While I think the discussion is a good one and important to make a decision about, the premise in the below article is flipped in my experience. Typically, designer brands tend to have smaller sizes and mass merchants more vanity sizing. What do you think?
1. More expensive brands run larger - agree or disagree
2. Having a standard size guide would make my business better - agree or disagree
3. Vanity sizing is helpful - agree or disagree.
Clothing designers appeal to women’s ego with vanity sizing
BY SARA BAUKNECHT February 29, 2012 11:33AM
In many cases, this seesaw in sizes is the culprit is vanity sizing,
or the fact that the U.S. government doesn’t enforce a standard of
measurements for women’s clothing sizes .
A standard measurement chart does exist, but it may be next to
impossible for the government to require designers to stick to it, says
Paula Minydzak, an adjunct instructor in fashion for the Art Institute
of Pittsburgh, who also is a tailor at a Men’s Wearhouse.
Standardizing sizes can complicate transactions between domestic and
foreign designers whose countries sometimes have different measurement
charts, she says. It also may turn some women off from shopping at first
if they wear a larger size under the government-regulated measurement
chart.
“It’s the equivalent of sticker shock,” Minydzak says.
So for now, the size guessing continues, which has its pros and cons.
For designers, the flexibility to come up with their own sizes
helps them create and market clothes for their target consumers — and
their egos.
“It’s easier for someone to sell clothes when they make people feel
good,” Minydzak says.
“One of the best ways to do it is make a woman
feel like she wears a smaller size.”
But toying with people’s perceptions of their body image can have
consequences. In 2005, Kinley conducted a study in which 75 women
between the ages of 19 and 58 were instructed to try on different sizes.
“What I found was a strong age relationship,” she says, adding that
women in their 20s seemed to care more about fitting into a smaller size
than those in their 40s or older.
In another study, from 2003, Kinley and some students measured about
1,000 pairs of pants by different designers of similar styles and cuts
and found “statistically significant differences within some size
numbers,” she says. She also observed that clothes by designers with
higher price points tended to be more generously cut, with Ralph Lauren
and Calvin Klein among the most forgiving.
Minydzak has noticed that clothes by more affordable brands tend to run more narrow in the sleeve and leg.
Many brands view their sizes not as mind games but as ways to better relate to shoppers’ needs, wants and body types.
For clothier Anthropologie, the goal is to sell quality clothes
with consistent sizes that appeal to the body shapes and lifestyles of
its target customer base of 28- to 45-year-olds, says Wendy Wurtzburger,
chief merchandising and design officer.
“Our intention is to have a size grade for her that is flattering
but is honest and isn’t trying to make her feel like something she
isn’t,” Wurtzburger says.
Other stores have disregarded the typical double-digit numerical-size
chart altogether. Sizes used by the clothing chain Chico’s range from
000 to 4.5, with the former being for women who usually wear a zero and
the latter for a size 22.
Studies have found that the public wants clothing labels with more
sizing information on them, Kinley says. Stores such as Macy’s and Lane
Bryant recently have launched Web components with tips on what sizes,
brands and styles may be best suited for their customers.
But whatever designers come up with next, comfort and satisfaction — not size — should be the motivation behind a purchase.
“We have to use sizes as a guide but respect the fact that that brand
does not mean you are that size,” Minydzak says. “You are your size.
Your body is your body, and there is no brand or no standard set of
measurements that is going to be made exactly for you as a woman.”
