Off-topic question about Universities

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Off-topic question about Universities

Richard A. O'Keefe-2
My University is about to go through a process of redesigning its logo.
I'm interested in whether having a logo, a "brand", actually matters
for a University.  Obviously it does for soap, tinned soup, and so on.

Some of you are at Universities, and some of you are at companies that
hire graduates from Universities, and some of you are graduates from
Universities or considering (further) study.  So there should be some
overlap with the target audience of a logo.

So I was wondering if anyone had any strong opinions about Universities
and logos, and better yet, any evidence.

According to the Vice-Chancellor,

 The University logo is the most prominent visual aspect of
 the overarching University brand. Continuity and consistency
 of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has.
 This is what builds recognition and awareness for an organisation,
 it is the foundation on which the visual identification of
 the University is built.

You might be as surprised as I was that reputation, quality, price,
published research, patents, and so on are not as valuable to a
University brand as a logo.  You might also be surprised that
visual recognition of a University is so important.  (Imagine
the Prime Minister at the supermarket.  "I'll have a kilo of
University of Otago, please.  No, not that.  That's the logo
with an *open* book, I want the one with the *closed* book.")
Well, I guess I'll never be smart enough to be a VC.

You might also be puzzled that if "Continuity and consistency
of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has" introducing
discontinuity and inconsistency by changing the logo could
ever be desirable.  If so, you have overdosed on the Logic pills.
I know I have!


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Off-topic question about Universities

zxq9-2
On 2017年07月05日 水曜日 13:20:00 Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
> So I was wondering if anyone had any strong opinions about Universities
> and logos, and better yet, any evidence.

Anecdotal, but perhaps relevant...

The last three places I've contracted did not seem to take university into account at all with regard to hiring candidates. They did take publicly visible projects, programming blogs, stackoverflow answers, published works, ML involvement, and similar things into account before giving someone a trial project.

The trial project and interviews were the only thing they cared about. The candidate's public brand (within the technical community) mattered because it acted as a filter for deciding whether or not to spend the effort reviewing a trial project. The trial project mattered and acted as a further filter to determine whether to spend effort on an interview. The interview was more of a process of discovering red flags, an opportunity to show how disqualifyingly troublesome or weird you may be as a person. Hired on the basis of performance, disqualified on the basis of profound personality issues (obviously they give people quite a bit of leeway personally, as I was accepted).

LinkedIn, university degrees, certifications, etc. did not count for much, if anything.

Clearly, if the university is a place to get trained and the point of that training is to get a job but all the employers care about are the resulting skills and not where you got them, then a university logo can only matter at all in the minds of the students.

This assumes that we are approaching the question of logos from the perspective of students who are trying to get jobs, but from the administrators' perspective the educational function of the university may well be one of the least important aspects of the organization and therefore branding. Perhaps this matters more in the grant market, the admissions market, the other-forms-of-public-funding market, the paid-dinner donations/regency market, patent license market, recruitment of primary investigators, and so on. Maybe perceived coolness in branding is paramount there.

But in terms of the jobs market that graduates will face... well, its just about the last thing anyone is even aware of, much less concerned with.

For the record, the last three places I've contracted were mostly remote work[1], were focused on infrastructure, and needed pretty specific things designed, not merely implemented, were contract-term employment (not full-time forever and ever) -- and paid pretty well. That is a very tiny slice of the job market. I have no idea what 9-5 places would care about.

Also, I've never been to university (as a student, anyway) so I'm not sure how things would differ for me had I a degree.

> According to the Vice-Chancellor

I'm so glad that this is an actual title for someone somewhere. Images of the Galactic Senate in the Star Wars prequels immediately come to mind...

> You might also be puzzled that if "Continuity and consistency
> of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has" introducing
> discontinuity and inconsistency by changing the logo could
> ever be desirable.  If so, you have overdosed on the Logic pills.
> I know I have!

Indeed! The exercise itself seems to defeat the purpose of the exercise.

-Craig

[1] I only performed any in-person work on one of the three jobs. Bringing the group physically together for two weeks was at my request, not a requirement -- fortunately it was a swell group of folks and they all agreed.
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Off-topic question about Universities

Marco Molteni
In reply to this post by Richard A. O'Keefe-2
I have been hiring candidates as software engineers in the telecommunication and software industry for more than ten years. I myself have a master in CS.

According to the position, I look also for the University degree, with a healthy dose of skepticism, since, say, being graduated in CS has no relationship with the ability (or not) of being able to write maintainable code.

We give various levels of programming exercises to try to evaluate the candidate ability to understand a problem, come up with clean, readable, simple, tested code. We don't do stupid whiteboard coding exercises or CS theoretical questions that require to be fresh out of University. We then try to evaluate if the candidate is smart, able to work in a group or is a jerk.

Regarding the University logo, frankly, I don't even look at it, why should I ? :-)

marco
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Off-topic question about Universities

Loïc Hoguin-3
In reply to this post by Richard A. O'Keefe-2
You missed the keyword *visual*. Images are very persuasive and they're
one important aspect of a brand. It's not the entire representation of a
brand, however.

I would argue that famous alumnees are a more important image for a
University brand. If your University was creating the Bill Gates and
Warren Buffet(s) of the world, you'd probably want a picture of them
instead of your logo.

Otherwise, a University has little more imagery than its logo, and
perhaps a few landmarks. So he's not incorrect in his statement.

On 07/05/2017 03:20 AM, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:

> My University is about to go through a process of redesigning its logo.
> I'm interested in whether having a logo, a "brand", actually matters
> for a University.  Obviously it does for soap, tinned soup, and so on.
>
> Some of you are at Universities, and some of you are at companies that
> hire graduates from Universities, and some of you are graduates from
> Universities or considering (further) study.  So there should be some
> overlap with the target audience of a logo.
>
> So I was wondering if anyone had any strong opinions about Universities
> and logos, and better yet, any evidence.
>
> According to the Vice-Chancellor,
>
>   The University logo is the most prominent visual aspect of
>   the overarching University brand. Continuity and consistency
>   of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has.
>   This is what builds recognition and awareness for an organisation,
>   it is the foundation on which the visual identification of
>   the University is built.
>
> You might be as surprised as I was that reputation, quality, price,
> published research, patents, and so on are not as valuable to a
> University brand as a logo.  You might also be surprised that
> visual recognition of a University is so important.  (Imagine
> the Prime Minister at the supermarket.  "I'll have a kilo of
> University of Otago, please.  No, not that.  That's the logo
> with an *open* book, I want the one with the *closed* book.")
> Well, I guess I'll never be smart enough to be a VC.
>
> You might also be puzzled that if "Continuity and consistency
> of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has" introducing
> discontinuity and inconsistency by changing the logo could
> ever be desirable.  If so, you have overdosed on the Logic pills.
> I know I have!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>

--
Loïc Hoguin
https://ninenines.eu
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Off-topic question about Universities

Jesper Louis Andersen-2
In reply to this post by Richard A. O'Keefe-2
On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:20 AM Richard A. O'Keefe <[hidden email]> wrote:
My University is about to go through a process of redesigning its logo.
I'm interested in whether having a logo, a "brand", actually matters
for a University.  Obviously it does for soap, tinned soup, and so on.

From personal experience, I have read many papers from different universities, but for most of them, I don't know what their logomark or logotype looks like. I don't even know if they have one.

But one has to be aware that an individual is not people. A university needs branding in general because they do things in addition to research. For a "mere human", the brand is probably the association one has with a university more than their faculty. In short: make sure you don't fall for selection bias.

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Off-topic question about Universities

Lars-Åke Fredlund-2
In reply to this post by Loïc Hoguin-3
And obviously, in the context of the Erlang world, the University of
Otago is known for the famous Richard A. O'Keefe :-)

So maybe you could suggest to your Vice-Chancellor a contextual combined
logo targeted towards computer science/computer industry which includes
the general university logo and a picture of your face. Please let me
know his/her reaction to your suggestion :-)

/Lars-Ake


On 05/07/17 11:51, Loïc Hoguin wrote:

> You missed the keyword *visual*. Images are very persuasive and
> they're one important aspect of a brand. It's not the entire
> representation of a brand, however.
>
> I would argue that famous alumnees are a more important image for a
> University brand. If your University was creating the Bill Gates and
> Warren Buffet(s) of the world, you'd probably want a picture of them
> instead of your logo.
>
> Otherwise, a University has little more imagery than its logo, and
> perhaps a few landmarks. So he's not incorrect in his statement.
>
> On 07/05/2017 03:20 AM, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
>> My University is about to go through a process of redesigning its logo.
>> I'm interested in whether having a logo, a "brand", actually matters
>> for a University.  Obviously it does for soap, tinned soup, and so on.
>>
>> Some of you are at Universities, and some of you are at companies that
>> hire graduates from Universities, and some of you are graduates from
>> Universities or considering (further) study.  So there should be some
>> overlap with the target audience of a logo.
>>
>> So I was wondering if anyone had any strong opinions about Universities
>> and logos, and better yet, any evidence.
>>
>> According to the Vice-Chancellor,
>>
>>   The University logo is the most prominent visual aspect of
>>   the overarching University brand. Continuity and consistency
>>   of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has.
>>   This is what builds recognition and awareness for an organisation,
>>   it is the foundation on which the visual identification of
>>   the University is built.
>>
>> You might be as surprised as I was that reputation, quality, price,
>> published research, patents, and so on are not as valuable to a
>> University brand as a logo.  You might also be surprised that
>> visual recognition of a University is so important.  (Imagine
>> the Prime Minister at the supermarket.  "I'll have a kilo of
>> University of Otago, please.  No, not that.  That's the logo
>> with an *open* book, I want the one with the *closed* book.")
>> Well, I guess I'll never be smart enough to be a VC.
>>
>> You might also be puzzled that if "Continuity and consistency
>> of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has" introducing
>> discontinuity and inconsistency by changing the logo could
>> ever be desirable.  If so, you have overdosed on the Logic pills.
>> I know I have!
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>
>

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Off-topic question about Universities

Jesper Louis Andersen-2
Excellent idea!

It reminds me of Peter J. Weinberger:

http://spinroot.com/pico/pjw.html

and I think the brand should contain the face of Richard A. O'Keefe in the same spirit.

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:17 PM Lars-Åke Fredlund <[hidden email]> wrote:
And obviously, in the context of the Erlang world, the University of
Otago is known for the famous Richard A. O'Keefe :-)

So maybe you could suggest to your Vice-Chancellor a contextual combined
logo targeted towards computer science/computer industry which includes
the general university logo and a picture of your face. Please let me
know his/her reaction to your suggestion :-)

/Lars-Ake


On 05/07/17 11:51, Loïc Hoguin wrote:
> You missed the keyword *visual*. Images are very persuasive and
> they're one important aspect of a brand. It's not the entire
> representation of a brand, however.
>
> I would argue that famous alumnees are a more important image for a
> University brand. If your University was creating the Bill Gates and
> Warren Buffet(s) of the world, you'd probably want a picture of them
> instead of your logo.
>
> Otherwise, a University has little more imagery than its logo, and
> perhaps a few landmarks. So he's not incorrect in his statement.
>
> On 07/05/2017 03:20 AM, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
>> My University is about to go through a process of redesigning its logo.
>> I'm interested in whether having a logo, a "brand", actually matters
>> for a University.  Obviously it does for soap, tinned soup, and so on.
>>
>> Some of you are at Universities, and some of you are at companies that
>> hire graduates from Universities, and some of you are graduates from
>> Universities or considering (further) study.  So there should be some
>> overlap with the target audience of a logo.
>>
>> So I was wondering if anyone had any strong opinions about Universities
>> and logos, and better yet, any evidence.
>>
>> According to the Vice-Chancellor,
>>
>>   The University logo is the most prominent visual aspect of
>>   the overarching University brand. Continuity and consistency
>>   of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has.
>>   This is what builds recognition and awareness for an organisation,
>>   it is the foundation on which the visual identification of
>>   the University is built.
>>
>> You might be as surprised as I was that reputation, quality, price,
>> published research, patents, and so on are not as valuable to a
>> University brand as a logo.  You might also be surprised that
>> visual recognition of a University is so important.  (Imagine
>> the Prime Minister at the supermarket.  "I'll have a kilo of
>> University of Otago, please.  No, not that.  That's the logo
>> with an *open* book, I want the one with the *closed* book.")
>> Well, I guess I'll never be smart enough to be a VC.
>>
>> You might also be puzzled that if "Continuity and consistency
>> of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has" introducing
>> discontinuity and inconsistency by changing the logo could
>> ever be desirable.  If so, you have overdosed on the Logic pills.
>> I know I have!
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>
>

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Off-topic question about Universities

dieswaytoofast
10 minutes of googling resulted in
   • Number of articles, papers, studies, etc. on brand recognition in various contexts (Pepsi. IBM. etc.) --> ∞ (ok. close, but not quite)
   • Number of the same pertaining to University brands (Notre Dame. Spartans. etc.) --> ∞ (same order of infinity)
   • Number of the same pertaining to University *Logos* --> 0 (literally. zero.)

Sez. everything right there...

cheers

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 8:29 AM, Jesper Louis Andersen <[hidden email]> wrote:
Excellent idea!

It reminds me of Peter J. Weinberger:

http://spinroot.com/pico/pjw.html

and I think the brand should contain the face of Richard A. O'Keefe in the same spirit.

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:17 PM Lars-Åke Fredlund <[hidden email]> wrote:
And obviously, in the context of the Erlang world, the University of
Otago is known for the famous Richard A. O'Keefe :-)

So maybe you could suggest to your Vice-Chancellor a contextual combined
logo targeted towards computer science/computer industry which includes
the general university logo and a picture of your face. Please let me
know his/her reaction to your suggestion :-)

/Lars-Ake


On 05/07/17 11:51, Loïc Hoguin wrote:
> You missed the keyword *visual*. Images are very persuasive and
> they're one important aspect of a brand. It's not the entire
> representation of a brand, however.
>
> I would argue that famous alumnees are a more important image for a
> University brand. If your University was creating the Bill Gates and
> Warren Buffet(s) of the world, you'd probably want a picture of them
> instead of your logo.
>
> Otherwise, a University has little more imagery than its logo, and
> perhaps a few landmarks. So he's not incorrect in his statement.
>
> On 07/05/2017 03:20 AM, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:
>> My University is about to go through a process of redesigning its logo.
>> I'm interested in whether having a logo, a "brand", actually matters
>> for a University.  Obviously it does for soap, tinned soup, and so on.
>>
>> Some of you are at Universities, and some of you are at companies that
>> hire graduates from Universities, and some of you are graduates from
>> Universities or considering (further) study.  So there should be some
>> overlap with the target audience of a logo.
>>
>> So I was wondering if anyone had any strong opinions about Universities
>> and logos, and better yet, any evidence.
>>
>> According to the Vice-Chancellor,
>>
>>   The University logo is the most prominent visual aspect of
>>   the overarching University brand. Continuity and consistency
>>   of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has.
>>   This is what builds recognition and awareness for an organisation,
>>   it is the foundation on which the visual identification of
>>   the University is built.
>>
>> You might be as surprised as I was that reputation, quality, price,
>> published research, patents, and so on are not as valuable to a
>> University brand as a logo.  You might also be surprised that
>> visual recognition of a University is so important.  (Imagine
>> the Prime Minister at the supermarket.  "I'll have a kilo of
>> University of Otago, please.  No, not that.  That's the logo
>> with an *open* book, I want the one with the *closed* book.")
>> Well, I guess I'll never be smart enough to be a VC.
>>
>> You might also be puzzled that if "Continuity and consistency
>> of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has" introducing
>> discontinuity and inconsistency by changing the logo could
>> ever be desirable.  If so, you have overdosed on the Logic pills.
>> I know I have!
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>
>

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions




--
That tall bald Indian guy..
Twitter | 
Blog 
 

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Off-topic question about Universities

Fred Hebert-2
In reply to this post by Richard A. O'Keefe-2

On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Richard A. O'Keefe <[hidden email]> wrote:

 The University logo is the most prominent visual aspect of
 the overarching University brand. Continuity and consistency
 of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has.
 This is what builds recognition and awareness for an organisation,
 it is the foundation on which the visual identification of
 the University is built.


A lot of other comments are correct in that in terms of overall brand, the logo is not necessarily doing much in the case of a university. Logos are deadly important in industries related to fashion, since in that case, clothing is not copyrightable, but by plastering your logo on garment, you make the design protected by trademarks instead. No such thing really happens in universities, and as mentioned before, publications or alumni play what I'd believe to be a much bigger role.

In terms of visual branding though, the logo tends to come with a specific style and a limited set of colors; the style and those colors will usually be those that are chosen to pick the colors and influence the design of everything related to digital media (website, watermarking, mailing lists, ads, etc.), print media (fliers, forms, business cards), or general advertisement.

So when it comes to a visual identity, the logo is often a linchpin that impacts all the other aspects of the identity. Maintaining continuity in style and/or color schemes means a lot less work needs to be re-done in other aspects of the overall marketing plan. Whether that work is impactful or not on the actual brand, or whether it is its "most valuable asset" on the reputation of the university is very arguable, but it is a significant amount of work (with a significant amount of money attached to it) nonetheless.

To me it sounds like the Vice-Chancellor is overplaying the importance it has on reputation and brand as a whole, but the treasurer could reasonably make the case that it is very important when it comes to branding-related expenses.

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Off-topic question about Universities

Joe Armstrong-2
I went to a very entertaining lecture about branding.

One of the big-name brands (I won't repeat it here) wanted to
establish a YouTube presence - they were getting zero love on
YouTube and were worried about this - they wanted some impact on
"social media".

So they hired a creative-director, a team of script writers and actors
and made a
90 second video - this cost several million dollars and was shown and
approved by top management.

After a month or so they were horrified to see that only 30K people
had viewed their video.

In the post-mortem they just didn't get it - how come some crazy kids
with no media
training, no creative director, no experience could make videos that
10+ million people viewed?

Herein lies the problem - the corporate mindset wants "presence on
social media"
- I see this a lot but don't really understand what it means.

I like Twitter - for example - one of the best things are the rapid
witty interactions that take
place - there can be a Tweet storm lasting 30 seconds - seeing the
Tweets statically, somewhat later and out of context misses the point.

Certain politicians, businesses and corporate entities feel they have
to have a Twitter presence - so
they blast out meaningless bullshit - which is actually a very funny
self-parody - it's like the
companies who make websites with regulated user forums and FAQs

FAQ: 1. Is your product really as awesome as you say it is?

  Yes - in fact it's even better - all our users are very happy with
the product.

FAQ 2: I really love your product, for the money it's really good value.

   Yes - we are committed to delivering outstanding value to the customer, ...

And then there are real product forums - where the users bitch about
their problems :-)

I'm sure the University of Otago could excel with a branding exercise:

Q1: Is the University of Otago a great place delivering outstanding
value to it's students?

A1: U of O is committed to providing outstanding value to all our
students - we excel in
providing world class education and training led by our superb teams
of internationally renowned teachers. We are committed to ....

Cheers

/Joe







On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Fred Hebert <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Richard A. O'Keefe <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>  The University logo is the most prominent visual aspect of
>>  the overarching University brand. Continuity and consistency
>>  of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has.
>>  This is what builds recognition and awareness for an organisation,
>>  it is the foundation on which the visual identification of
>>  the University is built.
>
>
>
> A lot of other comments are correct in that in terms of overall brand, the
> logo is not necessarily doing much in the case of a university. Logos are
> deadly important in industries related to fashion, since in that case,
> clothing is not copyrightable, but by plastering your logo on garment, you
> make the design protected by trademarks instead. No such thing really
> happens in universities, and as mentioned before, publications or alumni
> play what I'd believe to be a much bigger role.
>
> In terms of visual branding though, the logo tends to come with a specific
> style and a limited set of colors; the style and those colors will usually
> be those that are chosen to pick the colors and influence the design of
> everything related to digital media (website, watermarking, mailing lists,
> ads, etc.), print media (fliers, forms, business cards), or general
> advertisement.
>
> So when it comes to a visual identity, the logo is often a linchpin that
> impacts all the other aspects of the identity. Maintaining continuity in
> style and/or color schemes means a lot less work needs to be re-done in
> other aspects of the overall marketing plan. Whether that work is impactful
> or not on the actual brand, or whether it is its "most valuable asset" on
> the reputation of the university is very arguable, but it is a significant
> amount of work (with a significant amount of money attached to it)
> nonetheless.
>
> To me it sounds like the Vice-Chancellor is overplaying the importance it
> has on reputation and brand as a whole, but the treasurer could reasonably
> make the case that it is very important when it comes to branding-related
> expenses.
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Off-topic question about Universities

Lloyd R. Prentice-2

Ask your students, faculty, administration, alumni, and community, Richard,  the first words and feelings that come to mind when you mention the name of your university. 

 

That's your university's brand.

 

If those words and feelings are predominantly positive, e.g. motivate students to apply, alumni to donate, community to confer tax breaks, etc.,then how do you communicate those values quickly on a sign, letterhead, proposal, or tee-shirt?

 

 A logo has no intrinsic meaning beyond the associations people have when exposed to it. If I know nothing about your institution, a well-crafted logo may convey a sense of the values that the recruiters and fund-raisers in your institution would like me to associate with your institution  through typography, shape, and color alone.

 

But if I have experience with your institution, the logo will simply reinforce the positive or negative associations I have lurking in the back of my mind.

 

Over time and the cumulative interactions and experiences many people have with your institution, your logo takes on significantly weighted symbolic value. It becomes invaluable in and of itself. Harvard University aggressively enforces proprietary rights to it's logo.

 

Thus, think of your logo as the key to a cognitive/emotional value--- a short-hand designator or stand-in for your brand.

 

When you commission a graphic designer to create a logo, you're asking the designers to combine visual elements of type, shape, and color into a highly-compressed image that brings to mind the good feelings you'd like folks to have toward you institution. If the image projected by your newly-minted logo are truly congruent with your established brand, then it's successful.

 

If not, it will fail.

 

If you have a great university, but the wider community fails to understand how good you really are--- that is, student recruitment is not up to potential, fund-raising falls, short, good faculty candidates choose other schools, then your university has a marketing problem.

 

A logo alone will not solve your marketing problem.  But it can contribute toward the success of a well-conceived and executed marketing campaign.

 

The question is how much time and money should go into creating the logo vs. how much toward crafting and executing the larger campaign.

 

You might as your administrator just exactly what problem he's attempting to solve and what else he is doing to solve it?

 

All the best,

 

LRP

 

 

 

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: "Joe Armstrong" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:30am
To: "Fred Hebert" <[hidden email]>
Cc: "Erlang" <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [erlang-questions] Off-topic question about Universities

I went to a very entertaining lecture about branding.

One of the big-name brands (I won't repeat it here) wanted to
establish a YouTube presence - they were getting zero love on
YouTube and were worried about this - they wanted some impact on
"social media".

So they hired a creative-director, a team of script writers and actors
and made a
90 second video - this cost several million dollars and was shown and
approved by top management.

After a month or so they were horrified to see that only 30K people
had viewed their video.

In the post-mortem they just didn't get it - how come some crazy kids
with no media
training, no creative director, no experience could make videos that
10+ million people viewed?

Herein lies the problem - the corporate mindset wants "presence on
social media"
- I see this a lot but don't really understand what it means.

I like Twitter - for example - one of the best things are the rapid
witty interactions that take
place - there can be a Tweet storm lasting 30 seconds - seeing the
Tweets statically, somewhat later and out of context misses the point.

Certain politicians, businesses and corporate entities feel they have
to have a Twitter presence - so
they blast out meaningless bullshit - which is actually a very funny
self-parody - it's like the
companies who make websites with regulated user forums and FAQs

FAQ: 1. Is your product really as awesome as you say it is?

Yes - in fact it's even better - all our users are very happy with
the product.

FAQ 2: I really love your product, for the money it's really good value.

Yes - we are committed to delivering outstanding value to the customer, ...

And then there are real product forums - where the users bitch about
their problems :-)

I'm sure the University of Otago could excel with a branding exercise:

Q1: Is the University of Otago a great place delivering outstanding
value to it's students?

A1: U of O is committed to providing outstanding value to all our
students - we excel in
providing world class education and training led by our superb teams
of internationally renowned teachers. We are committed to ....

Cheers

/Joe







On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Fred Hebert <[hidden email]> wrote:


>
> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Richard A. O'Keefe <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> The University logo is the most prominent visual aspect of
>> the overarching University brand. Continuity and consistency
>> of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has.
>> This is what builds recognition and awareness for an organisation,
>> it is the foundation on which the visual identification of
>> the University is built.
>
>
>
> A lot of other comments are correct in that in terms of overall brand, the
> logo is not necessarily doing much in the case of a university. Logos are
> deadly important in industries related to fashion, since in that case,
> clothing is not copyrightable, but by plastering your logo on garment, you
> make the design protected by trademarks instead. No such thing really
> happens in universities, and as mentioned before, publications or alumni
> play what I'd believe to be a much bigger role.
>
> In terms of visual branding though, the logo tends to come with a specific
> style and a limited set of colors; the style and those colors will usually
> be those that are chosen to pick the colors and influence the design of
> everything related to digital media (website, watermarking, mailing lists,
> ads, etc.), print media (fliers, forms, business cards), or general
> advertisement.
>
> So when it comes to a visual identity, the logo is often a linchpin that
> impacts all the other aspects of the identity. Maintaining continuity in
> style and/or color schemes means a lot less work needs to be re-done in
> other aspects of the overall marketing plan. Whether that work is impactful
> or not on the actual brand, or whether it is its "most valuable asset" on
> the reputation of the university is very arguable, but it is a significant
> amount of work (with a significant amount of money attached to it)
> nonetheless.
>
> To me it sounds like the Vice-Chancellor is overplaying the importance it
> has on reputation and brand as a whole, but the treasurer could reasonably
> make the case that it is very important when it comes to branding-related
> expenses.
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Off-topic question about Universities

Richard A. O'Keefe-2
The thing is, we *have* a logo.
http://www.otago.ac.nz/administration/service_divisions/external-engagement/otago017269.html
More precisely, we have a portrait version, and a landscape version, each with
colour (preferred) and black-and-white (allowed) variants.

The logo contains the University crest, granted by the Lyon King of Arms in 1948.
That's not about to change.  The rest of the logo is words, the name of the
University in English and Māori (without which the crest would be unintelligible).
The name of the University isn't about to change.  So there's not much they *can*
change.

> On 6/07/2017, at 7:40 AM, <[hidden email]> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
> Over time and the cumulative interactions and experiences many people have with your institution, your logo takes on significantly weighted symbolic value. It becomes invaluable in and of itself. Harvard University aggressively enforces proprietary rights to it's logo.

Yes, but surely that is an argument for *not* changing the logo?

I have been a student at two Universities and given lectures at four.
Until yesterday, I couldn't have told you what any of their logos looked like.
I see the logo on a van, let's say, and my brain goes "blob, University, stuff,
probably a University vehicle then."

> You might as your administrator just exactly what problem he's attempting to solve and what else he is doing to solve it?

She.  Downsizing Humanities, including some staff with seriously good international
reputations.  The latest fear is that 300 general staff may lose their jobs.
If I'm reading the 2016 annual report correctly, the University had a surplus
of NZD 21.377 million last year, up from NZD 16.143 million the year before.

A professor of accounting, who co-authored a book with my father, told me
about 40 years ago, "Richard, never go into business.  You just don't
think the right way for it."  Clearly he was right.

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Off-topic question about Universities

Lloyd R. Prentice-2
Hi Richard,

I wouldn't discount your thinking on the matter.

Changing the well-established logo of a well-regarded institution should not be undertaken lightly. You risk severing the long-established favorable associations, e.g. the symbolic value attached to your mark.

It might be done to "freshen up" an image from stogy to contemporary and forward-looking, for instance, or to signal a change in vision or direction.

Or it might be done to deflect from an unfavorable image, but that doesn't sound like the case with your university.

But tradition is a compelling value for universities. At their best, universities provide a detached, considered, conservative (in the best sense of the word) perspective on the challenges of their host culture. They preserve and champion the best of the culture while, at the same time offering up new ideas and enriched knowledge to better understand and improve the human condition. In all regards, the widespread perception of stability is a virtue.

I can't speak of European universities, but universities across the U.S. have had to cater to students who who are looking for little more than having their ticket punched for entry into the job market. Unfortunately, many politicians and business leaders see universities strictly through a business lens. How can they better train students to fill the needs of the current job market? How can university research better support the current perceived needs of business and government? This thinking gets translated into the notion that universities should be run like businesses--- trim the "fluff," offer more amenities and less rigor to students, reward the football coaches while paying adjunct faculty so little they need second and third jobs to support their families, empower the administration over faculty.

It all comes down to the mission of your university. Until there's widespread consensus   across all stakeholders re: what the university stands for and how it needs to adapt to a changing world, a new logo won't accomplish much and may, indeed, detract from other work that needs to be done.

So, Richard, as a member of the faculty, it's quite appropriate for you to ask why you need a new logo and if it's the very best use of available funds.

All the best,

Lloyd

Sent from my iPad

> On Jul 5, 2017, at 9:23 PM, Richard A. O'Keefe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> The thing is, we *have* a logo.
> http://www.otago.ac.nz/administration/service_divisions/external-engagement/otago017269.html
> More precisely, we have a portrait version, and a landscape version, each with
> colour (preferred) and black-and-white (allowed) variants.
>
> The logo contains the University crest, granted by the Lyon King of Arms in 1948.
> That's not about to change.  The rest of the logo is words, the name of the
> University in English and Māori (without which the crest would be unintelligible).
> The name of the University isn't about to change.  So there's not much they *can*
> change.
>
>> On 6/07/2017, at 7:40 AM, <[hidden email]> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Over time and the cumulative interactions and experiences many people have with your institution, your logo takes on significantly weighted symbolic value. It becomes invaluable in and of itself. Harvard University aggressively enforces proprietary rights to it's logo.
>
> Yes, but surely that is an argument for *not* changing the logo?
>
> I have been a student at two Universities and given lectures at four.
> Until yesterday, I couldn't have told you what any of their logos looked like.
> I see the logo on a van, let's say, and my brain goes "blob, University, stuff,
> probably a University vehicle then."
>
>> You might as your administrator just exactly what problem he's attempting to solve and what else he is doing to solve it?
>
> She.  Downsizing Humanities, including some staff with seriously good international
> reputations.  The latest fear is that 300 general staff may lose their jobs.
> If I'm reading the 2016 annual report correctly, the University had a surplus
> of NZD 21.377 million last year, up from NZD 16.143 million the year before.
>
> A professor of accounting, who co-authored a book with my father, told me
> about 40 years ago, "Richard, never go into business.  You just don't
> think the right way for it."  Clearly he was right.
>

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Off-topic question about Universities

Sashan Govender
In reply to this post by Richard A. O'Keefe-2
Hi Richard

Speaking as someone who attended NZ universities, in other words I was the customer, the last thing that crossed my mind was the universities logo. In fact it didn't cross my mind at all. For personal reasons I didn't have a choice when going to Massey Albany but after I finished there I could wanted to do an MSc and I picked Auckland because there were faculty who were teaching subject matter I was interested in. The logo had no influence. Criteria for me were 1) does it have the course I want and 2) who's teaching it and what's their reputation is in academic circles.

As undergrads students look for courses that align with their interests and pick tertiary instituations that match. For postgrads it's the same plus they look at the faculty.

Speaking as someone who occasionally interviews people the last thing I look for is the logo or the university. Maybe the logo matters more in other fields, but I'd rather hire people who can work things out and I can't determine that by looking at the logo next to the name of the university on a candidates CV/resume.

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 11:20 AM Richard A. O'Keefe <[hidden email]> wrote:

According to the Vice-Chancellor,

 The University logo is the most prominent visual aspect of
 the overarching University brand. Continuity and consistency
 of logo use is the most valuable asset a brand has.
 This is what builds recognition and awareness for an organisation,
 it is the foundation on which the visual identification of
 the University is built.

You might be as surprised as I was that reputation, quality, price,
published research, patents, and so on are not as valuable to a
University brand as a logo. 

I'm as surprised as you.

If Otago wants to change it's logo, I think it's a waste of money. In the future will they link the change of logo back to increased income somehow to justify changing it? Or will they say something like 'logos provide intangible value that we can't measure'. I mean if the VC can say now, at this point in time, that the logo has value, it means he can measure it, which means there should be a way to measure the return on value from changing it.



 


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Loading...