
Question Label
Exhibit 36: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: IM26406MX496
39
Hip
1. 52% respondents felt that the fitting at hip was extremely poor, 32% felt that the fit was
average while the remaining 16% felt that the fit was good.
General Observation
1. The garment received a positive feedback for its looks.

2. The garment fit though received an average response due to gaping in armhole and neck.
3. 80% respondents were willing to buy the garment.
4. The length was more than necessary for most of the respondents.
Exhibit 37: Length was more than necessary.
1. Length from HPS to bottom edge according to specs should have been 56‖ in S and M
samples and 57‖ in L samples.
2. S sample- Length was +1/2‖; hence, 56 ½‖. Length demanded was 53 ½‖
3. M sample- Length was +1/2‖; hence, 56 ½‖. Length demanded was 53 ½‖

(approximately).
4. L sample- Length was -1/2‖; hence, 56 ½‖. Length demanded was 52 ½‖

(approximately).
5. Hip measurement was +3/4‖ in L sample.
40
Style No. Code: 9 Style No.: GJ56092MX500 (Maxi Dress Sleeveless)

100 92
88
90 80 Option 1
80 76
Option 2
70 64
60
60 52 52 Option 3
48
50 40 Option 4
40 32 32 32 32 32
28 28 Blank
30 24 24
20 16 16
12
8 8 8
10 4 4 4 4
0 0 0
0
Difficulty in Fit After Reason for Neck Width Neck Drop Neck Shoulder Armhole Bust Across Back
Wearing Wearing the Poor Fit Gaping Length
Question Label
Exhibit 38: Graph showing responses for few questions on Style No.: GJ56092MX500
Neck Line
1. In 24% cases the neckline was gaping a lot, in 48% cases it was gaping a little and in the
remaining 28% cases it wasn’t gaping at all. Therefore, in approximately 72% cases the neckline
was gaping.
Exhibit 39: Gaping in the neckline

Armhole
1. In 60% cases the armhole fit was unsatisfactory. The armhole was
gaping in many cases.
Exhibit 40: Gaping in armhole
41
Bust
1. In 52% cases the fitting at bust was extremely poor. Almost 85% of
these 52% respondents demanded an average decrease of 1.3‖ in the
bust level.
2. 32% respondents were neither dissatisfied nor satisfied with the fitting
at bust. 75% of them demanded an average decrease of 1.4‖.
3. The remaining 16% felt that the bust fitting was good.
Exhibit 41: Loose fitting at bust

120
96
100
84
80 Option 1
72 76
80 68 68
Option 2
52 56
60 48
44 44 40 4448 Option 3
32 32 36 32 32 32
40 28 Option 4
24 20 20
16 128 1212
20 8 8 8 Option 5
0 0 4 0 0 4 0 00
0
Hip
Garment Look
Waist
Age Bracket
Slit Length
Garment Fit
Bottom Sweep
Height Bracket
Fabric Quality
Buy the Garment
Frequency
Overall Length
Overall Rating
Willingness to
Question Label
Exhibit 42: Graph showing responses for remaining questions on Style No.: GJ56092MX500
Waist
1. 68% respondents weren’t satisfied with the fitting at waist level. Lot of excess
was found in the back panel in most cases. 82% of these respondents said they
demanded an average decrease of approximately 1‖ in the waist level.
2. The remaining 32% respondents were satisfied with the fit at waist.

Overall Length and Slit Length
1. 44% respondents thought the overall length was extremely poor and demanded and average
decrease of 3‖.
2. 36% respondents were partially dissatisfied with the overall length.
42
3. The remaining 20% respondents were satisfied with the length.
4. Approximately 68% respondents weren’t satisfied with the slit length.
5. The remaining 32% respondents were satisfied with the slit length.
General Observation
1. Approximately 92% respondents weren’t completely satisfied with the garment fit.
2. The slit kept shifting toward back or front due to the heavy weight of the printed fabric.
3. Puckering was found in many seams.
Exhibit 44: Puckering in seams
1. The length from HPS to bottom edge should be 56‖ in S & M samples and 57‖ in L sample
according to specs.
2. On checking the actual measurements of the samples;
S sample was 56 ½‖
M sample was 55 ¼‖
L sample was 56‖
3. Hip measurement in L sample was less by 1‖.
4. Side slit opening length in S sample was ½‖ more than required length according to the spec
sheet.
5. Front and back neck drop measurement in S sample was past the tolerance limit.
6. Most preferred styles were:
43
SS17GR109KURD IM26406MX496 SS17GN012TUMUL
Exhibit 45: Most preferred styles per product category
44
5.2 Height Wise Findings
Following is a size wise distribution of respondents into the different height categories:
5. Among the four height categories, i.e., Under 5’, 5’-5”, 5’5”-5’8” and 5’8” and over,
none of the respondents belonged to the first category. Hence, the categories have been
combined into two- Under 5’5” and 5’5” and over.
6. The number of respondents per size category are given as follows:
Height Category
Size Total Total Percentage
Under 5'5" 5'5" and Over
S 11 1 12 48
M 5 3 8 32
L 4 1 5 20
Total 20 5 25 100
Table 2: Height wise and size wise distribution of respondents
Apart from style wise analysis, an analysis displaying the relationship between the height of the
respondent and overall length as well as slit length of the garments was done. Below are 9 tables-
one table per style and the average increase (written as Inc.) and average decrease (written as
Dec.) demanded for overall length and slit length by respondents under each height category.
Average Change Average Change

Style Demanded in Demanded in Slit
Product Height
Number Style No. Overall Length Length
Type Category
Code
Inc. Dec. Inc. Dec.
1 SS17GR109KURD Kurti Under 5'5" 0.00 3.00 3.21 5.00
Percentage of respondents 80 0 12 52 4
5'5" and
1 SS17GR109KURD Kurti 0.00 5.00 3.58 0.00
over
Average Change Demanded 0.00 4.00 3.40 5.00
Total Percentage of respondents 100 0 16 68 4
Table 3: Changes required for SS17GR109KURD

Product Height
type Category
Code
Inc. Dec. Inc. Dec.
2 25115-KU-PK Kurti Under 5'5" 0.00 4.59 N/A N/A
Percentage of respondents 80 0 44 N/A N/A
2 25115-KU-PK Kurti 5'5" and over 0.00 3.00 N/A N/A
Percentage of respondents 20 0 4 N/A N/A
Average Change Demanded 0.00 3.80 N/A N/A
Total Percentage of respondents 100 0 48 N/A N/A
Table 4: Changes required for 25115-KU-PK
45
Average
Average Change
Style Change
Product Height Demanded in Slit
Number Style No. Demanded in
type Category Length
Code Overall Length
Inc. Dec. Inc. Dec.
3 23903D-KU-314 Kurti Under 5'5" 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00
5'5" and
3 23903D-KU-314 Kurti 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
over
Table 5: Changes required for 23903D-KU-314

Product Height
type Category
Code
Inc. Dec. Inc. Dec.
4 SS17GN012TUMUL Tunic Under 5'5" 2.00 5.75 1.13 0.00
5'5" and
4 SS17GN012TUMUL Tunic 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
over
Table 6: Changes required for SS17GN012TUMUL

Product Height
type Category
Code
Inc. Dec. Inc. Dec.
5 56890-TU-852 Tunic Under 5'5" 0.00 4.00 1.00 0.00
5'5"and
5 56890-TU-852 Tunic 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
over
Table 7: Changes required for 56890-TU-852
46
Product Height
type Category
Code
Inc. Dec. Inc. Dec.
6 AW1639298TU718 Tunic Under 5'5" 0.00 3.21 0.83 0.00
5'5" and
6 AW1639298TU718 Tunic 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
over
Table 8: Changes required for AW1639298TU718

Product Height
type Category
Code
Inc. Dec. Inc. Dec.
7 AW1625096MX180 Maxi Under 5'5" 1.67 2.50 0.00 0.00
5'5" and
7 AW1625096MX180 Maxi 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
over
Table 9: Changes required for AW1625096MX180

Product Height
type Category
Code
Inc. Dec. Inc. Dec.
8 IM26406-MX-496 Maxi Under 5'5" 0.00 3.24 1.67 1.00
5'5" and
8 IM26406-MX-496 Maxi 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
over
Table 10: Changes required for IM26406-MX-496
47
Product Height
type Category
Code
Inc. Dec. Inc. Dec.
9 GJ56092-MX-500 Maxi Under 5'5" 0.00 3.12 1.75 2.50
5'5" and
9 GJ56092-MX-500 Maxi 3.00 0.00 2.00 1.00
over
Table 11: Changes required for GJ56092-MX-500
48
5.3 Store Visit Findings
Other Optional
S. Store Size Garment/Product General Observations/ Information
Size in GD (if Style Number Customer Comments
No. Location tried Type collected from the store
any)
Fit OK. Usually didn’t fit into S size of Hottest selling styles:
SS17GI079TPTRL Top other brands, hence felt happy to be fitting
1 S N/A into S size. Not a regular customer.
SS17GS004TPCF Top Fit OK. SS17GR039TURC
Fit OK. Stomach bulge was prominent, SS17GB006TPCS
SS17I021MXXC Maxi hence, didn’t buy the style. Regular
customer.
2 XXL N/A
Fit OK but slit was too long. Didn’t prefer SS17GZ025TPRY
SS17GN007KURY Kurti the slit length for her size as stomach bulge
would be prominent.
3 S N/A SS17GZ029TPRY Top Fit not OK. Armhole was a little tight. SS17GZ029TPRY
Inorbit, SS17GR049TPLCE
Vashi SS17GN130KURY Kurti Fit OK. Regular customer.
4 S N/A
SS17GSB030KURYM Kurti Fit OK. Major selling size: S
Fit OK. Fit was fine generally. No colour

5 L M (For Kurtis) SS17GS026MXRY Maxi
fading. Regular customer.
SS17GS014DRRYM Dress Fit OK.
6 L N/A
SS17GS009TURYS Tunic Fit OK.
SS17GS002TUCF Tunic Fit OK. Neckline shape not ok. It was

7 S N/A protruding in some parts due to which it
doesn’t sit well on the body.
SS17GN016KURY Kurti
49
Other Optional
any)
Fit OK. Fabric was soft, had a good feel There was a size misinterpretation
SS17GSTL09 Kurti
and touch. problem with the style
8 S N/A Fit OK. Usually the fabrics of the SS17GR009DRRC. It was a very
SS17GS005KURYS Kurti garments have a soft feel. Regular loose fitting style due to which a
customer. garment of this style made for a
SS17GS002TUCF Tunic Fit OK. particular size actually fit well on a
customer two or three sizes smaller
9 S N/A even with a loose fit on the body.
SS17GR212TPRY Top Fit OK.
Hence, no options in the style were
available for smaller sizes like XS and
10 SS17GZ004TUCF Tunic Fit OK. S as the garments in GD were not
Fit OK. Print and design not very unique. made in sizes smaller than XS.
SS17GB005KURL Kurti
Preferred garments with sleeves.
Infiniti
11 Mall, XS S Fit OK. Preferred sleeveless clothing Most fast moving style:
Andheri though. Also preferred Westside (XS) for SS17GS014DREYM
SS17GI079TPTRL Top
Indian wear. Satisfied with the fit of both
the brands. Regular customer.
Kurtis sold the most, especially in
XL SS17GN025DRRY Dress Fit OK.
larger sizes like XL, XXL.
12 L
Fit OK. Wore L or XL usually but fit into
M SS17GR009DRRC Dress
M of this style. Style with a problem:
SS17GS005KURYS. Too much
Fit OK. Regular customer. Also preferred puckering at the front seams.
13 XXL N/A SS17GR023KURY Kurti
AND and Westside.
Fit not OK. M was a little too loose and S

14 M S SS17GZ158MXRY Maxi
was too tight.
50
Other Optional
any)
SS17GS014DRRYM Dress
Fit OK. Regular customer. Satisfied with
the prints.
15 L N/A SS17GZ004TUCF Tunic
Infiniti Fit OK. But didn’t like the look of gathers
Mall, SS17GN003TPCF Top at the waistline as it made the body look
Andheri heavier.
16 SS17GR049TPLCE Top Fit OK. Fits into XL of other sizes but in
GD fits into L. Also preferred Chemistry.
L N/A Satisfied with the fit of GD garments.
17 SS17GR165TUMO Tunic Sometimes the designs were not very
unique. Overall rated GD a good brand.
Fit not OK. Got sleeves altered at the A lot of fit alterations were required,
armhole. L was too loose and M was too generally for armhole and bust region.
18 M L SS17G35181KU500 Kurti tight at the sleeves. Preferred rayon a lot Sometimes, the length had to be
Khar due to its durability, resistance to reduced to one's height. Most selling
wrinkles. sizes were M and L.
Fit not OK. Armhole was gaping. Regular
19 S XS SS17GZ044DRRL Dress
customer.
Fit OK. Bought the piece. Fit would have SS17GB004KURY- V neck not sitting
been fine for XL but slit opening location well. Puckering at the neckline.
SS17GI065KURY Kurti was very low due to which fitting at hip -SS17GI0532PKOT- Front bottom
20 XXL XL was tight. Hence, bought XXL. Got the panel at CF is wavy, not straight.
fitting done at bust. Regular customer. Puckering in the button placket.
Elbows are tight in S sample.
Palladium, SS17GI008KUCG Kurti Fit OK. Did not buy the garment. - SS17GR171TPMO- Shoulder length
Lower is very less.
Parel SS17GR032KURY kurti - SS17GS091TURYM- A/H too deep.
SS17GS019KURY kurti - SS17GB050DRDNM- Neckline at
21 XL N/A Fit OK for all. Regular customer. princess seam is uncomfortable
SS17GI065KURY kurti
- SS17GR211TUMO- Neckline is too
SS17GN012TUMUL Tunic deep. Neck piping, princess seam and
button placket are puckering.
22 M N/A SS17GN012TUMUL Tunic Fit OK. Not a regular customer.
51
Fit OK. Waist slightly tight. Not a regular - SS17GZ089TUNET- Front
23 XL N/A SS17GN012TUMUL Tunic
customer. embroidery panel is puckering and has
N/A SS17GB009KURY Kurti excess. Neckline is gaping and not
24 M Fit OK. Not a regular customer. sitting well.
N/A SS17GR032KURY Kurti
SS17GS026MXRY Maxi Fit OK.
25 M N/A SS17GS029MXRY Maxi A/H too deep. Fit OK otherwise.
SS17GR140MXRL Maxi Slightly fitted at waist.
SS17GN040DRRL- This style is a
Usually wore M but fit into XS for this
26 XS M SS17GB012KURL Kurti cold shoulder dress but the cut out at
style. Fit OK for XS. Regular customer.
shoulder was found to be too small.
27 S,M M SS17GN131DRRY Dress Fit Ok. was resulting in poor aesthetics.
- SS17GZ012DRRY- Puckering in the
28 S N/A SS17GI0532PK0T Two Piece Fit OK. Slightly tight at elbow CF artwork and sleeve opening is too
Fit OK but shoulders were drooping. The broad.
customer usually faced problems as she - SS17GZ019TURY- too much
29 XXL N/A SS17GB005KURL Kurti was narrower at torso but broader below Puckering in front panel near
waist; hence, had to get fitting done. embroider.
Viviana
Bought the style though. -SS17GN010MXMUL- style ok but
Mall,
Fit OK. Sleeves were too long and loose. colours were found to be too dull.
Thane
30 S N/A SS17GZ012DRRY Dress Got fitting done. Length shortened by 2" Sleeves are quite wide.
approx and width reduced by 1". - SS17GR138KULD- too Puckering in
the front panel near the button placket
SS17GB012KURL Kurti Fit OK. Didn’t like the style though.
and lapped seams. Patch pocket had
Puckering and excess.
- SS17GR009DRRC- Overall style is
31 M S
Fit OK for XS. Slight puckering at too loose. Respondent could jump two
SS17GI075KUMD Kurti
keyhole. Regular customer. or three sizes down.
- SS17GS029- Puckering in the front
panel seams.
Table 12: Store Visit Data
52
6. Results & Discussion
6.1 Style Wise Results & Discussion
1. Issue: In approximately 56% styles the neckline was gaping. 20% of these styles were
that of maxi dresses without a collar or placket.
Possible Solution: In such a case, the specifications must be strictly followed.
2. Issue: In the rest 80% of such styles, which included few styles of kurtis and tunics, the
collar band circumference was less than specified in the specification sheet. Despite that,
the collar ends were turning and gaping was noticed at HPS.
Possible Solution: The specifications could be revised. The collar ends could also be
turning due to poor quality of fusing used.
3. Issue: The fabric near the button placket was stretching in 44% styles which included a
kurti (Style No.: SS27GR109KURD) and 3 tunics (Style Nos.: SS17GN012TUMUL,
56890TU852 & AW1639298TU718).
Possible Solution: The chest measurements could be revised. The chest measurement was
specified only for Style No.: AW1639298TU718 wherein the measurement was ½‖ less
than specified. Similar errors could be possible in the other styles as well. If so, then
specifications must be followed strictly. If not, the specifications could be revised.
Another solution to this problem could be repositioning of the first button. The first
button could be repositioned up by ½‖ to avoid the stretching of the placket, i.e., it should
be 3 ½‖ from the neck seam instead of 4‖ as mentioned in the specification sheets. The
placement is different in different styles. A standard measurement must be specified.
4. Issue: Button placket was wavy in some kurtis and tunics.
Possible Solution: Either the spacing between the buttons was not appropriate or the
fabric and the quality of buttons used were not compatible. Spacing between the buttons
could be kept as 2‖.
Heavier buttons could be avoided with lighter fabrics like rayon.
5. Issue: Excess fabric near the chest area was found in all kurtis and tunics except Style
No.: 25115-KU-PK, irrespective of the fitting at bust.
Possible Solution: The armhole in-cut shape could be improved.
6. Issue: Slit length opening and pocket positions were lower than the preferred locations.
53
Possible Solution: The pockets, if present, must be located at waist level standard
position and slit could start ½‖ below the end of pocket bags. If there are no pockets then
slit opening could begin at 20‖ from 1‖ below the armhole point. Standard positions of
slit openings are either 18‖ or 22‖. 22‖ was considered to be too low for basic kurti styles
from the primary data collected in store visits.
7. Issue: Excess was found in the back panel at waist level, hip level and across back level
in many styles.
Possible Solution: In some cases the measurements of the respective components were
within tolerance but were still loose for the respondents. Hence, either the specifications
or the tolerance limit could be revised.
The issue could be with the production stage as well.
8. Issue: In Style No.: AW1639298TU718 the shoulders were drooping by ½‖-1‖.
Possible Solution: Standard measurements must be followed.
9. Issue: Length from HPS to bottom edge in Style No.: 25115KUPK was preferred to be
approximately 4.5‖ less than the actual length although the actual length was less than the
specified length.
Possible Solution: Length from HPS to bottom edge according to secondary data
collected should be 40‖- 45‖ and the length of this style was 42‖ which was considered to
be very long by most respondents. The specifications could be revised to 38‖ - 45‖
according to style.
In Style No.: 23903D-KU-314 the front panel’s length from HPS to bottom edge was less
than specified which could have been the reason for hiking.
10. Issue: In style No.: AW1639298TU718 the length of the back panel seemed too long for
a tunic and the difference between the front and back panels was very contrasting.
Possible: Although the style was a high-low style the back panel could have been
approximately 33‖. This could be followed for all high low styles in tunics.
11. Issue: Side seam was hiking in the ―S‖ sample of Style No.: 25115KUPK
Possible Solution: The hiking could be due to stretching of the knit fabric while stitching.
Care would have to be taken at production stage.
12. Issue: Button plackets were overlapping at the bottom hem in Style No.:
AW1639298TU718 causing poor aesthetics.
54
Possible Solution: This issue could have been an execution error at the production stage.
Careful measures must be taken at the cutting and stitching stages as the fabric used was
very light. Wrong thread tension or wrongly cut panels could result in such problems.
13. Issue: The back neck embroidery was missing in the ―S‖ sample of Style No.:
AW1625096MX180.
Possible Solution: This could be an execution issue at the embroidery production stage.
14. Issue: In Style No.: GJ56092MX500, the neck drop was too deep and bust level
measurement was very loose for most of the respondents.
Possible Solution: Armhole In-cut could be improved and armhole depth could be
reduced by 1‖. The bust measurement could be reduced by approximately 1.3‖.
15. Issue: All maxi dresses received negative feedback for their overall length.
Possible Solution: After noting the average decrease in length demanded by majority of
the respondents for all the maxi dresses the length deemed as suitable for maxis was 53‖-
54‖. The standard measurement considered by GD upto then was 52‖-55‖. Restricting the
length upto 54‖ could save 1‖ of fabric per piece and in case of an Order Quantity of
1000 pieces; 1000‖ of fabric could be saved. That could save a lot of fabric and cost.
16. Issue: In 44% styles, puckering was noticed at various seams.
Possible Solution: This issue was a manpower issue and could be solved at production
level by correcting the thread tension used according to the fabric being stitched.
6.2 Height Wise Results & Discussion
The following inferences could be drawn from the analysis:
1. Most of the respondents (80%) were under 5 Ft. 5 In. Hence, the changes demanded were
majorly from that height category.
2. In only 4 out of 9 styles any major length-wise change was demanded by the respondents.
3. Issue: In Style No.: SS17GR109KURD, 68% respondents, of which 52% were under
5’5‖ and 16% were 5’5‖ and over, felt that the slit length could be increased by 3.4‖.
Possible Solution: In this case, the slit opening could have begun 1‖ below the end of
pocket bags as mentioned before as well.
55
4. Issue: In Style No.: 25115-KU-PK, 48% respondents, of which 44% were under 5’5‖ and
4% were 5’5‖ and over, felt that the overall length could have been reduced by 3.8‖.
Possible Solution: Here, the standard measurements of length from HPS to bottom edge
could have been revised.
5. Issue: In Style No.: IM26406MX496, 68% respondents felt that the overall length could
be reduced by 3.24‖. All 68% respondents were under 5’5‖.
Possible Solution: The standard HPS to bottom edge measurement range for Maxi
dresses could be changed from 52‖-55‖ to 52‖-53‖.
6. Issue: In Style No.: GJ56092-MX-500, 52% respondents felt that the length could be
reduced by 3.12‖. All respondents were less than 5’5‖.
Possible Solution: The standard measurements for Maxi Dresses could be changed from
52‖-55‖ to 52‖-53‖. The average height of Indian Women is 5’, hence, the new suggested
length would be appropriate for maxi dresses. (Balachandran, 2016)
6.3 Store Visit Results & Discussion
1. Most of the respondents observed during the store visits were of sizes M and above.
2. Most of the respondents said that the alterations required were mostly for armhole
gaping, bust or length.
3. Very often the slit length was unsatisfactory for the customers. Since their major target
market included women of bigger sizes the respondents often felt that the position of the
side slits was lower than required. The preferred location for the slit was at 20‖ from 1‖
below the armhole point.
4. Issue: Puckering was found to exist in most of the garments reported. Puckering was
found mostly in garments with embroidery work, full button plackets and in general in
various seams.
Possible Solution: Since this is a manpower issue, controlling the thread tension while
stitching at the production level could probably solve the issue. Controlling puckering in
embroidery work is a little difficult so the fabrics on which such artwork is done must be
chosen carefully. Most of the garments showing puckering were made of rayon and were
very light weight fabrics. Full button plackets could be avoided in rayon and other fabrics
which tend to droop due to weight of buttons.
56
5. Issue: In some styles like SS17GZ089TUNET and SS17GR138KULD another
manpower issue was observed where a pocket or a small patch was stitched on to any
bigger panel; puckering and roping effect was found. This was because the attached
pocket or patch was bigger than required due to which the look would get spoiled.
Exhibit 46: Style No. - SS17GZ089TUNET Exhibit 47: Style No. - SS17GR138KULD
Possible Solution: Precaution and care would need to be taken at the cutting stage to
ensure that right size of panels is being cut. In case the panel size is wrong then the
correction would need to be done at the design stage.
6. Issue: Roping effect, again a manpower issue, was found in other garments in the
neckline finishing as well such as in Style No.: SS17GR211TUMO.
Possible Solution: Proper folding tools like folders could be used while finishing off the
neck line and hem with piping.
Exhibit 48: Style No.- SS17GR211TUMO
57
7. Conclusion
After the complete execution of the project it was observed that the majority of issues would
probably require very minor changes but the effect of those minor changes and/or precautions
could make a huge difference in fit.
Another observation made was that in all the garments combined there were no specific
components to which issues were limited. With various styles the issues varied, be it in the
neckline, armhole, waist, hip, shoulders or across back. Hence, no single issue can be blamed for
the faults in fit. It can be concluded that the standard specifications and the patterns hence
developed for the numerous categories of garments offered by the brand need to be improvised
and reworked on. Once the improvements are made, patterns must be developed again and the
process of fit trials must be repeated in order to verify if the changes resulted in an improvement
in fit.
As far as manpower issues are concerned, they do not reflect on the fit of the garment but
definitely affect its aesthetic appeal. The need to control puckering was seriously felt.
58
8. Limitations & Scope of the Study
1. The number of styles and garments studied in the project were according to the time
duration available for the entire process. The project could have been carried out for more
garments to ensure greater accuracy in case the time duration would have been more.
2. The arrangement of garments could not be done according to the time decided due to
unavailability of samples of all the three sizes (i.e., S, M & L). Many samples had to be
arranged either from their vendors or from the warehouse which included a lengthy
procedure. Also, the garments were available only for a limited time period as they had to
be returned to the vendor.
3. The initial plan was to use garments of either Autumn Winter 2016 or Spring Summer
2017 collection but due to the unavailability of sufficient samples the project had to be
proceeded with whatever season’s styles were available, i.e., Autumn Winter 2015 to
Spring Summer 2017. The reason why styles older than previous two seasons were not
preferred was that the chances of improvements being done in those styles were higher
which would dissolve the purpose of the project.
4. Most of the respondents called for the fit trials were in the 18-29 years’ age group. Since
each respondent was required for at least two hours it was easier to arrange college
students for the project as compared to middle aged or young working women.
5. 20 college students and 5 office employees were called for the fit trials. More office
employees (not necessarily from the company) should have been tested but due to
restrictions it was not possible. More office employees from within the company could
not be called due to their busy schedules.
59
Bibliography
Balachandran, M. (2016). India’s women are gaining height faster than India’s men—but Indians
are still very short. Quartz India .
Dictionary.com. (n.d.). Apparel. Retrieved from dictionary.com:

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/apparel
Fit Issues- Perception of fit. (n.d.). Retrieved from sizingsystems.human.cornell.edu:

http://www.sizingsystems.human.cornell.edu/fit/perception.html
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Fit. Retrieved from merriam-webster.com: https://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/fit
Pi, L. (2011). Analysis Of Consumers’ Visual Perception Of Garment Fit: An Eye Tracking
Study. University of Delaware.
Shin, E. (2013). Exploring consumers' fit perceptions and satisfaction with apparel fit in general
. Iowa State University.
60
Annexure
i
Annexure 1- Pilot Questionnaire 1
Hello. I am Sampada Rawat and am currently pursuing my Bachelor’s degree at National
Institute of Fashion Technology, Mumbai. I am doing a research study for my Graduation Project
wherein I have to observe the perception of garment fit of different customers for a particular
brand’s garments. I would like to ask you a few questions before and after trying on a few
garments so that you could express your opinion about the garment’s fit.
1. What comes to your mind when you first here the word ―fit‖?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
2. What comes to your mind when you hear the words ―fit of a garment‖?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
3. What comes to your mind when you hear the words ―quality of a garment‖?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
(Show the garment- Garment No. 1)
4. What do you feel about the fit of this garment?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
5. What do you feel about the quality of this garment?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
Could you please now try on the garment?
6. How does the garment fit you?

___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
ii
7. How does the quality look after wearing the garment?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
8. Would you buy this garment if given the chance?

 Yes
 No
(Repeat questions 4 to 8 for the remaining garments)
(Once the respondent has tried all the garments)
Thank you so much for answering the questions and trying on the garments. Your feedback will
be very valuable for my study.
iii
Perception of Fit of Garments
Hello, I am Sampada Rawat and am currently pursuing my Bachelor’s degree at National Institute of
Fashion Technology, Mumbai. As a part of the course curriculum, I am carrying out a research study for
my Graduation Project entitled ―Assessment of customers’ perception of fit of garments‖. I would like
you to try on nine garments one after another and share your views with regard to the fit of the each
garment
(After the respondent tries on the first garment)
Please look at the photographs of the garment you are wearing and provide your inputs.
1. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning too difficult and 5 meaning too easy) how easy/difficult was it for
you to try on the garment?
1 2 3 4 5
2. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning very loose and 5 meaning very tight) how does the garment fit
you?
1 2 3 4 5
A1 (Neck width- seam to seam)
3. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning too narrow and 5 meaning too wide) how would you grade the
neck width?
1 2 3 4 5
4. If the neck width needs to be changed then by how many inches approximately should it be
corrected?
(Increase/decrease by) ______________________________________
iv
A2 (Neck Drop)
5. How would you grade the neck drop on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning too deep and 5 meaning too
high) keeping in mind the style of the garment?
1 2 3 4 5
6. Is the neckline gaping?
A lot A little Not at all
7. If the neck drop is not appropriate by how many inches approximately should it be corrected?
B (Shoulder Length)
8. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning too narrow and 5 meaning too wide) how would you grade the
shoulder length?
1 2 3 4 5
9. If the shoulder length is not appropriate by how many inches approximately should it be
corrected?
C (Armhole)
10. On a scale of 1 to 5 (one meaning very uncomfortable and 5 meaning very comfortable) how
would you grade the arm movement?
1 2 3 4 5
If you’re facing any problem please specify.
__________________________________________________________________________
11. If the armhole is not appropriate by how many inches approximately should its depth be
corrected?
D (Bust)
12. On a scale of 1 to 5 (one meaning very uncomfortable and 5 meaning very comfortable) how
comfortable is the garment at the chest (bust) area?
1 2 3 4 5
13. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the bust be
corrected?
v
E (Across Shoulder)
14. On a scale of 1 to 5 (one meaning very easy and 5 meaning very uneasy) how would you grade
the movement across your shoulders?
1 2 3 4 5
15. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the across shoulder
measurement be corrected?
F (Sleeve Opening)
16. On a scale of 1 to 5 (one meaning too narrow and 5 meaning too wide) how is the fitting at the
sleeve opening?
1 2 3 4 5
17. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the sleeve opening
G (Waist)
18. On a scale of 1 to 5 (one meaning very tight and 5 meaning very loose) how is the fitting at the
waist?
1 2 3 4 5
18. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the waist
H (Hip)
19. On a scale of 1 to 5 (one meaning very tight and 5 meaning very loose) how is the fitting at the
hip level?
1 2 3 4 5
20. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the hip
I (Length)
21. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning too long and 5 meaning too short) how would you grade the
length of the garment?
1 2 3 4 5
vi
22. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the length be
corrected?
J (Slit) - if present
23. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning too long and 5 meaning too short) how would you grade the
length of the slit (s)?
1 2 3 4 5
corrected?
K (Bottom Flare)
25. Is the bottom flare satisfactory?
There’s too much flare There’s enough flare The amount of flare is
insufficient
26. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being not a problem and 5 being a significant problem), how big of a
problem for you are the following issues regarding the garment.
1 – Not a problem 2 3 4 5 – A significant problem
A. The fabric quality?
1 2 3 4 5
Comments _________________________________________________________________
B. The look?
1 2 3 4 5
Comments_________________________________________________________________
C. The fit?
1 2 3 4 5
Comments_________________________________________________________________
D. Overall?
1 2 3 4 5
vii
23. Would you be willing to buy this garment?
Yes No
If No, could you please specify why?
____________________________________________________________________________
24. Please specify your age bracket.
Under 18 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over
25. How tall are you?
Under 5’ 5’- 5’5‖ 5’5‖ – 5’8‖ 5’8‖ and over
26. When you purchase Tops/Kurtis what size do you normally purchase? (Any other brand- 1,
Global Desi- 2)
o XS (33.5‖ – 34‖ ) o XL (41.5‖ – 42‖) o Other. Please Specify
o S (35.5‖ – 36‖) o XXL (43.5‖ – 44‖) ________
o M (37.5‖ – 38‖) o XXXL (45.5‖–46‖) o Don’t know- 99
o L (39.5‖ – 40‖) o No response- 99
XS S M L XL XXL XXXL Other _______
Don’t know-99 No Response- 999
27. When you purchase bottoms/pants, what size do you normally purchase? (Any other brand-1,
Global Desi-2)
o XS (28‖) o L (34) o XXXL (40)
o S (30) o XL (36) o Other. Please
o M (32) o XXL (38) specify________
28‖ 30‖ 32‖ 34‖ 36‖ 38‖ 40‖ 42‖ 44‖ Other _______
Don’t know-99 No Response- 999
viii
Assessment of Customers’ Perception of Fit of Garments
1. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning too difficult and 5 meaning too easy) how easy/difficult was it for
you to try on the garment?
1. Too difficult 2. Somewhat difficult 3. Neither too difficult nor too easy 4. Too easy
2. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning very poorly and 5 meaning extremely well) how well does the
garment fit you?
1. Very poorly 2. Somewhat poorly 3. Neither poorly nor well
4. Somewhat well 5. Extremely well
3. If the answer to the previous questions is either 1, 2 or 3 then given a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning
very loose and 5 meaning very tight) what reason would you state for your answer?
The garment is:
1. Too loose 2. Somewhat loose 3. Neither loose nor tight
4. Somewhat tight 5. Too tight
4. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning extremely poorly and 5 meaning extremely well) how does the
neck width fit you?
1. Extremely poorly 2. Somewhat poorly 3. Neither poorly nor well
4. Somewhat well 5.Extremely well
5. If the neck width needs to be changed then by how many inches approximately should it be
corrected?
A2 (Neck Drop)
6. How would you grade the neck drop on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning extremely poorly and 5
meaning extremely well) keeping in mind the style of the garment?
1. Extremely poor 2. Somewhat poor 3. Neither poor nor well
1. A lot 2. A little 3. Not at all
A3 (Collar)
9. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning very ugly and 5 meaning very attractive) how would you grade
the look of the collar?
1. Very ugly 2. Somewhat ugly 3. Neither ugly nor attractive
4. Somewhat attractive 5. Very attractive
Comments _______________________________________________
ix
10. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning extremely poorly and 5 meaning extremely well) how well does
the collar fit?
Comments _______________________________________________
A4 (Placket)
11. Is the spacing between the buttons
1. Less than required? 2. More than required? 3. Appropriate?
11. If the spacing between the buttons is not appropriate by how many inches approximately should it
be corrected?
(Increase/decrease by) _________________________________________
B (Shoulder Length)
12. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning extremely poorly and 5 meaning extremely well) how well does
the shoulder length fit?
13. If the shoulder length is not appropriate by how many inches approximately should it be
corrected?
C (Armhole)
14. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning very uncomfortable and 5 meaning very comfortable) how would
you grade the arm movement?
1. Very uncomfortable 2. Somewhat uncomfortable 3. Neither uncomfortable nor
comfortable
4. Somewhat comfortable 5. Very comfortable
If you’re facing any problem please specify. (Check if armhole is gaping in sleeveless)
________________________________________________________________________
15. If the armhole is not appropriate by how many inches approximately should its depth be
corrected?
D (Bust)
16. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning very uncomfortable and 5 meaning very comfortable) how
comfortable is the garment at the bust area?
1. Very uncomfortable 2. Somewhat uncomfortable 3. Neither uncomfortable nor
comfortable
x
4. Somewhat comfortable 5. Very comfortable
17. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the bust be
corrected?
E (Across Shoulder)
18. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning extremely uneasy and 5 meaning extremely easy) how would you
grade the movement across your shoulders?
1. Extremely uneasy 2. Somewhat uneasy 3. Neither uneasy nor easy
4. Somewhat easy 5.Extremely easy
19. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the across shoulder
F (Sleeves)
20. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning extremely poor and 5 meaning extremely well) how is the fitting
at the sleeve opening?
21. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the sleeve opening
22. Do the biceps fit

23. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the bicep
G (Waist)
at the waist?
19. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the waist
xi
H (Hip)
at the hip level?
26. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the hip
I (Length)
27. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning very unsatisfactory and 5 meaning very satisfactory) how would
you grade the length of the garment?
1. Very unsatisfactory 2. Somewhat unsatisfactory 3. Neither unsatisfactory nor satisfactory
4. Somewhat satisfactory 5. Very satisfactory
corrected?
29. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 meaning very unsatisfactory and 5 meaning very satisfactory) how would
you grade the length of the slit (s)?

corrected?
K (Bottom Sweep)
31. Is the bottom sweep satisfactory?

32. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the bottom sweep
be corrected?
xii
33. On a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being not a problem at all and 5 being a significant problem), how big of a
problem for you are the following issues regarding the garment?
1 – Not a problem at all 2- Somewhat fine 3- Neither fine nor a problem
4- Somewhat a problem 5 – A significant problem
E. The fabric quality?

1 2 3 4 5
Comments _________________________________________________________________
F. The look?
1 2 3 4 5
Comments_________________________________________________________________
G. The fit?
1 2 3 4 5
Comments_________________________________________________________________
H. Overall?
1 2 3 4 5
1. Yes 2. No
If No, could you please specify why?

_____________________________________________________________________
1. Under 18 2. 18-29 3. 30-39 4. 40-49 5. 50-

59 6. 60 and over

1. Under 5’ 2. 5’- 5’5‖ 3. 5’5‖ – 5’8‖ 4. 5’8‖ and over
31. When you purchase Tops/Kurtis what size do you normally purchase? (Any other brand- 1,
Global Desi- 2)
o XS (33.5” – 34” ) o L (39.5” – 40”) o XXXL (45.5”–46”)
o S (35.5” – 36”) o XL (41.5” – 42”) o Other. Please
o M (37.5” – 38”) o XXL (43.5” – 44”) Specify _______
1. XS 2. S 3. M 4. L 5. XL 6. XXL
7. XXXL 8. Other _______ 9. Don’t know-99 10. No Response- 999
32. When you purchase bottoms/pants, what size do you normally purchase? (Any other brand-1,
Global Desi-2)
xiii
o XS (28”) o XL (36) o Other. Please
o S (30) o XXL (38) specify
o M (32) o XXXL (40) ________________
o L (34)
1. 28‖ 2. 30‖ 3. 32‖ 4. 34‖ 5. 36‖ 6. 38‖
7. 40‖ 8. 42‖ 9. 44‖ 10. Other _______ 11. Don’t know-99
12. No Response- 999
xiv
Annexure 4- Final Questionnaire
Style No.: ___________________ Size: ____ Product: ______________
Assessment of Customers’ Perception of Fit of Garments
1. How easy/difficult was it for you to try on the garment?

1. Very difficult 2. Little difficult 3. Very Easy
2. How well does the garment fit you?

1. Extremely poorly 2. Fits Okay 3. Extremely well
3. If the answer to the previous questions is either 1 or 2 then given a scale of 1 to 4 (1 meaning too loose and 4 meaning too tight)
what reason would you state for your answer?
The garment is:
1. Too loose 2. Somewhat loose 3. Somewhat tight 4. Too tight

4. On a scale of 1 to 3 (1 meaning extremely poorly and 3 meaning extremely well) how does the neck width fit you?
1. Extremely poorly 2. Fits Okay 3.Extremely well
5. If the neck width needs to be changed then by how many inches approximately should it be corrected?
A2 (Neck Drop)
6. How would you grade the neck drop on a scale of 1 to 3 (1 meaning extremely poorly and 3 meaning extremely well)
keeping in mind the style of the garment?
1. Extremely poor 2. Fits Okay 3.Extremely well

1. A lot 2. A little 3. Not at all
A3 (Collar)
9. On a scale of 1 to 3 (1 meaning very ugly and 3 meaning very attractive) how would you grade the look of the collar?
1. Very Ugly 2. Looks Okay 3. Very attractive
Comments _______________________________________________
10. On a scale of 1 to 3 (1 meaning extremely poorly and 5 meaning extremely well) how well does the collar fit?
1. Poorly 2. Fits Okay 3.Well
Comments _______________________________________________
A4 (Placket)
11. Is the spacing between the buttons
1. Less than required? 2. More than required? 3. Appropriate?
12. If the spacing between the buttons is not appropriate by how many inches approximately should it be corrected?
(Increase/decrease by) _________________________________________
B (Shoulder Length)
13. On a scale of 1 to 3 (1 meaning extremely poorly and 3 meaning extremely well) how well does the shoulder length fit?
1. Extremely poorly 2. Fits Okay 3.Extremely well
xv
14. If the shoulder length is not appropriate by how many inches approximately should it be corrected?
C (Armhole)
15. On a scale of 1 to 3 (1 meaning very uncomfortable and 3 meaning very comfortable) how would you grade the arm
movement?
1. Very uncomfortable 2. Fits Okay 3. Very comfortable
If you’re facing any problem please specify. (Check if armhole is gaping in sleeveless)
__________________________________________________________________________
16. If the armhole is not appropriate by how many inches approximately should its depth be corrected?
D (Bust)
17. On a scale of 1 to 3 (1 meaning very uncomfortable and 3 meaning very comfortable) how comfortable is the garment at the
bust area?
1. Very uncomfortable 2. Okay 3. Very comfortable
18. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the bust be corrected?
E (Across Back)
19. On a scale of 1 to 3 (1 meaning extremely uneasy and 3 meaning extremely easy) how would you grade the movement across
your shoulders?
1. Extremely uneasy 2. Okay 3.Extremely easy
20. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the across shoulder measurement be corrected?
F (Sleeves)
21. On a scale of 1 to 3 (1 meaning extremely poor and 3 meaning extremely well) how is the fitting at the sleeve opening?
1. Extremely uneasy 2. Okay 3.Extremely easy
22. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the sleeve opening measurement be corrected?
23. Do the biceps fit
1. Extremely poorly 2. Fit Okay 3.Extremely well
24. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the bicep measurement be corrected?
G (Waist)
25. On a scale of 1 to 3 (1 meaning extremely poor and 3 meaning extremely well) how is the fitting at the waist?
1. Extremely poor 2. Fit Okay 3.Extremely well
26. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the waist measurement be corrected?
H (Hip)
27. On a scale of 1 to 3 (1 meaning extremely poor and 3 meaning extremely well) how is the fitting at the hip level?
1. Extremely poor 2. Fit Okay 3.Extremely well
28. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the hip measurement be corrected?
I (Length)
29. On a scale of 1 to 3 (1 meaning very unsatisfactory and 3 meaning very satisfactory) how would you grade the length of the
garment?
1. Very unsatisfactory 2. Length is Okay 3. Very satisfactory
30. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the length be corrected?
31. On a scale of 1 to 3 (1 meaning very unsatisfactory and 3 meaning very satisfactory) how would you grade the length of the
slit (s)?
xvi
1. Very unsatisfactory 2. Length is Okay 3. Very satisfactory
32. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the length be corrected?
K (Bottom Sweep)
33. Is the bottom sweep satisfactory?
1. Very unsatisfactory 2. Okay 3. Very satisfactory
34. If any corrections are needed then by how many inches approximately should the bottom sweep be corrected?
35. On a scale of 1 to 3 (1 being a significant problem and 3 being not a problem at all), how big of a problem for you are the
following issues regarding the garment?
1 – A significant problem 2- Neither too problematic nor too good 3 – Not a problem at all
I. The fabric quality?
1 2 3
Comments _________________________________________________________________
J. The look?
1 2 3
Comments_________________________________________________________________
K. The fit?
1 2 3
Comments_________________________________________________________________
L. Overall?
1 2 3
1. Yes 2. No
If No, could you please specify why? _____________________________________________________________________
1. Under 18 2. 18-29 3. 30-39 4. 40-49 5. 50-59 6. 60 and over
1. Under 5’ 2. 5’- 5’5‖ 3. 5’5‖ – 5’8‖ 4. 5’8‖ and over
39. When you purchase Tops/Kurtis what size do you normally purchase? (Any other brand- 1, Global Desi- 2)
o XS (33.5” – 34” ) o L (39.5” – 40”) o XXXL (45.5”–46”)
o S (35.5” – 36”) o XL (41.5” – 42”) o Other. Please Specify
o M (37.5” – 38”) o XXL (43.5” – 44”)
1. XS 5. XL 9. Don’t know-99
2. S 6. XXL 10. No Response- 999
3. M 7. XXXL
4. L 8. Other _______
40. When you purchase bottoms/pants, what size do you normally purchase? (Any other brand-1, Global Desi-2)
o XS (28”) o L (34) o XXXL (40)
o S (30) o XL (36) Other. Please specify__________________
o M (32) o XXL (38)
xvii
1. 28‖ 2. 30‖ 3. 32‖ 4. 34‖ 5. 36‖ 6. 38‖ 7. 40‖
8. 42‖ 9. 44‖ 10. Other _______ 11. Don’t know-99 12. No Response-
999
41. How often do you wear such a garment?

1. Once a week 2. 2-3 times a week 3. 4-6 times a week 4. Daily 5. Never
42. Would you like to suggest something for the garment?
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
43. Researcher’s remarks
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
xviii
Annexure 5- Style Wise Photos
Exhibit 49: Style No.: SS17GR109KURD (Kurti)
Exhibit 50: 25115-KU-PK (Kurti)
Exhibit 51: 23903D-KU-314 (Kurti)
xix
Exhibit 52: SS17GN012TUMUL (Tunic)
Exhibit 53: 56890-TU-852 (Tunic)
Exhibit 54: AW1639298TU718 (Tunic)
xx
Exhibit 55: AW1625096MX180 (Maxi Dress)
Exhibit 56: IM26406-MX-496 (Maxi Dress)
Exhibit 57: GJ56092-MX-500 (Maxi Dress)
xxi
Annexure 6- Respondents’ Details
Most Preferred Styles
Respondent's Measurements (Inches) GD Brands Preferred (Kurtis/tunics) Brands Preferred (Tops/dresses)
S. No. From the Fit Trials
Name Size
Bust Waist Hip Brand Name(Size) Brand Name(Size) Kurti Tunic Maxi
1 Aanchal 36 36 40 L W for Women (L), FabIndia (M), Lifestyle (L) Shoppers Stop (L/XL), Pantaloons (L/XL) 1 5 7
Madame (M/L), Forever 21 (M/L), Westside (M), Max (M/L) (Size

2 Aastha 40.5 34 40.5 L W for Women (M), GD (M) (Size depends on style) 2 4 8
depends on style)
3 Akansha 34 30 40 S W for Women (M), Global Desi (S) Max (M) 1 6 7
Chemistry (S), Max (S), Jealous 21 (S), Rio (S), West sider (S),
4 Amrata 34 30 38 S Shrishti (S), Max (S), Soch (XS), Avaasa (XS), Biba (XS) 2 4 8
Forever 21 (S)
5 Bhavika 35 30 40 S GD (S), W for Women (M) Mango (M), Zara (M), AND (S) 2 4 8
6 Drishti 38 30 40 L Biba (M) Zara (M), Forever 21 (M) 1 4 7,8
7 Ishika 33 30 37.5 S Biba (Size not sure) Forever21 (M), H&M (M), Madame (M) 1 5 8
8 Jia 36 31 41 M Global Desi (M), Max (M) Forever 21 (M/L), Zara (M/L) 1 4 8
9 Manisha 34 32 M Max (L), Reliance Trends (L) Westside (L), Pantaloons (L) 1 6 7
10 Mansi 36 32 40 M Max (L) Forever 21 (L), Pantaloons (L) 1 4 8
11 Nikita 35 29.5 37.5 S Ethnicity (S), Max (S) 109⁰ F (S), AND (S), Vero Moda (S), Chemistry (S) 3 6 8
12 Phalguni 36 34 41 M Pantaloons (L), Westside (M/L), Reliance Trends (L) Vero Moda (M), Numero Uno (M), Wills (L) 3 4 7
13 Pritika 34 30 39 S Biba (S), FabIndia(XS/S), Global Desi (XS/S) Zara (XS/S), Forever 21 (S) 1 4 7,8
14 Priyanka 36 32 40 S FabIndia (M), GD (S) Zara (M) 3 6 8
15 Simran 36 32 40 M Westside(M), Akriti (M), Shrishti (M), FabIndia (M) Wardrobe (M), Nuon (M/L), Pantaloons (M/L) 1 6 8
16 Sunayani 32 28 30 S FabIndia (XS), Max (XS/S) Forever 21 (S), Max (S) 1 4 8

17 Suyasha 40 31 41 L FabIndia (M/L), Ritu Kumar (5 to 14) Forever 21 (S/M/L) , Forever New (S/M/L), Zara (S/M/L) 1 6 8
18 Swati 34.5 29 36.5 S Pantaloons (M), Reliance Trends (M), W for women (S) Forever 21 (XS/S) 1 6 7
19 Vaishnavi 37 32 40 M Westside (M/L), GD (M), O.M.O (M) Pantaloons (M/L) 1 6 8
20 Yugeshwari 39 29 41 M Westside(M), Max (M) Vero Moda (M), Only (M), Max (M) 3 6 7
21 Uma 36 30.5 36 S Max (M), Niru (M) Only (M), AND (M) 2 5 7
22 Prachi 32.5 30 37.5 S N/A Globus (S), Lifestyle (S) 1 4 8
23 Priyanka (CAD) 36.5 31.5 41 M D Mart (M), GD (M) D Mart (M) 1 4 9
24 Rajshri 34.5 30 33.5 S GD (S), Some local brands (S/M) AND (S), Some local brands (S/M) 1 6 7
25 Rizwana 36 31 38 L Biba (S), Sangria (M) N/A 1 5 7
Most Preferred GD, Westside, W for Women, FabIndia Forever 21, Pantaloons, Zara, Vero Moda, And 1 4 8
Table 13: Details of respondents
xxii
Annexure 7- Specification Sheets
xxiii
xxiv
xxv
xxvi
xxvii
xxviii
xxix
xxx
xxxi
Appendix
xxxii
Appendix 1- House of Anita Dongre Limited (Formerly known as AND Designs India
Limited)
Founded in 1995 by Anita Dongre, Meena Sehra and Mukesh Sawlani, House of Anita Dongre
Limited (HOADL) (formerly known as And Designs India Limited) is one of India's leading
fashion houses today. It’s a well-recognized, well-respected and well-loved name. The company
owns and operates three brands with three extremely distinct identities- AND with its line of
chic, contemporary western-wear for women, Global Desi – a young, free-spirited, vibrant line
of boho-chic ensembles and the Anita Dongre label offering breathtaking, curated looks in
bridal, couture, prêt as well as menswear. This label also includes Pinkcity, handcrafted jadau
jewellery and the recently launched luxury prêt label Grassroot which is a tribute to the
handcrafted traditions of India, and seeks to revive, sustain and empower heirloom traditions
from across India and fashions them into contemporary tales.
Within India, the network includes well above 1150 points of sale with more than 260 exclusive
brand stores and over 900 multi-brand large format stores in over 110 cities. Globally, House of
Anita Dongre marked its presence in Mauritius with the launch of its first international Global
Desi store in 2013, followed by the grand opening of a flagship store of all 3 brands in
November 2014.
In April 2015, the company shifted its headquarters to the serene, green hills of Rabale in Navi
Mumbai. The new, ergonomically-designed building is a reflection of everything that the
company stands for and believes in. Earth-friendly, animal-friendly, work-friendly - the special
architecture of this green space uses air, water and sunlight in the most efficient and economical
manner, creating a work environment that is completely in sync with the natural environment.
xxxiii
Appendix 2- Global Desi
Global Desi is an India-inspired young, colourful and boho-chic brand which has a global appeal.
Inspired by the prints and vibrant cultures of India it is one of the four brands under the company
House of Anita Dongre Limited- HOADL (Formerly known as AND Designs India Limited.).
In 2013, the company achieved an international milestone by launching its first international
Global Desi store in Mauritius. This marked the entry of the company into the international
market and is expected to grow more in the coming years. The USP of this brand lies in its
concept of providing a wide range of Indo-Western clothing with a Bohemian theme which has
not yet been adopted by many brands offering women’s wear clothing.
Another small yet attractive fact about this brand is that while many similar women’s ethnic
wear brands offer appealing designs very few offer garments that suit the requirement of today’s
youth. Many Global Desi garments have pockets which in itself add utility to them. Two types of
collections are included- one for regular casual or semi formal wear and one for festive wear.
The difference in the regular and festive wear is in the amount of art work and colour themes but
the availability of options for both the types of occasions makes the brand a hot seller especially
amongst the youth.
xxxiv

Fit Analysis - Sampada Rawat PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Fit Analysis - Sampada Rawat PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Assessment of Customers’ Perception of Fit for Global Desi

A dissertation submitted in partial Fulfillment

Bachelor of Fashion Technology (Apparel Production)

Under the Guidance of

MS. ABOLI NAIK

Department of Fashion Technology

Ms.Aastha Sharma- BFT Sem. II Ms. Pritika Menon- FD Sem. IV

Ms. Bhavika Bisht- BFT Sem. II Ms. Sunayani Bhattacharya- FC Sem. IV

Ms. Drishti Singh- FD Sem IV Ms. Priyanka Lalwani- FD Sem. VIII

2. Objective of the study .................................................................................. 3

3. Review of Literature .................................................................................... 4

3.1 Understanding Apparel and Fit ................................................................ 4

3.2 Perception of Fit ....................................................................................... 4

3.4 Analysis of Consumer’s Visual Perception of Garment Fit: Eye Tracking

4. Research Design and Methodology ........................................................... 13

4.1 Brands, Product Categories and Sizes Offered ...................................... 13

4.2 Sampling Scheme ................................................................................... 13

4.3 Arrangement of Garments ...................................................................... 14

4.4 Fit Trials ................................................................................................. 14

4.5 Possible Cause(s) and Solutions of Issues Highlighted ......................... 14

5.1 Style Wise Findings................................................................................ 15

5.2 Height Wise Findings ............................................................................. 45

5.3 Store Visit Findings ................................................................................ 49

6. Results & Discussion ................................................................................. 53

6.2 Height Wise Results & Discussion ........................................................ 55

6.3 Store Visit Results & Discussion ........................................................... 56

8. Limitations & Scope of the Study ............................................................. 59

Annexure 1- Pilot Questionnaire 1 ....................................................................ii

Annexure 2- Pilot Questionnaire 2 ...................................................................iv

Annexure 3- Pilot Questionnaire 3 ...................................................................ix

Annexure 4- Final Questionnaire..................................................................... xv

Annexure 5- Style Wise Photos ......................................................................xix

Annexure 6- Respondents’ Details ............................................................... xxii

Annexure 7- Specification Sheets ............................................................... xxiii

Appendix .................................................................................................... xxxii

Appendix 1- House of Anita Dongre Limited (Formerly known as AND Designs

Appendix 2- Global Desi ............................................................................xxxiv

Table 1 : Size wise distribution of respondents..................................................... 15

3.2 Perception of Fit

1. Assess young consumers’ overall satisfactions with apparel fit in general

a. Accuracy (natural object’s physically measurable properties were correctly represented in

The purposes of the study were to:

Eight hypotheses were investigated in this study:

Hypothesis 4a - Duration of fixations on human model will be negatively related to concern

Hypothesis 4b - Number of fixations on human model will be negatively related to concern

Exhibit 2: An example of “hot-spot” graph

Exhibit 4: Hypotheses tested in this study

SPSS computer programs were used for statistical data analysis.

The results of the present study indicated:

1. There is significant relationship between female college consumers’ body image

Despite certain useful results, there were some limitations as well:

1. More body related variables should have been included.

4.1 Brands, Product Categories and Sizes Offered

1. Different product categories offered at Global Desi (GD).

2. The most selling products and sizes.

4.2 Sampling Scheme

1. The three most selling sizes noted were - S, M and L.

4.4 Fit Trials

First, a structured questionnaire was prepared to understand the respondents’ perception of

Secondly, the respondents were called for the fit trials.

The same procedure was followed for all the samples.

4.5 Possible Cause(s) and Solutions of Issues Highlighted

5.1 Style Wise Findings