University Branding – Building an Effective Buy-In and Approval Process

Posted by: Chris Lester, Principal Feb 28, 2011 0 Comments

One of the challenges to a university branding project is incorporating the right level of input and creating an effective feedback and approval environment. Branding requires a great deal of soul searching and self-assessment, demanding cooperation, support, and ultimately acceptance—qualities rarely universal in large working groups. Typically, the larger the feedback group, the more difficult it is to successfully complete a branding project.

Lots of input, limited feedback

The number of stakeholders at the table when making decisions regarding a university’s brand can be overwhelming—there will undoubtedly be a large number of stakeholders who will require a voice in the process.

To navigate this, you will need to separate input from feedback. Input should be received from all involved, while feedback should be limited to the smallest number of decision-makers possible.

It’s important to identify objective measures that the branding can be measured against and use those measures as a framework to guide the input, and ultimately the feedback, process. To identify the objectives, you will need to define what you hope your university’s brand will achieve.

Clear objectives, compelling value

As an example, let’s say we want our brand to be TRUSTWORTHY and INTERESTING, which, in turn, will help make it motivating.

Qualities that will make the brand trustworthy could be:

• Consistency—Create universal conventions that support consistent use of the identity and can be consistently applied across ALL communications.

• Recognizability—There should be no question about the university’s affiliation to its communications. The hierarchy should be clear and consistent, and the identity should always be significant.

• Clarity—Hierarchies should be obvious, and the purpose of any communication should be absolutely clear.

• Brevity/Simplicity—The visible components of communications should focus on only what is necessary to communicate its purpose. All other information should be made available in a logical manner within the context of the communication.

Qualities that will make the brand interesting could be:

• Vibrance—Bright, colorful, and attractive

• Energy—Active and alive—communicates that things are happening

• Optimism—Positive and human—appeals to our better selves

• Unexpectedness—Create contrasts and transitions that are less predictable

It’s important to keep the number of objective measures manageable and make them, and the process for applying them, clear to all stakeholders. The input group should be engaged at the highest level and should be made aware of the rationale for going through the branding process as well as its intended outcome. Examples of the kind of input that would be most valuable to the process would be getting their impression of the university’s image and their thoughts on important factors that contribute to a positive brand impression, like reputation, academics, location, legacy, history, mission, community, etc. The input group could also be asked to articulate how they go about describing the university to those less familiar with it.

This input will help guide decisions made in the branding process so that the work, whether it’s written or visual, will capture and magnify the most compelling value of the university’s brand.

The branding work should be evaluated against the agreed upon objectives and reflect the identified qualities. Feedback should not take the form of what someone likes or dislikes, but rather, it should be focused on whether the work reflects the qualities essential to reaching the objectives. Those qualities should be prioritized. For instance, consistency may be the most important aspect initially, so it could be weighted more heavily than, say, unexpectedness. You will have to make that determination based on your branding context, but if you keep the conversation focused on objective measures, chances are you will end up getting through the process successfully.

A real effort to keep the numbers in the decision-making group limited will also help ensure that decisions are less frequently second-guessed and progress is not continuously paralyzed. Also, the fact that stakeholder perspectives have been considered will inspire more confidence in the overall approach.

Focusing feedback on objective measures will help counteract the damaging affect of the personal preferences and preconceptions that frequently find their way into the branding process. Very few individuals are comfortable assuming the liability of approval of work so visible to the university, but by using this approach, that liability is shared across a thoughtful and rational process to which all stakeholders contributed.

Enjoy this post?

Subscribe to the feed

Chris Lester

Principal

• Most Recent
• Topics

View all previous posts