Customisation, in itself, was the very idea of business production in the early days. Backhouse workshops 'tailored' products for individual customers. But then, Samuel Colt, the early 19th century revolver-maker of the Wild West-under pressure to crank out large numbers-discovered the wonders of making standard interchangeable parts, batch-wise, and then running a separate assembly operation for multiple revolvers. And lo-we got mass production. It was adopted in an assembly line format by Henry Ford, and costs crashed as large numbers of cars rolled out of the factory.

The mass model, having helped the US win World War II with a heavy onslaught of motorised wheels and wings, assumed top-notch glory as a benefactor of mankind. Rolls-Royce, with its custom-built business of luxury vehicles, was to slowly lose its sheen, as Ford vroomed forth, selling any colour you like as long as it's black.

The mass market became a large blob of homogeneity, as ordered by industry-till the customer decided she'd had enough. And wanted colour. Her own pick. Because she wasn't a statistic, but a human being with her own passions, organs and dimensions.

Since then, business progress has largely been about balancing the cost advantages of mass production with the customer need of individual choice. And now that computers have closed information gaps, 'mass customisation' has become viable.

Dell has used the Internet to let customers configure their computers just the way they want. Amazon uses software to adapt the customer's surfing experience to the individual's search behaviour. And car makers are talking about satellite-linked computerised cars soft-loaded to suit an individual's needs (guidance to reach your kinda rock concert, car park status reports, update on your stock portfolio, news alerts on the specific risks you take into account for your analysis, you name it).

The concept is compelling. Rock videos have even started essaying dystopic versions of it. Business futurists, though, must think what mass customisation could imply for brand integrity-the principle that a brand must stand for a set of values, consistently. Willing, that is, to peacefully lose a customer who rejects the set.