THE NEW, eagerly awaited UCL brand, which replaced the old portico logo, was unveiled two moths ago to a fanfare of universal apathy and bemused disdain. The new logo, in a slab-sided typeface, stands alongside that a slogan that is arguably meaningless and vapid – ‘London’s Global University’. The Provost, Professor Malcolm Grant, and the communications team at UCL have been working on the rebranding of the college since before the beginning of the last academic year; but it took almost a year after the unveiling of the “Campaign for UCL” (launched last November with a temporary logo) for the new logo to be made public.
The fact that the logo was released so late, alongside the fact that it has been rumoured to cost the college £600,000 (London Student said this, but they got it from the AUT teachers’ union website; The Cheese Grater heard it mentioned by a source close to the Provost himself) has raised concerns that the whole process was bungled by College. Senior sources within UCL’s communications team have vigorously denied that the logo cost £600,000 and argue that extensive market research that led up to the rebranding identified UCL’s problem as being an ignored, misunderstood and “stuffy” college within the University of London and other Russell Group universities.
The Development and Corporate Communications team have been refreshingly candid as to their aim to increase the “brand awareness” of UCL internationally, especially in America, and give a modern, competitive edge to UCL in the fight for research grants. UCL is currently stood at 25th place in the 2004/05 international league table they use (one place behind Imperial College) and it is Professor Grant’s ambition to replace Oxbridge as Britain’s premier. However alarm bells have begun to ring at all levels of the university with regard to what is seen as the “marketisation and corporatisation” of UCL, in preference to what was seen as the previous prestige logo and image which relied upon the college’s history and founding philosophy.
One student commented that it was a shame that Malcolm Grant had forgotten (or ignored) the Harvard academic and aesthete Professor Elaine Scarry’s comment that “a university is among the precious things that can be destroyed”, and expressed a worry that the new logo was purely designed to appeal to win research grants rather than appeal to the brightest and best of UK students.
Sources tell us there is considerable grumbling amongst the college academic staff about many of the proposed changes; grumbling which certainly surfaced at the 2005 graduation dinner for honorary graduates. There was an expressed sense within the college that its soul has been quietly wrestled away from them but little political will to take on of another Provost after such a short tenure. Many academics were particularly angry because they perceived that ‘UCL plc’ feels such little regard for the college that they regard its very name, which reflects the fact they we were the founding college of the University of London, as an “historical inconvenience”: a fact confirmed by the communications team which explained that University College London was a title confusing to potential American students and investors, who did not know whether UCL was a university or college. Hence the fact that from now on the college will be referred to purely as UCL – which, as John Sutherland points out, is often thought to stand for the University of Central London.
The decision itself on the final branding was made by the Provost and his management team with what could be seen as perfunctory liaison with students and even less with alumni of the university. Shockingly even those with a vested interest in UCL’s brand, such as UCL Union, were not consulted in any meaningful sense and its officers were left angry by the fact the lack of consultation. They were presented, The Cheese Grater has learned, with a done deal like the rest of the student body and forced to acquiesce.
Our sources within the development office have informed us that during the process of rebranding, roughly 800 self-selected students participated in an online consultation; over 1,500 alumni were also involved; the Union Sabbatical Officers were also consulted. They were shown a variety of logos, all of which looked fairly similar to each other. The Cheese Grater has found no evidence to suggest that any methodology was used to weight the result in order equally represent each department or faculty. Furthermore, they admit, this was just to identify the problem rather than find a solution. More extensive research was conducted with external bodies rather than students or potential students, a decision based on both cost and the fact that UCL is a “research-led institution”, not primarily an educational establishment. One angry student involved in the process described it as a “disgraceful sham designed to cover the college’s back”. When questioned Purbah Choudhury, UCL’s deputy director of corporate communications, found the idea that students themselves should be involved in the decision of which brand image to select “extraordinary”.
However the research amongst students revealed that the student body and the college agreed upon the problem: that UCL does not have an identity at home and abroad that can match Oxford and Cambridge or even Imperial and LSE. Moreover the trouble is that while UCL wants to compete with those universities it is perceived as competing with lesser universities such as Bristol and Warwick because their reputations are over-estimated while UCL’s is underestimated. However looking at both UCL’s real and perceived competitors, the majority have gone for a “modern prestige” logo which combines both modernity with a sense of prestige. Unlike UCL.
The communications team have claimed that while rebranding they faced a difficulty in that unlike many other old universities, they had no crest upon which to base a future logo. They did, however, have UCL’s founding motto, ‘cuncti adsint meritaeque expectent praemia palmae’ (‘let all come and receive the reward of victory and merit*’). Apparently this meant nothing to them.
Meanwhile the fact that UCL’s new logo has opened up the college to ridicule and talk of crisis, has angered many UCL students, aggravated since much of this mockery has come from King’s College (another perceived competitor) and London Student. Indeed recently one or two graduates expressed doubts as to whether they would support UCL Friends, the previously successful alumni fundraising programme, based on what was seen as the new ‘UCL plc’ image.
Previous Provosts have got into trouble when they have tried to rebrand the college and Professor Grant was no doubt aware of this when he bravely went about the process. However he thought that his rebranding solution would settle UCL’s future, The Cheese Grater is afraid that he is very much mistaken.
Watch this space for further information on the new UCL
*Vergil, Aeneid book 5, line 70.
