[erlang-questions] Off-topic question about Universities

[Richard A. O'Keefe]

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!