18 August 2023 
 
Adam Irish 
By email: [FYI request #23472 email] 
 
 
Tēnā koe Adam  
 
I refer to your information request dated 11 July 2023 made under the Official Information Act 1982 
(the Act). You have requested information in relation to the University of Otago’s new brand. 
 
We note that on 9 August 2023, we extended the time limit by which we must make a decision on 
your request of 11 July 2023, to 18 August 2023. 
 
Please see below our responses to each of your questions. 
 
Approval of rebranding decision: 
 
a.  Who were the individuals or decision-making bodies responsible for approving the 
University of Otago’s rebranding decision? Please provide the names and titles of these 
individuals or bodies. 
 
The University of Otago Council approved the new brand. The names and details of those on the 
University Council are publicly available on the University website. 
 
b.  What was the decision-making process followed for the approval of the rebranding 
decision? Please describe the steps taken and the criteria considered during this process. 
 
The University had been actively reviewing its brand since 2019. The project was a collaboration 
between the University of Otago and representatives of mana whenua, with additional oversight from 
a dedicated steering group and the University of Otago Council at key points in the process. While the 
COVID-19 pandemic caused delays to key phases of the project, the University began initial 
stakeholder consultation in December 2022 once an extensive consultation plan and proposed draft 
concepts were approved by the University Council. Consultation took place between December 2022 
and March 2023. 
 
Council members were briefed on the proposals for the new brand in a series of Council meetings 
from July 2022 onwards. A set of decision criteria was developed to support the University’s Senior 
Leadership Team and Council with key decisions throughout the project. These criteria considered: 
 
•  Strategic alignment 
•  Potential achievability  
•  Potential affordability  
•  Potential value for money  
•  Engagement with future students and influencers 
•  Engagement with current students  

---

•  Engagement with staff  
•  Engagement with Alumni  
 
Profiles of decision-makers: 
 
a.  Could you please provide the profiles of the individuals who approved the rebranding 
decision? This should include their names, professional positions, personal and family 
histories in Otago, connections to Otago University, and any affiliations they have. Please 
provide the meeting minutes and who voted for and against the rebranding. 
 
As noted above and in our email to you of 9 August 2023, the details of those on the University of 
Otago Council are publicly available on the University website. This includes their names, professional 
positions, education details, and the details of any other University of Otago Committees they chair or 
are a member of.  
 
We decline providing their “family histories in Otago” pursuant to section 9(2)(a) of the Act, as it is 
necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons. We have determined that University of Otago 
Council members have a strong privacy interest in respect of information relating to their private lives 
(i.e., their home and family). This is personal information about Council members and is “information 
a reasonable person would expect to remain private”.1 We acknowledge that our Council members 
were acting in their professional capacities when approving the University’s new brand, however, the 
information that has been requested (beyond what is already publicly available online) relates to their 
private lives, rather than their public and professional lives. 
 
With regards to your request for “any affiliations” University of Otago Council members have; we note 
that the University of Otago Council Register of Interests notes the interests of each Council member 
including the entity and the nature of the interest. The Register of Interests is made publicly available 
online as part of the Council meeting papers for each meeting (provided to you in our email of 9 
August 2023). In case it is helpful, please see attached a copy of the most recent University of Otago 
Council Register of Interests for the 8 August 2023 meeting.  
 
The decision to approve the University of Otago’s new brand was a unanimous decision by the 
University of Otago Council. This decision was confirmed during Part 1 – Open Committee section 
(item 6. Tuakiritaka Project) of the Council meeting held 11 July 2023. These meeting minutes are 
available online as part of the Council meeting papers for the 8 August 2023 meeting. However, in 
case it is helpful, please see attached a copy of the meeting minutes from the 11 July 2023 meeting of 
the University Council. 
 
We note that the University Council met earlier on 11 July 2023 for a Council-only session to consider 
the decision. On grounds of enabling the University to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, 
commercial activities (pursuant to section 9(2)(i) of the Act), and the effective conduct of public affairs 
through the free and frank expression of individuals (pursuant to section 9(2)(g)(i) of the Act), we have 
determined that it is appropriate to withhold the minutes from the Council-only session. We note that 
the non-public parts of Council meetings are conducted on a Chatham House rules basis – to enable 
free and frank discussions between members. Accordingly, the expectation of all parties that attended 
the Council-only session is that any information shared during the meeting would be deemed to be 
private. 
 
 
 
1 Ombudsman’s Guidance on section 9(2)(a) at 4. 

---

b.  Additionally, please provide information regarding the decision-makers’ knowledge of the 
history of the University of Otago, including any qualifications, research, or expertise they 
possess in this area. 
 
As noted previously, Council members’ qualifications are publicly available on the University website. 
With regards to information about research undertaken by Council members’ or expertise they may 
have about the history of the University of Otago, we decline this part of your request pursuant to 
18(g) of the Act on the basis that we do not hold the information requested. We note, however, that 
some of this information may be publicly available online. 
 
Consultation with Otago Scottish Heritage Council, Heritage NZ, the Presbyterian Church in 
Dunedin and Kāi Tahu: 
 
a.  Did the University of Otago consult with the Otago Scottish Heritage Council, Heritage NZ, or 
the Presbyterian Church in Dunedin during the development of its branding proposals? 
 
The University of Otago did not consult with the Otago Scottish Heritage Council, Heritage NZ, or the 
Presbyterian Church in Dunedin during the development of its branding proposals. 
 
b.  If consultation did take place, please provide details regarding the nature, extent, and 
outcomes of these consultations. 
 
Not applicable, as the University did not consult with the Otago Scottish Heritage Council, Heritage NZ, 
or the Presbyterian Church in Dunedin during the development of its branding proposals. 
 
c.  What was the extent of Kāi Tahu’s involvement in the branding proposal development and 
decision-making processes? Please provide details on the specific aspects they were 
consulted on, the feedback they provided, and the dates and at what stage of the proposal 
was their feedback sought and received? 
 
The University worked in collaboration with Kāi Tahu papatipu rūnaka Te Rūnanga o Ōtākou and Kāti 
Huirapa Rūnaka ki Puketeraki. This collaboration involved representatives of mana whenua sharing 
their mātauranga (knowledge) of the history of the region and its inhabitants, places of geographic 
and historic importance, and expertise on Kāi Tahu language and customs. This collaboration included 
the University sharing concepts for the new brand and seeking feedback from the representatives. 
These engagements occurred at regular interviews during the project between 2021 and 2023. 
 
Clarification on the statement made in a recent Stuff article: 
 
a.  In a recent Stuff article, it was mentioned by Council member Suzanne Ellison that “it was 
about elevating the name, and improving something that wasn’t ‘quite right’”. Please 
provide explanation and/or further clarification regarding the meaning of this statement. 
 
We have decided to decline this part of your request pursuant to section 18(g) of the Act on the basis 
that the information requested is not held by the University and would require us to generate an 
opinion or explanation in order to respond to your question. Guidance provided by the Office of the 
Ombudsman notes that “generating an opinion or explanation may amount to the creation of new 
information, rather than the provision of information already held. Such requests may be refused 
under section 18(g)”.2 Ms Ellison has advised that she does not hold any information in relation to 
your request, therefore we have no further information to provide.  
 
2 Ombudsman’s Guidance on sections 18(e) and 18(g) at 12. 
 

---

Involvement of individuals responsible for forecasting student numbers in financial 
decisions: 
 
a.  Were the same individuals who were responsible for the erroneous forecasting of student 
numbers involved in the financial decisions related to the initial allocation of funding for this 
rebranding project? 
b.  If yes, please provide details of their involvement and the extent to which their input 
influenced the financial decisions. 
 
No staff who are, or were, involved in any forecasting of student numbers were also involved in the 
financial decisions related to the initial allocation of funding for the rebranding project. 
 
Employment status of individuals involved: 
 
a.  Have any individuals who were involved in the student number forecasting and funding 
allocation for the rebranding proposal subsequently lost their jobs or no longer work at the 
University of Otago? If yes, please provide information on the nature of their departure and 
the reasons for their departure. 
 
As no staff were involved in student number forecasting and the allocation of funding for the 
rebranding project, we decline this part of your request pursuant to 18(g) of the Act on the basis that 
we do not hold the information requested. 
 
Support for rebranding proposals: 
 
a.  How did the University of Otago determine that two-thirds of the University community 
supports the rebranding proposals? Please provide information on the methodology used to 
assess the alleged level of support. 
 
To clarify, almost three quarters of those surveyed by the University supported the proposed brand as 
reflecting the University’s future direction. More than two thirds supported both the English and te 
reo Māori versions initially proposed. 
 
The purpose of the University’s consultation was to hear from the University community whether they 
believed the proposed visual identity reflected the future direction of the University and reflected the 
design principles (whakapapa to our stories, iconic, practical). Given that the University’s staff and 
students are spread across five campuses, and Alumni are located around the world, a survey 
supported by other engagement activities was chosen as the main consultation tool to give everyone 
the same opportunity to comment. Other supporting engagement activities included: 
 
•  All staff forum (in person and online). 
•  Emails to all staff and students. 
•  Emails to 80,000 alumni (all alumni for whom the University has email contact details and 
permission to contact) 
•  Social media posts. 
•  Public media briefing. 
•  Reminders to complete the survey. 
•  Creation of an email address so that the community to directly ask questions, provide 
feedback or seek assistance. 
 
 

---

Further information on how the University consulted on its new brand, the development of the 
survey, and the tools and analysis methods used, are available in the Tuakiritaka Consultation Findings 
document (pages 6 – 10), which is publicly available online. Please see attached a copy of this 
document (noting that we provided a copy of this document to you in our email of 9 August 2023). 
 
b.  What specific questions were used to gauge the level of support (and the simplified 
extrapolation) for the two thirds support for the rebranding proposal? 
 
Details of the questions, the themes of the questions, and an analysis of the questions asked in the 
survey are available in the Tuakiritaka Consultation Findings document (page 15 onwards). This 
includes breakdowns of responses by group and age, comment themes, overall sentiments, and 
comment examples. 
 
c.  Was the rebranding proposal presented to the entire University community for feedback 
and input? If so, please provide details of the channels or methods used to gather feedback. 
 
The rebranding proposal and survey were presented to the entire University community (staff, 
students, and all alumni for whom the University had email addresses and permission to contact). As 
noted above, the University engaged in a variety of activities to inform and reach out to the University 
community. This information is also available in the Tuakiritaka Consultation Findings document 
(pages 8 – 10).  
 
An email address was established for the consultation in order to capture feedback from those who 
were not able to complete the survey for reasons of technological or physical accessibility, and to 
ensure that all alumni who had changed email address or unsubscribed from university 
communications could request a survey link. Staff- and student-only emails were also sent directly 
from that email address so that there was a location for replies and questions to be collated and 
responded to. It is important to note that consultation around the Tuakiritaka proposals was intended 
for the immediate University community (i.e., current staff, current students, and alumni). Some of 
the email feedback received was from outside of these groups. 
 
The University’s central social media channels (Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, and Instagram) were used 
to post about the consultation and all response were monitored and replied to where appropriate. 
Posters and video displays were established across all of the University’s campuses to encourage staff 
and students to engage in the consultation process. The week following the survey opening, two 
question and answer forums were held – one for students and one for staff. Both were held with 
attendance welcome both in person and virtually. A reminder was also sent from the survey tool to all 
those who had not completed the survey after two weeks, and a notice was put in the weekly staff 
email bulletin. 
 
d.  What percentage of Alumni responded to the survey and what was their percentage of 
support for the rebranding. 
 
Out of the 82,018 alumni who were contacted with a link to the survey, 5,859 responded. This equates 
to a response rate of approximately 7%. The analysis of the questions asked in the survey (from page 
15 of the attached Tuakiritaka Consultation Findings document) details how alumni responded to the 
questions – for example, 71% of alumni agreed that the English version of the brand proposal 
reflected the future direction of the University, and 51% of alumni agreed that the te reo Māori 
version of the brand proposal reflected the future direction of the University (see page 16). 
 
 
 

---

In the above cases, we consider that good reasons exist for withholding information, and this is not 
outweighed by other considerations which would make it desirable, in the public interest, to make the 
information available. If you are not satisfied with our response to your information request, section 
28(3) of the Act provides you with the right to ask an Ombudsman to investigate and review this 
response. However, we would welcome the opportunity to discuss any concerns with you first. 
 
 
Ngā mihi 
 
 
 
Kelsey Kennard 
Official Information and Compliance Coordinator 
Office of the Registrar 

---

University of Otago Council Part 1 - Disclosure of Interests
UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO COUNCIL 
REGISTER OF INTERESTS 
(As disclosed on appointment to the Council and updated as necessary) 
 
All University of Otago Council members are Trustees of The Hocken Collection. 
 
Professor Ralph W Adler 
Entity 
Nature of Interest 
University of Otago 
Employee 
Adler Family Foundation 
Trustee 
Dunedin Community Accounting 
Trustee 
 
Frazer B Barton 
Entity 
Nature of Interest (Notification Date of Change) 
ALC Trustees No 1 Limited 
Director 
ALAL Limited 
Director 
Anderson Lloyd Shareholding Company Limited 
Director / Partner 
Anderson Lloyd Partnership 
Partner 
Anderson Lloyd Trustee Company Limited 
Director 
Calvert & Co Trustees Limited 
Director 
Enterprise Risk Management Limited 
Shareholder (ceased 31/8/2021) 
Insolvency Management Limited 
Shareholder (ceased 31/7/2020) 
Naseby Development Trust 
Trustee 
New Zealand Law Society / Te Kāhui Ture o 
President and Board Member 
Aotearoa 
Otago Law Practitioners Benevolent Fund 
Trustee 
Pine Time Limited 
Director (ceased 13/7/2021) 
Presbyterian Support Otago Incorporated 
Trustee (ceased 15/12/2020) 
PSO Retirement Villages Limited 
Director (ceased 24/2/2021) 
TCP Holdings Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
The Otago Law Practitioners Benevolent Fund 
Trustee 
 
 
 
Brendan J Boyle (appointed 1 November 2022) 
Entity 
Nature of Interest 
Brendan Boyle Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Fairway Resolution Holdings Limited 
Director 
Fairway Resolution Limited 
Director 
Education Review Office Independent 
Member 
Children’s Monitoring Steering Group 
Future for Local Government Review 
Government Appointee 
NZ Treasury Governance Group 
Co-General Manager  
NZ Treasury Risk and Audit Committee 
Member 
 
 
 
11 July 2023 
3

---

University of Otago Council Part 1 - Disclosure of Interests
UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO COUNCIL 
REGISTER OF INTERESTS 
Hon Clare E Curran  
Entity 
Nature of Interest 
Curran Consultants Ltd 
Director / Shareholder 
Dunedin Night Shelter Trust 
Chair / Trustee 
Good Shepherd NZ Ltd 
Director  (to 18/11/2022) 
Good Shepherd NZ Trust 
Trustee 
Life Matters Suicide Prevention Trust 
Co-General Manager  
Mental Health Network 
Chair 
The Network for Learning Ltd 
Director 
UNDP Bangkok Regional Hub 
Consultant 
 
Martin R Dippie 
Entity 
Nature of Interest 
Cardrona Alpine Resort Ltd 
Director (from 14/4/2022) 
Central Land Holdings Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Derby Street Limited 
Director 
Fiordland Travel Ltd 
Director (from 14/4/2022) 
Hoveton Trustees Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
International Antarctic Attraction Ltd 
Director (from 14/4/2022) 
Ironside Properties Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Jacks Hardware and Timber Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Jacks Property Services Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
M10 IP Holding Company Limited 
Director 
M10 IP Trust Limited 
Director 
Milford Sound Flightseeing Ltd 
Director (from 14/4/2022) 
Mitre 10 (NZ) Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Mitre 10 Holdings Limited 
Director 
Mitre 10 Imports Limited 
Director 
Orange and Black Limited 
Director 
Orchard Road Holdings Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Otago Business Park Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Otago Land & Merchants Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Otago Land Group Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Otago Rescue Helicopter Limited 
Director 
Otago Rescue Helicopter Trust 
Trustee 
Real Group Ltd  
Chair / Shareholder (from 6/4/2022) 
Real Journeys Ltd 
Director (from 14/4/2022) 
RealNZ Ltd 
Director (from 14/4/2022) 
Sebring Treasury Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Three Parks Properties Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
University of Otago Holdings Ltd 
Director 
Wanaka Hardware and Building Supplies Ltd 
Director / Shareholder 
 
 
 
11 July 2023 
4

---

University of Otago Council Part 1 - Disclosure of Interests
UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO COUNCIL 
REGISTER OF INTERESTS 
Suzanne L Ellison 
Entity 
Nature of Interest 
Kati Huirapa Runaka ki Puketeraki 
Runaka Manager 
Manawapopore Trust 
Trustee 
Dunedin City Council Creative Dunedin Partnership  Runaka Representative (ceased Oct 2022) 
Karitane Maori Tours Limited  
Director  
 
Stephen J Higgs 
Entity 
Nature of Interest 
BPAC NZ Limited 
Director (from 6/9/2021) 
Cumberland Property Group Limited 
Director 
Cumberland Rural Properties Limited 
Director 
Headwaters NZ Limited 
Director (ceased 12 March 2021) 
High Health Alliance Limited 
Director (ceased 22 February 2021) 
LP Management No 3 Limited 
Director 
LP Management Services Limited  
Director 
LP Management No 10 Limited (Counties Medical 
Director (ceased 6 December 2022) 
Practice) 
Mitern Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Otago Federated Farmers Charitable Trust 
Trustee 
NZ Formulary Ltd 
Director (from 20/10/2021) 
Otago Innovation Limited 
Director (ceased 30 August 2022) 
Polson Higgs Wealth Management Limited 
Director  
South Link Education Trust 
Trustee 
University of Otago Foundation Trust 
Trustee 
University of Otago Holdings Limited 
Director 
Vetlife Limited 
Director 
Nexeus Global Ltd 
Director 
Comhla Vet Ltd 
Director 
 
Quintin D Jane 
Entity 
Nature of Interest 
Otago University Students’ Association 
Representative 
NZ University Students’ Association 
Board Member; Council Member 
 
Melissa L Lethaby  
Entity 
Nature of Interest 
Achieve – the National Post-Secondary Education 
University of Otago representative 
Disability Network NZ Limited  
George Street Normal School Parent Teacher 
Vice-President 
Association Incorporated 
University of Otago  
Employee 
 
 
 
11 July 2023 
5

---

University of Otago Council Part 1 - Disclosure of Interests
UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO COUNCIL 
REGISTER OF INTERESTS 
Professor Helen D Nicholson 
Entity 
Nature of Interest 
AAW Jones Custodian Limited 
Director 
AAW Jones Charitable Trust 
Trustee 
McMillan Nominees Limited 
Director 
NZ Vice-Chancellors’ Committee (Universities NZ) 
Committee Member 
University of Otago 
Employee 
University of Otago Foundation Trust 
Ex officio Trustee 
University of Otago Holdings Limited 
Ex officio Director 
Ageing Well National Science Challenge 
Member of Governance Group 
Healthier Lives National Science Challenge 
Member of Governance Group 
National University of Samoa 
Council Member 
 
Patricia A Oakley 
Entity 
Nature of Interest 
Forsyth Barr Limited 
Employee / Shareholder 
Financial Services Council Investment and KiwiSaver  Co-Chair 
Committee 
 
Financial Services Council Strategic Research 
Chair 
Committee 
 
Royal New Zealand Ballet 
Trustee (from 30/6/2022) 
Institute of Directors – National Council 
Council Member Vice President 
Institute of Directors – Otago Southland Branch 
Chairperson 
New Zealand Institute of Directors 
Director (from 1/7/2022) 
New Zealand Lotteries Commission 
Member 
Global Women 
Member 
The Food Club Limited 
Shareholder 
University of Otago Holdings Limited 
Director 
 
Malcolm A Wong 
Entity 
Nature of Interest 
Aylesbury Investments Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Book City Limited 
Shareholder 
Chinese Poll Tax Heritage Trust 
Trustee 
CNW Trustees (2007) Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
CNW Trustees (2017) Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
CNW Trustees (2020) Limited 
Director / Shareholder  
CNW Trustees Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Cook North & Wong Limited 
Director / Shareholder 
Dunedin Casinos Charitable Trust 
Trustee (from 9/11/2021) 
Dunedin Chinese Gardens Trust 
Trustee 
Kotahitaka Trust Board 
Trustee 
Otago Community Trust 
Trustee 
Sun Gum Saan Limited 
Director (from 27/09/2021) 
P M Yelavich Anaesthetics Limited 
Shareholder 
William Sherriff Charitable Trust 
Trustee 
 
11 July 2023 
6

---

University of Otago Council Part 1 - University Council Minutes
 
 
COUNCIL 
 
 
Minutes of a meeting of the University Council 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
11 July 2023 
 
 
Present 
The Chancellor (in the Chair), the Pro-Chancellor, the Vice-Chancellor 
(Acting), Professor R W Adler, Mr F B Barton, Mr B J Boyle, Hon C E Curran, 
Mr M R Dippie, Ms S L Ellison, Mr Q D Jane and Mr M A Wong. 
 
In attendance 
The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Acting) Academic, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor 
(External Engagement), the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Enterprise), 
the Chief Financial Officer, the Director of Strategy, Analytics and Reporting, 
the General Counsel and Acting Registrar, and the Deputy Secretary to the 
Council 
 
 
Mr H Paul, Ms M McPherson (Item 5) and Mr S McLauchlan and Mr A Lee 
(Item 14) 
 
Apologies 
Ms M L Lethaby and the Chief Operating Officer 
 
Welcome 
On behalf of the Council, the Chancellor welcome Professor Phil Bremer to his 
first meeting of Council. 
 
Acknowledgment 
On behalf of the Council, the Chancellor welcomed members of the public, 
media, members of the Protect Otago Action Group and mana whenua. 
 
 
Part 1: Open Committee 
 
Opening Karakia  
led by Ms S L Ellison 
 
1.  Disclosure of Interest and Register of Interests 
 
 
 
The Council received the current Register of Interests for members of the 
University of Otago Council. 
 
 
2. University Council Minutes 
 
 
 
Part 1 of the Minutes of the meetings of the Council held on 13 June 2023 were 
confirmed. 
 
 
 
 
7

---

University of Otago Council Part 1 - University Council Minutes
 
3.  University of Otago Senate 
 
The Council received Communications from the Senate, dated 28 June 2023. 
 
 
 
The Council 
 
APPROVED 
-  the renaming of the Consumer Food Science subject for the Master of 
Applied Science, Postgraduate Diploma in Applied Science, and 
Postgraduate Certificate in Applied Science to Food and Agriculture, 
including amendments to the subject requirements and the introduction of 
new papers, FOSC 406 Topics in Advanced Food Science 6 and FOSC 407 
Topics in Advanced Food Science 7. 
 
 
-  the deletion of the Obesity Prevention and Management endorsement for the 
Postgraduate Diploma in Health Sciences and the Postgraduate Certificate in 
Health Sciences, including the deletion of papers OBPM 401, OBPM 402, 
and OBPM 403. 
 
 
3.1 
Division of Sciences – School of Computing 
 
The Council received a memorandum from the Pro-Vice-Chancellors of 
Commerce and Sciences, dated 5 July 2023 regarding the proposal to establish a 
School of Computing within the Division of Sciences. 
 
The Council 
 
APPROVED 
-  the establishment of a new School of Computing within the Division of 
Sciences, with the establishment date of 1 August 2023. 
 
-  the disestablishment of the Department of Information Sciences in the 
Division of Commerce. 
 
-  the disestablishment of the Department of Computer Science in the Division 
of Sciences. 
 
 
3.2 
Admissions Statute 
 
The Council received a memorandum from the Secretary to the Senate, dated 4 
July 2023. 
 
The Council 
 
APPROVED 
-  the consequential amendments to the Admission to University Statute 2011. 
 
 
 
 
8

---

University of Otago Council Part 1 - University Council Minutes
 
4.  Finance Review 
 
The Council received a Financial Review Part 1 report for the period ended 31 
May 2023 from the Chief Financial Officer and 
 
NOTED 
that the report was taken as read. The report recorded that the operating surplus 
was $2.7 million lower than the budgeted surplus of $123.3 million.  This 
unfavourable variance was largely due to lower student enrolments resulting in 
student related income being $17.5 million lower than budget. This is offset by 
lower scholarships and consumables expenditure, a $2.5 million unbudgeted 
dividend received from University of Otago Holdings, staff vacancies and lower 
than budgeted depreciation which is due to a delay in capital project builds. 
 
Liquidity continues to be strong and cash reserves are currently sufficient to 
meet expenditure on major projects over the coming months. There is an 
expectation that borrowing will recommence in August 2023. 
 
 
5.  Vice-Chancellor’s Report 
 
The Council received a report from the Vice-Chancellor (Acting), dated 4 July 
2023 and 
 
NOTED 
that Professor Nicholson discussed the following items: the funding received 
from the Health Research Council of New Zealand for Otago researchers ($52 
million),  Otago has topped the 2022 TEC Educational Performance Indicators 
(that measure educational performance of students in areas of course 
completion rate, first-year retention rate, qualification completion rate and 
student progression from sub-degree study), Honorary degree conferral event 
scheduled for the 19 July 2023, August Graduation ceremonies scheduled for 
the 19 August 2023 and the recent Government’s funding injection for Otago – 
further meetings are being scheduled with OUSA, TEU and some political 
parties with the purpose to seek additional Government funding, and this 
includes working with Victoria University of Wellington. 
   
The Council acknowledged the benefits of receiving updates on senior staff 
appointments in the report and would like management to consider also 
including information about departing senior staff in the report. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
9

---

University of Otago Council Part 1 - University Council Minutes
 
6.  Tuakiritaka Project 
 
 
 
The Chancellor extended a warm welcome to mana whenua and on behalf of 
Council thanked Te Rūnanga o Ōtākou and Kāti Huirapa Rūnaka ki Puketeraki 
and all those involved in the project to date. 
 
 
 
He noted that this has been significant matter for Council to consider and 
members have deliberated in length over several meetings before the decision 
was made. 
 
 
 
The Chancellor announced the following: 
 
-  The name, University of Otago, will remain the same. 
-  A new te reo Māori name will be adopted - Ōtākou Whakaihu Waka – a 
metaphor meaning A Place of Many Firsts 
-  A new tohu (symbol), created in collaboration with mana whenua will be 
adopted. 
-  The present Coat of Arms will continue to be used in a variety of situations. 
-  A newly created stylised version of the Coat of Arms has also been designed 
to be used in international marketing and alumni communications to reflect 
Otago’s heritage. 
 
The decision has followed an extensive consultation process with the 
University community – students, staff, alumni, prospective students, parents, 
international partners and ranking agencies.   
 
These changes reflect Otago’s heritage and the future – representing the 
direction of Vision 2040 and the priorities in the strategic plan, Pae Tata. 
 
The Vice-Chancellor (Acting) commented that management are fully 
supportive of the proposed brand change which reflects the University’s future 
direction.  
 
These changes will take effect in May next year as the Council balances 
changes with the current financial situation.  This also aligns with the new 
recruitment cycle for 2025 students.  It is planned to roll out the changes over 
12 months and across two financial years at a cost of $1.3 million. 
 
Council reiterated the importance of this decision and acknowledged the 
extensive consultation process that has been undertaken which sets the tone to 
be a university of the future, which is recognised and is reflective of Otago’s 
commitment to stakeholders and to remain has world leaders in tertiary 
teaching and research. 
 
 
 
 
10

---

University of Otago Council Part 1 - University Council Minutes
 
7. Exclusion of the Public 
 
The Chancellor moves that the public be excluded from the whole of the proceeding of this meeting/the 
following parts of the proceedings of this meeting, namely, — 
 
 
Item 8 
Pt 2 of the Minutes of the meeting of the University Council held on 13 June 
2023 
 
Item 9 
University Council Work Plan and Action Follow-Register 
 
Item 10 
Health and Safety Report for May 2023 
 
Item 11 
Vice-Chancellor’s Report 
 
Item 12 
Emeritus Professors 
 
Item 13 
Public Orator 
 
Item 14 
University of Otago Foundation Trust 
 
Item 15 
Financial Improvement Report 
 
Item 16 
Financial Reports 
 
Item 17 
Audit and Risk 
 
Item 18 
Council Only Business 
The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing 
this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under Section 48(1) of the Local 
Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as 
follows: - 
 
 
General Subject 
Reason for passing this 
Ground under Section 
 
 
resolution 
48(1)(a) for the passing 
 
 
 
of this resolution 
 
 
Items 8-18 
Good reason for withholding Section 48(1)(a)(ii) 
 
Confidential Minutes  information under the Official 
 
and Reports 
Information Act 
 
This resolution is made in reliance on Section 48(1)(a)(ii) of the Local Government Official 
Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by Sections 6,7 
and/or 9 of the Official Information Act 1982 (except Section 9(2)(g)(i)) as the case may require.  The 
interests which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings 
of the meeting in public are as follows (all references are to Section 9 of the Official Information Act): 
 
Item 8 
Pt 2 of the Minutes of the meeting of the 
s9(2)(a), (i), and (k) 
University Council held on 13 June 2023 
Item 9 
University Council Work Plan and Action Follow-
s9(2)(a), (i) and (k) 
Register 
Item 10 
Health and Safety Report for May 2023 
s9((2)(a), (ba), (c) and 
(g)(ii) 
Item 11 
Vice-Chancellor’s Report 
s9(2)(a), (i), (j) and (k) 
Item 12 
Emeritus Professors 
s9(2)(a) 
Item 13 
Public Orator 
s9(2)(a) 
Item 14 
University of Otago Foundation Trust 
s9(2)(i), (j) and (k) 
Item 15 
Financial Improvement Report 
s9(2)(i) and (k) 
Item 16 
Financial Reports 
s9(2)(i) and (k) 
Item 17 
Audit and Risk 
s9(2)(i) and (k) 
Item 18 
Council Only Business 
s9(2)(i), (j) and (k) 
 
AND THAT for Items 8-17- Professors A Ballantyne, R Blaikie, Mr D Thomson, Mr B Trott and for 
Item 14 – Mr Alan and Mr Stuart McLauchlan be permitted to remain at this meeting after the public 
has been excluded because of their knowledge of the matters to be discussed.  This knowledge, which 
will be of assistance in relation to the matters to be discussed, is relevant to those matters because it 
 
11

---

University of Otago Council Part 1 - University Council Minutes
 
relates to aspects of the administration and/or knowledge of specific capital projects of the University 
of Otago for which these people are responsible. The General Counsel and Acting Registrar and the 
Deputy Secretary is also permitted to remain at the meeting for Items 1-18 to provide secretarial 
support and advice. 
 
 
12

---

Tuakiritaka Consultation Findings
Tuakiritaka
Consultation Findings  |  2023
1

---

Contents
Purpose of this document
Contents
Purpose of this document
This report presents findings and analysis of the Tuakiritaka project consultation undertaken during March and April 
Purpose of this document  ..................................................................................................................................................3
2023. It includes the results of an online survey of University of Otago alumni, staff and students, which sought their 
feedback and input about proposals to change the visual identity of our brand. 
Executive summary  ...............................................................................................................................................................4
The findings of this report will be used to inform the recommendations to the University’s Council on whether a proposed 
Background to the proposal ...............................................................................................................................................5
new Māori name, tohu and wordmark should be adopted in our branding.
Background to the consultation .......................................................................................................................................6
How we consulted and measured the results ...........................................................................................................7-8
 
Survey development ......................................................................................................................................................9
 
Distribution of survey ....................................................................................................................................................10
 
Other consultation methods ......................................................................................................................................10
Survey findings ..........................................................................................................................................................................11
 
Respondents ......................................................................................................................................................................11
 
Comments and themes ................................................................................................................................................14
 
1.  Alignment of the proposal with the future direction of the University .............................................14
 
2.  Applicability of design principles .......................................................................................................................22
 
3.  Appropriateness of timing ....................................................................................................................................28
 
4.  Implementation considerations .........................................................................................................................34
 
5.  Personal impact.........................................................................................................................................................38
 
6.  Further feedback ......................................................................................................................................................44
 
7.  Consultation assessment .....................................................................................................................................48
Summary/conclusions ...........................................................................................................................................................50
Email feedback ..........................................................................................................................................................................52
2
3

---

Executive summary
Background to the proposal
Executive summary
Background to the proposal
The Tuakiritaka project aims to refresh the University of Otago brand. At the heart of the proposal is a new visual 
identity and a new Māori name, Ōtākou Whakaihu Waka. The project team has developed these to align with the 
The University has been actively reviewing its brand since 2019. The review was initiated because of the growing 
University’s current and future aspirations as expressed in Vision 2040. The project is framed by three aspirations: 
complexity and confusion around elements of our brand, such as the proliferation of unofficial sub-brands, logos, 
to reflect and celebrate the multiple strands of history and the unique place that shape the University (whakapapa); 
typefaces, names and designs that have emerged organically over the years. Adding to this, our brand elements are 
to develop a distinctive visual identity that speaks to the institution’s values and aspirations and which will become 
becoming increasingly difficult to use in digital and online environments. The last major changes to our brand occurred 
instantly recognisable (iconic); and to create an identity design system that allows function and form to add to our 
in the early 1990’s – prior to the widespread use of the internet.
institution’s cultural narratives (practical).
The process to refresh our brand began with a discovery phase that was completed in 2020, involving interviews with 
The University undertook a five-week period of consultation with key stakeholders to seek their feedback on the 
key internal stakeholders of the University. These interviews uncovered the main characteristics of our brand, as well 
Tuakiritaka proposals. More than 9,000 completed responses were received from alumni, staff and students
as a central brand idea “Together We Dare”, which pays homage to the University’s motto “Dare to be Wise”. Alongside 
this, market research was pointing to a clear generational shift in the behaviours and values of students, which provided 
Survey findings:
important insights about how we could position the University’s brand for the future. 
At the same time as this discovery phase, the University was embarking on a strategic reset called Vision 2040, which 
Nearly two-thirds of all respondents agree that the proposed visual identities reflect the future direction  
has at its core a commitment to partnership with mana whenua, as well as a desire to place greater acknowledgement 
of the University.
of the University’s unique connection to Te Waipounamu (South Island), to Aotearoa New Zealand, and our location as a 
• 
60% believe that the designs were practical, while just over half of respondents agree that the designs  
 
university in the Pacific. 
 
were both iconic and reflected our whakapapa.
The convergence of these key phases of work provided the foundation for the design process used in the project. It 
• 
More than 50% of respondents felt that now is the right time to make the changes, with a third of  
 
 
focused our thinking on how our visual identity and brand should reflect the new direction the University is heading in, 
 
people disagreeing.
while acknowledging the shifting dynamics in the tertiary education sector. Furthermore, we focussed on the need to 
maintain our relevance as a university in Aotearoa New Zealand, while supporting the University’s capability to connect 
• 
While a third of respondents do not feel that the proposed changes to the visual identity would impact  
 
with and attract a changing generation of students. 
 
them personally, 54% of people indicated some level of impact.
With these foundations in place, a working group was set up to explore a refreshed visual identity. This group consisted 
• 
In terms of the consultation process, 75% of respondents agree to some extent that they had a fair    
 
of university leaders and staff, design, language and history experts, and representatives of mana whenua rūnaka: Kāti 
 
opportunity to express their opinions.
Huirapa ki Puketeraki and Te Rūnaka o Ōtākou. Additional oversight was provided by a dedicated steering committee. A 
set of design principles was adopted to guide the project to ensure that the proposed new visual identity speaks to our 
The survey comments were categorised into 13 themes, with both supportive and unsupportive feedback. Among the 
shared whakapapa (history), and is iconic and practical.
most common positive feedback was support for the  suggested te reo Māori name and endorsements of the direction 
and intent of the changes.
While the COVID pandemic caused delays to key phases of the project, a major brand audit was completed, and a new 
brand strategy was drafted in 2021. Several wānanga (meetings) involving the working group were also held during 2021 
Despite this, there was some level of misunderstanding about whether the “University of Otago” will remain as the 
and 2022 to collaborate on the development of narratives and proposed designs for the University’s visual identity. 
official name. There were also some apprehensions expressed by some respondents about the design of the tohu and 
font. Among the most common areas of concern was the potential for the loss of status for the University, a reduction 
Following approval of an extensive consultation plan and proposed draft concepts for a new visual identity by our 
in the individual’s sense of connection to the institution as a result of replacing the coat of arms and the applicability of 
Council, the University began initial stakeholder consultation in December 2022. 
the proposal internationally. There was also a significant degree of concern about the costs of the proposal.
Based on the findings of the survey, there can be a high degree of confidence that a broad cross-section of alumni, 
staff and students agree that the proposals align with Vision 2040 and reflect the future of the University. There is 
also acceptance that the proposed design and Māori name reflect the whakapapa of the organisation, are iconic and 
practical.
In deciding how to implement the proposals, strong consideration should be given to timing, ensuring this is managed 
in a financially prudent manner. Consideration should also be given to ensuring that specific elements of the design are 
accessible, and that the use of the new identity in international markets supports ongoing recognition of the University.  
Strategies should be developed to increase understanding about the relevance and story of the tohu and Māori name. 
These strategies should include a clear framework for how the English and te reo Māori versions of the identity are to 
be used, and that the name “University of Otago” is maintained. 
4
5

---

Background to the consultation
How we consulted and measured the results
Background to the consultation
How we consulted and 
Initial feedback was gathered from more than 50 individual and group briefings held with key alumni, community stake-
measured the results
holders, senior staff and student representatives between December 2022 and March 2023. As a result of this initial 
feedback, the concepts were refined to a final proposal which was communicated to all stakeholders on  
15 March 2023.
What we wanted to know:
Given the importance and extent of the proposed changes, the University Council wanted to consult with the entire 
The purpose of our consultation was to hear from our community whether they believed the proposed visual identity:
University community, which consists of about 7,000 staff, 19,000 students and approximately 80,000  
registered alumni. 
• 
Reflected the future direction of the University?
 
o  This question was divided into consideration of the English version and the te reo Māori version
The proposal:
• 
Reflected the design principles?
• 
Keeping the name, University of Otago.
 
o  The design principles were:
• 
Changing our te reo Māori name from Te Whare Wānanga o Otāgo to Ōtākou Whakaihu Waka – a metaphor    
 
o  Whakapapa to our stories – the design is connected to our story and our identity.
 
which means “A Place of Many Firsts”.
 
o  Iconic – the design is uniquely ours, an ownable icon.
• 
Keeping our coat of arms for ceremonial purposes.
 
o  Practical – the design can easily be used in a variety of ways (digital, physical).
• 
Adopting a new tohu (symbol) for the University. 
• 
Creating an English and a te reo Māori version of our tohu and names together, with the English version to be    
Plus, we asked: 
 
used commonly in external-facing communications, and the te reo Māori version used when suitable.
• 
Was now the right time to make this change?
• 
Our colours, blue and gold, will continue to be used, with a more vibrant execution.
• 
How much would the proposed change impact them?
• 
Our motto will remain Sapere Aude, widely translated as “Dare to Be Wise”.
• 
Had they had a fair opportunity to express their opinion?
• 
Colleges, clubs and societies, and sports teams can retain their own identities.
6
7

---

How we consulted and measured the results
How we consulted and measured the results
How we consulted:
Survey development
The University of Otago community is made up of about 7000 staff, 19,000 students and about 110,000 alumni.
We expected there would be significant interest in providing feedback on the proposed visual identity. A survey 
was chosen to support the consultation process because it meant we could control access to this key part of the 
Our staff and students are spread across five campuses, and our alumni are located around the world. 
consultation process – so we were hearing only from our community. It also allowed consistent information to be 
It was important to the University Council that this decision was not taken without hearing from this community. 
collected during the process, and ensured the data collected could be managed.
The Council wanted to give everyone the same opportunity to comment, rather than being dependent on location, so a 
The survey was designed to meet the purpose of consultation – to seek information or advice, or to take into 
survey supported by other engagement activities was chosen as our main consultation tool. 
consideration different points of view. A consultation process does not imply a referendum or other form of vote. The 
questions put forward to respondents represented the key points we were looking for feedback on.
The other supporting activities to inform and reach out to the community:
We deliberately chose to not actively seek feedback on individual design elements. We wanted respondents to focus 
on the intent of the proposed change and the package of elements that made up the proposal. Design processes can 
• 
All staff forum to launch the consultation (in person and online).
easily be hamstrung by a “design by committee” approach that can result in disjointed or compromised outputs that 
don’t reflect the initial vision.
• 
Emails to all staff and students.
The provision of six separate “free text” comment boxes meant that respondents had multiple opportunities to share 
• 
Email to 80,000 alumni (all alumni for whom we have email contact details and permission to contact).
their point of view with little restriction, and only one compulsory question was included. This gave respondents the 
• 
Follow-up emails with survey links to all staff, students and alumni.
opportunity to look through the survey to see the range of questions being asked before needing to provide a response. 
“Don’t know or Unsure” options were also provided to ensure that respondents did not feel forced to respond in a 
• 
Staff and student question and answer forums (in person and online).
particular manner.
• 
Website with comprehensive details and frequently asked questions.
Respondents were required to provide the group or groups they identified with from a list of options. This ensured that 
the data collected could be analysed with key University community groups in mind – for example staff, students and 
• 
Social media posts.
alumni. Other demographic information was requested towards the end of the survey to help us ensure that we were 
hearing from a range of people (age, ethnicity).
• 
Public media briefing.
Feedback was sought from internal survey specialists and the survey was also reviewed by an independent market 
• 
Information stands on the main Dunedin campus.
research company prior to its release. As the survey was not for academic research purposes, academic ethical 
• 
Posters publicising the consultation on all campuses.
approval was not required. 
• 
Reminders to the community to complete the survey (sent halfway through the feedback period).
Tools and analysis
• 
Our call centre, AskOtago, was set up to take calls from members of the community who could not access the  
 
survey or needed assistance with technology.
The survey was hosted on the Qualtrics platform. Qualtrics is a general-purpose survey application commonly used 
across the University and globally. We were able to minimise the impact of technical issues by using this platform, with a 
• 
An email address was created so that the community could ask questions, provide feedback through that forum or  
multitude of browsers, devices and operating systems known to work well with the platform. Unfortunately, Qualtrics is 
 
get assistance with the survey.
limited in supporting the use of macrons which was noted by some respondents. 
What we hoped:
Sentiment and topic analysis of comments were also conducted within the Qualtrics platform. 
Two people were tasked with reviewing all comments. The people reviewing the comments categorised comments by 
• 
We hoped that there would be a high level of awareness of the proposal, through either our direct emails, social  
topic and sentiment. Individual comments were reviewed in isolation; other comments or responses made by the same 
 
media or public media.
respondent were not seen at the same time. 
• 
We hoped that enough people would respond to the survey to give us a 95% confidence rate in the results.
The categorisation of comments was then separately moderated by a third person. This person reviewed the allocation 
• 
We hoped that we would hear from our Māori staff and students.
of topics and sentiment on a 10% sample basis. Moderation showed the comment categorisation to be logical 94–99% 
of the time. 
• 
We hoped that people who took part in the consultation felt they had a fair opportunity to have their say.
8
9

---

How we consulted and measured the results
Survey findings
Distribution of survey
Survey findings
Because we wanted to ensure we were only hearing from our community members, we chose to use personal links to 
distribute the survey. This meant that each individual contacted had a link that was only for their use. As a result, the 
data collected was not anonymous, but was treated confidentially. Only three people had full access to the complete 
Respondents 
data set, and comments were not related back to identifying data at any time.
There were 11,582 people who began the Tuakiritaka Identity proposal survey. Of these 78% (9,007) completed a 
Respondents were identified in three ways. Staff were identified through staff email addresses; all staff have an email 
submitted response. A total of 18,212 comments were received.
address ending in otago.ac.nz which was used to distribute individual survey links. All categories of staff were identified 
regardless of employment conditions. 
The level of responses gave us statistical confidence that the information presented in this report most likely represents 
the University community population.
Students were identified through their student emails. All students are provided with a student.otago.ac.nz email 
address which was used to distribute individual survey links.
All data is self-reported; no validation (supplying documentation that confirms your identity) was possible.
Alumni were identified through the University’s alumni database. The email addresses within this database were used to 
distribute individual survey links to alumni. There were some alumni who shared an email address with another person. 
Groups
As messages were distributed by email it was only possible to generate one link per email address. 
Table 1 shows the number of respondents by group. Respondents were asked to select the group or groups they 
We were aware that there were respondents who could potentially be contacted three times due to the nature of their 
identified with. Respondents were able to select multiple groups, recognising that many people had multiple 
relationship with the University (for example, the same individual could have a student enrolment and student email 
connections to the University. Respondents were unable to skip this question. There were 69 combinations of groups 
address, be a member of staff with an otago.ac.nz address, and have a different email address associated with their 
(e.g., current student and alumni and staff). The most common combination was a respondent who was both a member 
alumni record). If the same email address appeared more than once, duplicate entries were removed. This was most 
of staff and a graduate (alumni) (425). 
common across the staff and alumni email lists. Communication to respondents acknowledged that duplicate messages 
may be received, and these respondents were asked to respond to one survey link only.
Staff were the most likely to respond, and alumni were the least likely to respond. Response levels for alumni, current 
students and staff were all sufficient to achieve a statistical confidence level of 95% with a margin of error of 1% for 
Invitations to the survey were sent out on Thursday 16 March 2023 and respondents were given until Sunday 16 April 
alumni and 2% for staff and students.
2023 to complete their response.
Other consultation methods
Table 1: Respondent Groups
The consultation was launched with a forum open to all University staff, led by the Acting Vice-Chancellor, Professor 
Group  
Respondents 
Total contacted 
Response rate
Helen Nicholson. The forum outlined the work to this point and the proposal for consultation.
Alumni  
5,859
82,018
7%
Immediately following the forum, emails were sent to all staff and students, and to all alumni for whom we have email 
addresses and permission to contact. These emails provided an overview of the consultation and gave a link to a web 
Career advisor/teacher 
115
n/a
page that outlined the proposal in full, including frequently asked questions. The email also alerted the three groups – 
Current student 
2,220
20,152
11%
staff, students and alumni – that a survey link would be sent the following day directly from our survey software.
Potential student  
264
n/a
An email address had been established for the consultation, and the student and staff emails were sent directly from 
Staff  
1,807
8,548
21%
that address so there was a place for replies and questions to be collated and responded to. 
Whānau of current student  
334
n/a
Our central social media channels (Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter and Instagram) were used to post about the 
Whānau of potential student  
429
n/a
consultation and all responses were monitored and replied to when appropriate. 
None of the above  
130
n/a
Posters and video displays were established across our campuses to encourage staff and students to take part in the 
consultation.
The week following the survey opening, two question and answer forums were held – one for students and one for staff. 
All figures presented are rounded to the nearest whole number. Figures may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
Both were held with attendance welcome both in person and virtually. About 60 people attended the staff meeting, and 
about 100 attended the student meeting. 
A reminder was sent from the survey tool to all those who had not completed the survey after two weeks, and a notice 
was put in the weekly staff email bulletin.
10
11

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Ethnicity
Figure 1 shows the age of respondents by group. As expected, most student respondents were under 25 years old. 
Nearly 50% of staff respondents were under 45 years old, whereas just over 50% of alumni respondents were over  
Table 2 shows the ethnicity of respondents. Census categories were used when collecting this information. As with the 
44 years old.
census there was a number of people who used the “other” option to provide a response such as Pakeha or New Zea-
lander. Respondents were able to select multiple ethnicities. There were 55 combinations of ethnicities (e.g., New Zea-
land European and Māori and Other). The most common combination was New Zealand European and Māori (689).
Figure 1: Age of Respondents by Group
100%
1%
Table 2: Ethnicity of Respondents
2%
4%
5%
7%
8%
10%
90%
19%
22%
10%
7%
19%
17%
11%
80%
16%
Ethnicity 
Respondents 
Proportion of 
New Zealand
13%
25%
48%
respondents
population est.1
70%
16%
Chinese  
363
4%
5%
25%
60%
40%
19%
Cook Island Māori
44
0%
2%
41%
50%
23%
22%
Indian
164
2%
5%
20%
Under 18 years of age
Māori
1,010
11%
17%
40%
19%
68%
21%
18–24 years
New Zealand European
6,494
72%
64%
30%
21%
9%
23%
25–34 years
1%
12%
100%
Niuean
16
0%
1%2%
4%
31%
7%
8%
20%
35–44 years
5%
10%
24%
19%
13%
10%
Samoan
12090%
19%
1% 22%
4%
10%
45–54 years
7%
10%
17%
11%
19%
17%
11%
55–64 years
7%
Other
1,85680%
21%
12%
6%
8%
9%
3%
3%
2%
5%
16%
0%
1%
65+
13%
25%
48%
Did not respond 
243
Alumni
Career 
Current
Potential
Staff
Whānau
Whānau
None of
70%
16%
advisor/
student
student
of current
of potential
these
25%
teacher
student
student
options
60%
40%
19%
41%
Age profile
50%
23%
22%
40%
20%
Under 18 years of age
19%
Table 3 shows the age profile for all respondents.
68%
21%
18–24 years
30%
21%
9%
23%
25–34 years
12%
31%
20%
35–44 years
24%
19%
13%
Table 3: Age of respondents
10%
45–54 years
10%
17%
11%
55–64 years
12%
7%
6%
8%
9%
3%
3%
2%
5%
0%
1%
65+
Alumni
Career 
Current
Potential
Staff
Whānau
Whānau
None of
Age
n
%
advisor/
student
student
of current
of potential
these
teacher
student
student
options
Under 18 years of age
40
0%
18–24 years
1,838
21%
25–34 years
1,777
20%
35–44 years
1,466
16%
45–54 years
1,462
16%
55–64 years
1,063
12%
65+
1,253
14%
1 Based on 2018 census data. Stats NZ NZ.Stat Ethnic group (detailed total response – level 3) and languages spoken by 
Did not respond
108
sex, for the census usually resident population count, 2018 census
12
13

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Comments and themes
Analysis of questions
Note about comments:
Comments received provide additional information that at times will not align with quantitative information. Often 
Question 1. Alignment of the proposal with the future direction 
a respondent will only comment if they feel particularly passionate about the subject. At times this can mean that 
comments are more polarising than quantitative information would suggest.
of the University
Care needs to be taken when assessing comments to ensure that the anecdotal influence does not displace the 
Respondents were asked how strongly they agreed that the proposal reflects the future direction of the University.  
quantitative assessment.
They were given the opportunity to assess this against the English and te reo Māori versions of the visual identity.
The assessment of comments also does not allow for nuanced information. Comments were categorised into topics 
Caveats
and then a sentiment (e.g. positive or negative) was selected. 
Respondents were provided with a link to Vision 2040 to help their assessment of this question. However, it was not 
Sentiment and themes were allocated based on the comment itself, regardless of whether comprehension of the 
specified that Vision 2040 was the only interpretation of the University’s future direction. Some respondents felt the 
proposal was accurate. As an example, a topic such as the new Māori name with a negative sentiment may include a 
question was one of logic rather than an opportunity to assess whether the proposal reflected their own personal view 
comment that indicates unhappiness with the loss of the name University of Otago. However, it has not been proposed 
of the future direction of the University.
to remove the name University of Otago.
Responses
Another example is when the comment indicates a sentiment that the proposal does not go far enough within the topic. 
Respondents were provided with two versions of the proposed visual identity. They were asked “to what extent do  
For example, a comment that indicates that to be culturally aware the University should only use te reo Māori, and the 
you agree that each of the proposed versions reflect the future direction of the University?” Table 4 and Figure 2 
coat of arms should not be used again, would be categorised as Cultural Awareness – Negative. 
show the responses to this question. The table shows 72% of respondents agreeing to some extent with respect to the 
English version and 56% agreeing to some extent for the te reo Māori version. Some respondents chose not to answer 
this question. 
Table 4: Proposal Reflects the Future Direction of the University
English version 
Te reo version
n
%
n
%
Strongly agree
3,150
36%
2,373
28%
Somewhat agree
2,202
25%
1,621
19%
Agree
955
11%
824
10%
Total agree
6,307
72%
4,818
56%
Neither agree nor disagree
604
7%
723
8%
Somewhat disagree
340
4%
502
6%
Disagree
498
6%
772
9%
Strongly disagree
1,041
12%
1,781
21%
Total disagree
1,879
21%
3,055
36%
Did not respond
217
411
14
15

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Figure 2: Proposal Reflects the Future Direction of the University
Responses were also analysed by age group, and this information is shown in Figures 5 and 6. Generally, responses 
were similar by age group, except for those aged over 65, or who did not disclose their age. This difference was more 
pronounced when considering the te reo Māori version.
Strongly agree 
Agree
Somewhat agree 
Figure 5: Proposal Reflects Future Direction of the University, by Age, 
Te Reo
Neither agree nor disagree
28%
19%
10%
8% 6% 9%
21%
Somewhat disagree 
English Version
English
36%
25%
11%
7% 4% 6% 12%
Disagree
Strongly disagree  
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Did  not respond
54%
8%
38%
65+
68%
5%
27%
55-64 years
77%
7%
17%
Information is also available by key groups. Figures 3 and 4 show responses from Alumni, Current Students, Staff, and 
those respondents who identified as Māori. 
45-54 years
76%
6%
18%
Figures 3 and 4 both show that staff were the most likely to agree that either of the two proposals reflect the 
35-44 years
73%
7%
20%
University’s future direction. This could be because staff are more likely to understand Vision 2040 than alumni or 
students. Figure 4 shows more difference in opinions between groups, with alumni being the least likely to agree that 
25-34 years
70%
7%
23%
the te reo Māori version reflects the University’s future direction.
18-24 years
70%
9%
21%
Agree
Under 18
Neither agree nor disagree
years of age
79%
3%
18%
Figure 3: Proposal Reflects Future Direction of the University, by Group, 
Disagree
English Version
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Māori
71%
8%
21%
Staff
77%
7%
16%
Figure 6: Proposal Reflects Future Direction of the University, by Age, 
Current
Te Reo Māori Version
Student
70%
9%
21%
Agree
Alumni
71%
6%
22%
Neither agree nor disagree
Disagree
Did not respond
13%
15%
72%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
65+
33%
8%
59%
55–64 years
55%
9%
36%
Figure 4: Proposal Reflects Future Direction of the University, by Group, 
45–54 years
60%
9%
31%
Te Reo Māori Version 
35–44 years
60%
8%
32%
25–34 years
59%
8%
33%
Māori
67%
6%
27%
18–24 years
64%
8%
28%
Staff
71%
8%
21%
Agree
Under 18
Current
Neither agree nor disagree
64%
8%
28%
years of age
59%
5%
36%
Student
Agree
Disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Alumni
51%
8%
41%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Disagree
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
16
17

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Respondents were also given the opportunity to reflect on their responses via free-text commentary.
Table 5: Count of Comments by Topic and Sentiment (Future Direction)
Comment themes and sentiment
Topic
Positive
Negative
Suggestion
Total
Comments should be considered in context with the quantitative information presented. 
Tohu
113
633
77
823
Nearly 4,000 comments were received on this question. These comments ranged from specific feedback about the 
designs, to more general comments about the direction the University, and society in general, is taking. Respondents 
Heritage
33
718
10
761
also took the opportunity provide their own suggestions.
Name
376
217
151
744
Table 5 provides a count of comments by theme. 
International recognition
13
426
139
578
A large number of respondents applauded the timing and direction of the proposed changes, embraced the changing of 
Cultural awareness
134
276
8
418
the te reo Māori name, but felt the tohu was unsatisfactory. 
Font
17
158
24
199
A number of comments received also indicated misinterpretation of the proposal, in particular a number of respondents 
Cost
1
151
2
154
were angry about the loss of the name University of Otago (which has not been proposed). A number of respondents 
Cultural action
22
105
9
136
also indicated a preference of one of the two proposed logos, or a preference to retain the current visual identity.
Implementation strategy
23
18
71
112
The most commented topic was the tohu, and the majority of the feedback was negative. A number of comments 
Colours
14
55
3
72
compared the tohu to other objects and other logos such as Otago Rugby, bananas and Whittaker’s chocolate.
Consultation process
4
57
2
63
Heritage was the next most common topic. Negative feedback highlighted the loss of connection some people felt as a 
Timing
17
14
31
result of the proposal. In particular, the coat of arms was highlighted as very important to a number of respondents. 
Vision 2040
8
18
26
Positive feedback affirmed the recognition of pre-European heritage in the proposal. Clarity around the use of the coat 
of arms in the future, if this proposal is accepted, would be useful.
Closely connected to the topic of heritage was concern about international recognition. Many respondents felt that the 
coat of arms in particular was an internationally recognised symbol of academic excellence. Some respondents were 
also concerned that their degree would no longer be easily verifiable by employers (especially internationally). 
The sentiment (on a scale from very negative to very positive) of each comment was also assessed.  
Figure 7 shows the overall sentiment expressed via comments for this question.
While many respondents felt the promotion of Māori cultural elements was a positive step for the University, there were 
some who felt the proposal excluded their own identity and culture. Respondents spoke to the multicultural nature of 
the University community and the need to have an identity that is accessible to international students in particular.
Figure 7: Overall Comment Sentiment (Future Direction)
Many respondents were confused by the font, and suggested adjustments to make it more accessible. The cost of 
developing the proposal also received negative feedback, particularly given the current inflationary pressure being 
experienced by many.
Very positive
Positive
Mixed
Negative
6% 11%
16%
43%
12%
12%
Very negative
Neutral
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
18
19

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Comment examples
“This is amazing and a great step forward. In the past I’ve actually been a bit ashamed of  “Otago University with its long proud history was founded in 1869 with Māori having 
my degree from Otago on the basis the University still feels old and a bastion of old white 
nothing to do with this founding AT ALL. It was based on Scottish heritage. Why on earth 
privilege. I would love to see this new identity. Change is well overdue.”
there is a suggestion to incorporate a Māori name I have no idea. It is an insult to the 
University's proud history. Māori are suggested as 16% of the population BUT this is not 
so - the vast majority (if not all) have less than 50% Māori genes, most with much less 
“Why? Why would you change the proud logo of our University? Otago University is world 
that - almost nothing - so why pander to this nonsense of them conveniently neglecting 
famous and globally recognised by its traditional crest which has shone on thousands of 
the majority of their genes for personal gain. Nothing but total hypocrisy.”
Doctorate, Master, and Graduate certificates over time.”
“
“Now knowing the history of Otakou, it is only right that the University return to the 
“Internationally, I think the English version should be made the more prominent version. I like 
correct and proper name. I think this is a great idea. It is NZ-distinct and the way of the 
the te reo Māori version, and it does demonstrate the way the University wants to be seen 
future - and present.
to be headed, however Māori is not an internationally familiar language and therefore we 
would possibly lose our identity as a University on the international stage”.
“Typically the university employs western whakaaro, so I don't agree with slapping a reo 
Māori ingoa to an institution which doesn't support Māori.”
“There is no need for the virtue signaling all of this implies. Less than 3% of the population 
of New Zealand are fluent in the Māori language and I expect a larger proportion of NZ are 
fluent in Mandarin so who not a logo couched in that language? If you concentrated on 
academic success through a completely colour-blind lens and actual science as it is properly 
defined your University could begin to regain the international status it once had.”
20
21

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Question 2. Applicability of design principles
Table 6: Design Principles Reflected in the Proposal
Respondents were asked to assess whether the proposal reflects the three core principles that the work was intended 
to express. These principles were:
Whakapapa
Iconic
Practical
• 
Whakapapa to our stories – the design is connected to our story and our identity.
n
%
n
%
n
%
• 
Iconic – the design is uniquely ours, an ownable icon.
Strongly agree
1,739
20%
1,786
20%
1,913
22%
Agree
1,870
21%
1,828
21%
2,185
25%
• 
Practical – the design is able to be easily used in a variety of ways (digital, physical).
Somewhat agree
997
11%
1,118
13%
1,051
12%
Responses
Total agree
4,606
52%
4,732
54%
5,149
60%
Table 6 and figure 7 show similar but polar opposite responses. For example, when assessing whether the proposed 
Neither agree nor disagree
1,154
13%
857
10%
1,018
12%
visual identity is iconic, 20% of respondents strongly agreed and 19% of respondents strongly disagreed.
Somewhat disagree
463
5%
517
6%
333
4%
“Practical” was the most obvious of the three design principles to respondents, with 60% of respondents agreeing to 
Disagree
811
9%
840
10%
627
7%
some extent that the design reflected the principle. 52% of respondents agreed the proposal represented whakapapa to 
Strongly disagree
1,459
16%
1,672
19%
1,272
15%
our stories, and 54% of respondents agreed that the design was iconic.
Total disagree
2,733
31%
3,029
35%
2,232
26%
Don't know
382
4%
145
2%
228
3%
Did not respond
132
244
380
Figure 8: Design Principles Reflected in Proposal
Strongly agree 
Agree
Practical
Somewhat agree 
22%
25%
12%
12% 4% 7%
15%
3
2%
Neither agree nor disagree
Iconic
Somewhat disagree 
20%
21%
13%
10% 6% 10%
19%
2%
Disagree
Whakapapa
20%
21%
11%
13%
5% 9%
16%
4%
2
Strongly disagree
Don’t know  
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
22
23

---

Strongly agree
Agree
Somewhat agree
Total agree
Neither agree nor disagree
Somewhat disagree
Survey findings
Disagree
Survey findings
Strongly disagree
Total disagree
Don't know
Respondents were also given the opportunity to provide further commentary via a free-text box.
Table 7: C
Did not r ommen
espond
t Count by Topic and Sentiment (Design Principles)
Comment themes and sentiment
Comments should be considered in context with the quantitative information presented.
Topic
Positive
Negative
Suggestion
Total
More than 2,500 comments were received. Table 7 provides a count of comments by theme.
Tohu
149
819
28
996
Respondents were most likely to comment on the tohu, and largely with negative sentiment. Feedback was generally 
Heritage
38
549
587
in reference to the design principles outlined, noting that the proposed tohu was too similar to other established logos 
Cultural awareness
124
154
278
such as Otago Rugby, Otago Polytechnic (now Te Pukenga), Whittaker's chocolate, and several other examples. With 
International recognition
9
154
2
156
respect to whakapapa, many felt that European elements of the University story were being lost. Others felt the current 
visual identity was a better reflection of the design principles.
Colours
66
819
22
907
Cost
Concerns about brand recognition, both domestically and internationally, were also raised. Some felt that the proposal 
88
88
was too corporate and no longer represented an academic organisation. Others felt that English needs to remain the 
Name
25
12
1
38
primary language given the commonality of use around the world. 
Implementation strategy
81
81
The proposed colours were also a talking point, with a mix of sentiment noted. Respondents had questions about 
Font
4
38
42
how the proposed visual identity would look in particular settings, with some concern about the practicality of a dark 
Consultation process
4
38
42
gradient background. 
Cultural action
5
21
1
27
Digital implementation
28
28
The sentiment (a scale from very negative to very positive) of each comment was also assessed. Figure 9 shows the 
overall sentiment expressed via comments.
Figure 9: Overall Comment Sentiment (Design Principles)
Very positive
Positive
Mixed
Negative
4% 6%
11%
53%
11%
15%
Very negative
Neutral
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
24
25

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Comment examples
“What whakapapa? Why is this University, built on stolen Māori land, suddenly deciding to  “Branding requires continuity. Granted the cross and stars are a bit meh, but the existing 
incorporate our culture and designs into their logo for their own benefit and public image.”
symbol has some brand recognition. A big astigmatic O with a pair of half pai koruey bits is 
“
no improvement and lacks the history / connection and er, (to misuse the term in the same 
the same way this marketing exercise does), the Whakapapa.
“In the tohu (symbol) and wordmark (logo) I totally feel the compelling new story for the 
future combined with honouring the history and heritage of the University of Otago, the 
region and mana whenua. It feels fresh and vibrant, and at the same time familiar in the 
sense of Ōtākou / Otago identity.”
“For me, academia is a global network, and the scholastic enterprise is one that reaches into 
stories of all nations and draws an identity rooted in the flourishing of humanity. Given the 
status of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, UoO is right, in my opinion, in this 2040 direction, yet the first 
principle of whakapapa seems limiting to "our own". How is "our own" understood? It seems 
that distance is being put between the University and its coat of arms. Is there a history that 
UoO wants to distance itself from? If so, how does that square with whakapapa?”
“I love the simplicity of the design and that fact that it is still easily recognisable as Otago 
with the O (with a beautiful Māori design) and the blue and gold. It is a clever marriage of 
two worlds.”
“Although it is indeed practical, I do not believe this is the main focus of the entire change 
of image. The logo by itself, without the University's name next to it giving it full context, 
does not speak to me of Maori culture, or roots, let alone knowledge or even of an exchange 
coming together. No parts of the symbol actually touch, making it feel as though there 
was a possibility for an exchange and yet, it never happened, as if the exchange was very 
weakly going to occur, or as if it may never happen at all. It doesn't speak to me of water 
either, it would need to have more fluid lines, for it to do so. I also wish it would communicate 
strength, a solid base, readiness to take on the world. After all, this is the logo/image we are 
eventually taking with us to the rest of our paths, locally or internationally. Unfortunately, 
visually it could very easily be confused with 2 moons or even bananas, which I do not 
believe are the intended connotation the new image wishes to convey. Thank you for your 
time reading our diverse points of view.”
26
27

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Question 3. Appropriateness of timing
Figure 11 breaks down the responses by group and shows that staff are the most likely to agree that now is the right 
time to implement the proposal, while alumni are the least likely to agree.
Respondents were asked whether they considered that now was the right time to make this change.
Table 8 and figure 10 indicate respondents’ viewpoints were polarised when considering the potential timing of 
changing the University’s visual identity. 28% of respondents strongly agreed that now was the right time to change, and 
Figure 11: Right Time for Change Response by Group
24% of respondents strongly disagreed with the statement. The total proportion of respondents who agreed to some 
extent with the statement was 51%. 
Māori
62%
8%
30%
1%
2
Staff
63%
9%
27%
1%
2
Table 8: Right Time for Change Response
Current
Agree
Student
53%
13%
33%
1%
2
Neither agree nor disagree
Alumni
48%
10%
41%
1%
2
Disagree
n
%
Don’t know
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Strongly agree
2,506
28%
Agree
1,301
15%
Somewhat agree
709
8%
Total agree
4,516
51%
Figure 12 breaks responses down by age and shows that those aged 65 and above, or who did not provide a 
Neither agree nor disagree
965
11%
response, are the least likely to agree that now is the right time to make the change. The other age groups showed 
similar patterns.
Somewhat disagree
400
4%
Disagree
847
9%
Strongly disagree
2,120
24%
Figure 12: Right Time for Change Response by Age
Total disagree
3,367
36%
Don't know
102
1%
No response
14%
7%
76%
3
2%
Did not respond
57
65+
34%
9%
57%
1%
2
55–64 years
55%
9%
35%
1%
2
45–54 years
57%
10%
32%
1%
2
Figure 10: Right Time for Change Response
35–44 years
54%
10%
34%
1%
2
Strongly agree 
25–34 years
51%
11%
36%
1%
2
Agree
Somewhat agree 
Agree
18–24 years
52%
13%
33%
1%
2
Neither agree nor disagree
Neither agree nor disagree
Under 18
Somewhat disagree 
Disagree
46%
23%
28%
3
2%
years of age
Disagree
Don’t know
28%
15%
8%
11% 4% 9%
24%
1%
2
Strongly disagree
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Don’t know  
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
28
29

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Respondents were also given the opportunity to provide further commentary via a free-text box.
Table 9: Comment Count by Topic and Sentiment (Timing)
Comment themes and sentiment
Comments should be considered in context with the quantitative information presented.
Topic
Positive
Negative
Suggestion
Total
Nearly 3,000 comments were received. Table 9 provides a count of comments by theme.
Timing
572
386
6
964
A large number of respondents commented positively that now is the right time to make this change. Some 
Cost
9
666
675
respondents noted the proposal was well overdue. Other respondents, while positive about the change, noted some 
Cultural awareness
330
330
660
tweaks or suggestions to improve the design.
Heritage
22
364
1
387
Respondents who were negative about the timing of the proposal were most likely to identify cost as the major factor 
Name
252
90
9
351
behind this. Many respondents felt that spending additional money on this proposal when areas of the University are 
facing budget cuts was illogical and reduced the morale of University staff. 
Tohu
44
268
13
325
Cultural action
91
147
5
243
A number of respondents felt that the timing of the proposal was driven by politics and represented a cynical response 
to government funding priorities. These respondents were also likely to note they felt being more culturally aware was a 
International recognition
15
186
201
fad or that the University was pandering to Māori. 
Implementation strategy
6
10
97
113
Other respondents noted generations of systemic racism and a pressing need to address inequities experienced by 
Consultation process
15
93
5
113
Māori. Many of these respondents also challenged the University to back up the symbolism expressed in the proposal 
Vision 2040
28
7
1
36
with action to improve outcomes for Māori.
Font
4
13
17
Differing interpretations of Te Tiriti o Waitangi were offered by some, and there were also respondents who felt the 
Humanities
9
9
information presented was incorrect.
The sentiment (on a scale from very negative to very positive) of each comment was also assessed. Figure 13 shows 
the overall sentiment expressed via comments.
Figure 13: Overall Comment Sentiment (Timing)
Very positive
Positive
Mixed
Negative
4%
17%
15%
40%
14%
11%
Very negative
Neutral
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
30
31

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Comment examples
The above sounds fine. With finances so tight uni wide it's a good idea to do it fairly 
“Why do this in phases. Be brave enough to make the changes. Why is Māori yet again 
cheaply. I think 'haters gunna hate'. There will be a few around who moan about having 
waiting. Is this not a Te Tiriti committed organisation. If it is not implemented in full there 
“two logos at once.”
is a risk that yet again te reo will come second and lost in the Eurocentric foundations of 
this organisation.”
“
“I believe this is a done deal and we are merely ticking a box. These changes will go 
ahead regardless of anything said by this survey. I understand and want a more bicultural 
“Yes - please ensure that not giving any ground to racism is considered and that the noise 
environment but I don’t think the white people understand their cultural identity at all. The 
that the dinosaurs might make is not influential in your decisions around implementation.”
Māori people were robbed of a lot and white people did not understand. White people 
still don’t understand but are fearful in today’s society of not being seen to do something 
so organisations are all changing their name. The fact this survey was sent to me only in 
“Go back and reconsider. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing. Change the logo but retain 
English shows it is tokenism and woke by a bunch of white privileged people. Keep the 
the coat of arms. Scrap the yellow O. Go ahead with the updated Māori name.
name add the Tohu. Reputation with Mana.”
 
“Communicate, communicate then communicate some more! Tell us what is behind it all. 
Get the bloody ODT to run a huge story on it and respond to all the whingers in the letters 
to the editor with positivity!!”
“I think you need to consider that it is not really within the budget. The University 
has whacked up their prices for students, even though the standard of education has 
decreased. Teachers, lecturers, professors and heads of staff are not being paid enough 
as it is. You’re teaching a generation of the future, not making them broke and actually 
giving them something to make something of themselves. PhD students, the science 
departments. Especially the ocean sciences have cut classes, all because these aren’t 
“within budget” so you can’t sit there and say that there is a money to spend. Not this 
much money. The University should be spending its finance on new equipment for better 
learning. Not just a logo.”
32
33

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Question 4. Implementation considerations
Table 10: Comment Count by Topic and Sentiment (Implementation Considerations)
Respondents were given the opportunity to reflect on a proposed implementation strategy. The approach was outlined: 
if it is agreed to make this change, then it is envisaged that the proposed tohu (symbol), wordmark (logo) and updated 
Topic
Positive
Negative
Suggestion
Total
Māori name are rolled out in a phased way that means costs can be managed within existing budgets. This will mean 
that there will be a mix of both the new and old visual identities for quite some time after the new brand is launched.
Implementation strategy  
730
730
Respondents were given the opportunity to comment on this proposed approach.
Cost
30
622
652
Mixed brand
175
255
430
Comment themes and sentiment
Heritage
170
1
171
Over 3,000 comments were received. 
International recognition
109
30
139
There was a mix of views as to whether the implementation strategy would be effective. Many respondents felt that 
Tohu
11
95
14
120
having a mix of both the current and proposed brands for a period of time would be messy or dilute the effectiveness of 
the proposal. Others felt that a mixed brand would help people adjust to the change and was a cost-effective measure. 
Cultura awareness
19
96
1
116
Consultation process
2
54
13
69
Many respondents took the time to share suggestions or things they had learned in similar processes. The most com-
mon suggestion was to ensure there was a clear timeframe for transition with deadlines that were adhered to. Others 
Name
45
22
2
69
suggested elements of the proposal that could be addressed or asked for clarification of the treatment of aspects such 
Degrees
19
34
53
as the coat of arms. 
Timing
2
46
48
Some respondents felt in asking this question that the consultation process was not genuine, and the outcome was 
Cultural action
38
7
45
predetermined. 
Digital implementation
4
38
42
Sustainability
21
6
7
34
Buildings and signage
22
22
Font
11
2
13
Humanities
12
12
The sentiment (on a scale from very negative to very positive) of each comment was also assessed. Figure 14 shows 
the overall sentiment expressed via comments.
Figure 14: Overall Comment Sentiment (Implementation Considerations)
Very positive
Positive
Mixed
Negative
1%
1
11% 3%
40%
15%
29%
Very negative
Neutral
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
34
35

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Comment examples
The above sounds fine. With finances so tight uni wide it's a good idea to do it fairly 
“Why do this in phases. Be brave enough to make the changes. Why is Māori yet again 
cheaply. I think 'haters gunna hate'. There will be a few around who moan about having 
waiting. Is this not a Te Tiriti committed organisation. If it is not implemented in full there 
“two logos at once.”
is a risk that yet again te reo will come second and lost in the Eurocentric foundations of 
this organisation.”
“I believe this is a done deal and we are merely ticking a box. These changes will go 
“
ahead regardless of anything said by this survey. I understand and want a more bicultural 
“Yes - please ensure that not giving any ground to racism is considered and that the noise 
environment but I don’t think the white people understand their cultural identity at all. The 
that the dinosaurs might make is not influential in your decisions around implementation.”
Māori people were robbed of a lot and white people did not understand. White people 
still don’t understand but are fearful in today’s society of not being seen to do something 
so organisations are all changing their name. The fact this survey was sent to me only in 
“Go back and reconsider. It doesn’t have to be all or nothing. Change the logo but retain 
English shows it is tokenism and woke by a bunch of white privileged people. Keep the 
the coat of arms. Scrap the yellow O. Go ahead with the updated Māori name.
name add the Tohu. Reputation with Mana.”
“Communicate, communicate then communicate some more! Tell us what is behind it all. 
Get the bloody ODT to run a huge story on it and respond to all the whingers in the letters 
to the editor with positivity!!”
“I think you need to consider that it is not really within the budget. The University 
has whacked up their prices for students, even though the standard of education has 
decreased. Teachers, lecturers, professors and heads of staff are not being paid enough 
as it is. You’re teaching a generation of the future, not making them broke and actually 
giving them something to make something of themselves. PhD students, the science 
departments. Especially the ocean sciences have cut classes, all because these aren’t 
“within budget” so you can’t sit there and say that there is a money to spend. Not this 
much money. The University should be spending its finance on new equipment for better 
learning. Not just a logo.”
36
37

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Question 5. Personal impact
Table 11: Personal Impact Response
Respondents were asked a series of questions that were designed to assess the personal impact of making this change.
Caveats
Would this proposed tohu
Would this proposed tohu (symbol),
(symbol), wordmark (logo) and
The reliability of questions that ask about the future intent or actions can be limited. An example of this is when people 
wordmark (logo) and updated Māori
updated Māori name change your
state an action (for example, “if that candidate wins the election, I will leave the country”) but most likely do not follow 
name change how you perceive the
future engagement with the
through with it.
University of Otago?
University of Otago?
Responses
n
%
n
%
Table 11 shows that a slightly greater proportion of respondents are expecting a positive change in how they perceive 
the University as a result of implementing this proposal (35% positive compared to 33% negative). 
Yes – a positive change
3,108
35%
1,391
16%
The table also shows the majority of respondents (51%) would not change their future engagement with the University 
Yes – a negative change
2,957
33%
1,911
21%
as a response to this proposal. Of those who did indicate a change in their future engagement, 21% of respondents 
Don't know or unsure
776
9%
1,088
12%
indicated this would be a negative change and 16% indicated this would be a positive change. 
No
2,104
24%
4,556
51%
Research indicates that individuals feel the pain of loss twice as intensively than the equivalent pleasure of gain .  
Did not respond
62
61
This cognitive bias is known as loss aversion. This concept may help explain the difference in responses between 
perception and future engagement in table 12.
² Journal references found here https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/loss-aversion
Respondents were also asked how much the change would impact them. Table 12 shows that 35% of respondents did 
not expect the proposed visual identity to impact them personally; 54% of respondents indicated some level of impact.
Table 12: Extent of Impact Response
n
%
Not at all
3,094
35%
Somewhat
1,991
22%
Moderately
1,548
17%
Significantly
1,319
15%
Don't know or unsure
989
11%
Did not respond
66
If a respondent indicated the proposal would impact on them, they were then asked to comment how they 
would be impacted. 
38
39

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Comment themes and sentiment
Table 13: Comment Count by Topic and Sentiment (Personal Impact)
Comments should be considered in context with the quantitative information presented.
Nearly 3,500 comments were received. Table 13 provides a count of comments by theme.
Topic
Positive
Negative
Suggestion
Total
While some respondents commented on operation impacts such as implementing the new visual identity digitally, or on 
Cultural awareness
645
273
918
buildings and signage around the University, the vast majority of respondents indicated an emotional impact.
Heritage
42
623
1
666
A positive emotional impact was expressed by many. Respondents spoke to a greater sense of pride in the University. 
International recognition
12
346
9
367
Conversely, a negative emotional impact was expressed by many; these respondents spoke of alienation, shame and 
48
217
7
272
embarrassment.
Tohu
Name
166
56
4
226
Those who were positive noted the importance of the cultural awareness being expressed by the University, and the 
connection they had to the proposed te reo Māori name.
Cultural action
89
64
25
178
Cost
129
129
Those who were negative focussed on the loss of connection to the University through the removal of visual aspects 
that were important to them. Family connections were frequently mentioned, with the display of the coat of arms 
Degrees
8
58
4
70
on degrees being particularly important. International recognition was also mentioned. Many were concerned that 
Implementation strategy
1
43
44
the proposed change would impact on their ability to have their qualifications recognised overseas and thus their 
Digital implementation
37
37
employability.
Consultation process
2
19
1
22
Again, respondents took the opportunity to reiterate their views on design aspects of the proposal.
Vision 2040
14
5
19
Timing
10
7
17
Font
13
13
Colours
4
3
1
8
Mixed brand
3
4
7
Buildings and signage
5
5
The sentiment (on a scale from very negative to very positive) of each comment was also assessed. Figure 15 shows the 
overall sentiment expressed via comments.
Figure 15: Overall Comment Sentiment (Personal Impact)
Very positive
Positive
Mixed
Negative
5%
26%
8%
39%
10%
12%
Very negative
Neutral
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
40
41

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Comment examples
I attended Otago under the old logo, and feel strong pride in the logo and Latin motto 
“I see it impacting my career internationally. The current Otago logo is recognised and 
it represents. I feel nostalgic seeing the logo and the changes are good and positive, 
respected internationally. Not to mention, the name and logo on my Master’s and Bachelor’s 
“however I will miss having the Latin motto encompassed in the logo.”
degrees won't match my PhD, despite being from the same education provider. I think 
changing this emblem would severely hurt international recognition of our University, 
and leave Alumni feeling as though the uni they went to is being swept under the rug 
“I am very proud of my decade at a prestigious university and its traditions. The reputation 
and replaced with a political pawn that doesn't prioritise education, but rather their latest 
of my tertiary qualifications matter. Being one of New Zealand’s oldest and most 
branding ploy.”
recognised universities matters to me. The changes feel like a betrayal to the history and 
traditions of the University and it cheapens the brand and in doing so my qualifications. 
The new design belongs on a rugby jersey not on the walls of one of New Zealand’s oldest 
“I believe it was all conceived with the best intentions possible. But the amount of money 
institutions. Leave it alone, you have no right to change it. It belongs to all those who have 
spent already, and the total confusion to the rest of NZ and the world, leaves me cold.”
been before you and those who will follow after us.”
“Impact in the long run will be very positive, reflecting the bicultural Tiriti partnership of 
“In my studies and work at the Uni from 2010 to 2018, as a Pasifika person, I encountered 
Aotearoa-New Zealand. In the short term, there will be a range of views, and the values 
“
systemic racism and despite studying and working on Māori and Pasifika projects, I did 
driving a subset of negative views will include implicit and explicit racism. This places Māori 
not see any Pasifika or Māori culture reflected in the institution values, governance or 
staff in a very vulnerable position.”
culture. Lack of diversity seemed to be central to governance and a prerequisite for 
becoming a valued staff member. During those years, University of Otago values seemed 
so far away from the concept of unity and inclusion that I looked at alternative ways 
“Like honestly, it’s just branding, so actual impact will be minimal. I just don’t like the new 
and places to use my doctorate skills gained from the University. The new tohu, the 
design, and it seems very unnecessary, expensive and out of touch with the student 
engagement and building of a relationship with Tangata Whenua and the new meaningful 
population as a whole.
name, finally puts a stake in the ground and is specifically showing the world that this 
University wants to do what is right and to be better. Thank you!”
"I'm looking at my Master's degree on my wall and have huge affection for Otago and my 
time in Dunedin. I love the current identity because it signifies the history of the institution 
and has a certain weightiness that crests have, a tie to our Scottish ancestry. But this 
new identity will better reflect the culture in which my children are growing up in, which 
is far more honouring and proud of our Maori ancestry. So yes, it impacts me because as 
Otago's identity changes, it also says something about what defines my identity.”
42
43

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Question 6. Further feedback
Table 14: Comment Count by Topic and Sentiment (Further Comments)
Respondents were asked to provide any further feedback they wished to share.
Topic
Positive
Negative
Suggestion
Total
Comment themes and sentiment
Consultation process
121
510
46
677
Nearly 2,500 comments were received. Table 14 provides a count of comments by theme.
Cultural awareness
69
217
22
308
Heritage
82
178
6
266
Respondents were most likely to comment on the consultation process. Many felt the outcome of the consultation was 
predetermined and this was reinforced by the nature of questions asked in the survey. Others expressed gratitude for 
Cost
15
242
2
259
having the opportunity to share their point of view.
Name
1
223
224
Tohu
118
48
17
183
There was a clear call for a more compelling “why” so that people could understand the benefits of changing the  
International recognition
25
69
12
106
visual identity. 
Cultural action
5
90
5
100
Other respondents took the opportunity to reiterate concerns about the cost of the proposal, morale of the University, 
Timing
40
40
80
the appropriateness of the tohu and how the proposal would be received internationally. Respondents also took the 
Font
3
72
1
76
opportunity to express their appreciation for the work completed to date.
Colours
8
31
4
43
Implementation strategy
2
7
19
28
Vision 2040
8
11
19
Degrees
1
5
4
10
Humanities
4
4
Mixed brand
2
2
The sentiment (on a scale from very negative to very positive) of each comment was also assessed. Figure 16 shows the 
overall sentiment expressed via comments.
Figure 16: Overall Comment Sentiment (Further Comments)
Very positive
Positive
Mixed
Negative
9%
16%
11%
41%
11%
12%
Very negative
Neutral
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
44
45

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Comment examples
Thanks, and well done on making this important change. It makes me personally very 
“I fear that the decision has already been made and with a lot of money having been 
proud to be an alumni of this great University, and also represents an important step 
spent to this point and the email that preceded this consultation making the case for 
“forward on an international stage.” 
going ahead with the change, it seems to me that this consultation is likely mere window-
dressing so the decision can be justified. It's for that reason I selected the "don't know 
or unsure" option on the question about whether I've had an opportunity to be heard. It 
“After recent years of massive disruption within staffing at uni, this proposed change 
would be very easy to dismiss any opinion that isn't in favour as simply being "racist" but 
is simply one too many and and a corporate logo is no substitute for a coat of arms. 
I hope you are in fact listening to contrary voices with an open mind. If not, it would say 
Universities are, after all, a European construct.”
something very disappointing about the institution.”
“My hope is that this change goes ahead even if there is some opposition or doubt. I don't 
“I recognise that there will be people who are unhappy about this and will feel that Otago 
believe it would be right to make the decision based on a majority view. It is that type of 
is losing something in making this change. They don't realise that the sense of loss in 
process that in the past has caused much of the pain and loss for those of us Kāi Tahu 
“
not being able to see oneself in this space is the ongoing experience of Māori every day 
and Māori. Our voices must be raised and heard even if they are fewer, because it is we 
- interesting to see that for some, getting a taste of a change towards reflecting Māori 
who carry the pain when the wrong choices are made. This is a real opportunity for a 
leads to a 'I may be alienated' reaction. It also interesting to note the associated fear and 
forward direction that heals some of the pain we carry, and will raise all people now and 
anxiety about losing the identity of Otago associated with the change in the Uni tohu to 
into the future. I am very grateful to all those who have given their time, thought, and mahi 
something that reflects Māori whakapapa. Some of us have had to live with this sense 
thus far and may it continue forwards. Mō tātou, ā, mō kā uri ā muri ake nei. For us and our 
of giving up identity every day stepping into the University and there has been little 
children after us. Kā mihi nui.”
recognition of this.
“I suspect this is merely a box ticking exercise and no one will read this - but it is 
disappointing that the University has chosen to pursue the divisive politics of identity 
that serve only to categorise and drive us apart rather than bring us together as one 
community.”
“I completely agree with adoption of Māori name but tohu reflects Māori culture not 
what we are currently as New Zealanders nor recent history. Given the current financial 
climate, it is not the right time to launch into new branding exercise. Also, I am concerned 
as an international university, how this will be perceived to our international market. 
Tradition is associated with quality of education and commitment. New logo could be 
perceived as now we are a 'new' Māori university. Already a lot of money has been spent 
but feedback is being gathered only now which seems to be a lot of wasted money on 
external consultants.”
46
47

---

Survey findings
Survey findings
Question 7. Consultation assessment
Comment examples
Respondents were also given the opportunity to assess whether the consultation process (including learning about the 
Respondents commented on the nature of the consultation process at a number of points in the survey. 
proposed change and providing feedback on the proposed change) had given them a fair opportunity to express their 
Counts of this information have been captured earlier in this report.
opinion.
Table 15 shows that 75% of respondents agreed to some extent that they had a fair opportunity to express  
their opinion.
“I think the consultation process could be handled better. Let people have an 
input into the design process rather than present the choice between two 
Table 15: Fair Opportunity Response
options. In my opinion I love the new Maori name, but think the logo should 
still incorporate the book crest. This doesn't have to be the exact same but it 
shouldn't just be removed completely.”
n
%
Strongly agree
2,315
26%
Agree
3,039
34%
“I would like to commend the University on the quality of its video presenting 
Somewhat agree
1,331
15%
the proposed identity change and for designing a survey that allows a full 
Neither agree nor disagree
916
10%
range of views to be expressed in relation to Tuakiritaka.”
Somewhat disagree
380
4%
Disagree
327
4%
“I think is a done deal, this survey is just for the purposes of you saying you 
Strong disagree
366
4%
have consulted. Bad proposal. The only very slight approval I have is that you 
Don't know or unsure
208
2%
use the colours of yellow and blue. Whatever I say or others say you will go 
Did not respond
125
ahead. I am nearing retirement, not so important to me. But makes me feel sad 
that my identity as a graduate of University of Otago will be diminished in this 
change, which will go ahead whatever the feedback you receive”.
“Hi, thanks for letting us have our feedback. Please treat all feedback with 
respect, even if you disagree. I hope that this feedback gathering is not 
just a tick-box exercise on getting the public’s feedback but that you seek 
to understand the connection we have to the current logo as deep and 
meaningful to us. Thank you”.
“In the last 4 years that this change has been happening over, this is the first 
consultation I have seen with people currently at the University. 4 years! And 
you've only given one option. Do better.”
“
“Thank you for making this change. Thank you for asking for our opinions. 
There is never a good time to change and change will always be hard for some. 
Hurihia tō aroaro ki te rā tukuna tō ātārangi kia taka ki muri ki a koe.”
48
49

---

Summary/conclusions
Summary/conclusions
Summary/conclusions 
Key points
Most common misconceptions
• 
11,768 people engaged with the survey and 9,002 complete responses were received.
• 
People thought the University’s official name, University of Otago, was proposed to be removed.
• 
Respondents were more likely to agree than disagree that the identity proposal (either version) reflected the future  
• 
There was a strong theme that the consultation process was not genuine, and that the project would progress  
 
direction of the University.
 
regardless of feedback received.
 
o  Respondents were more likely to agree the English version better reflected the future direction of the  
 
• 
There was little understanding of the why the proposal had been made, or the need to change.
 
 
University than the te reo Māori version.
• 
Some respondents thought the two versions of the wordmark were proposed as options, rather than  
• 
Respondents were more likely to agree than disagree the proposal reflected the design principles.
 
being interchangeable.
• 
Respondents were more likely to agree than disagree the time was right to implement the identity proposal. 
• 
There was scepticism about the transitional nature of the wordmarks; people thought the te reo Māori version   
 
would be phased in gradually rather than the proposal for two interchangeable wordmarks.
• 
Respondents were very slightly more likely to indicate the proposal would have a positive change in their  
 
 
perception of the University than negative.
• 
The use of the Latin motto Sapere Aude, especially in relation to the translated meaning of the proposed te reo  
 
Māori name, Place of Many Firsts.
• 
Respondents were most likely to indicate no change in their future engagement with the University as a response  
 
to this proposal.
• 
The belief the University was being divisive and removing European heritage elements.
 
o  Of those who did indicate a likely future change in engagement, the change was more likely to be negative  
 
than positive.
• 
Respondents indicated the proposal would more likely impact them than not.
 
o  The impacts described were largely emotional, both positive and negative. 
• 
Respondents were significantly more likely to agree than disagree the consultation process gave them a fair  
 
 
opportunity to express their opinion.
• 
Comments indicated
 
o  Some level of misunderstanding of the proposal details.
 
o  Some level of apprehension with the design of the tohu and font, and to a lesser extent the colours.
 
o  A significant level of support for the suggested te reo Māori name.
 
o  A degree of comfort with the direction and intent of the changes.
 
o  A significant degree of concern at the loss of University status and connection, and the applicability of the    
 
 
proposal internationally.
 
o  A significant degree of concern about cost.
50
51

---

Tuakiritaka Consultation Findings
Tuakiritaka Consultation Findings
Email feedback
Comment examples
An email address ([email address]) was established for the consultation, and the student and staff emails were 
sent directly from that address so that there was a place for replies and questions to be collated and responded to. 
Otago University must NOT approve a new Maori name - Otakou Whakaihu 
The inbox was established in order to capture feedback from people who were not able to complete the survey 
Waka - and a Maori logo: This is Woke nonsense gone mad. How about this 
“
for reasons of technological or physical accessibility, and to ensure all alumni who had changed email address or 
unsubscribed from University communication could request a survey link. 
for an idea. Govern for the majority not the minority!!”
AskOtago, the Development and Alumni Relations Office, and the Offices of the Vice Chancellor and Registrars also 
forwarded inquiries to this project mailbox.
“Kia ora koutou 
There were 80 responses that included comment on the proposal, and a further 279 (this number including some 
Absolutely love the new tohu and name.  Thank you for your mahi 
follow-up communication – not 279 distinct contacts) seeking help accessing the survey. 
Ngā mihi nui”
It is important to note that consultation around the Tuakiritaka proposals was intended for the immediate University of 
Otago community (defined as current staff, current students, and alumni). The emails received were not verified to be 
part of this group. 
“I applaud your vision and aim to become a Tiriti lead University, and I think it's 
Comment themes and sentiment
excellent to take the lead from mana whenua on the new kupu and deisgn. 
“
Of the emails received, 40 were negative or very negative, 27 were positive or very positive, and 13 were mixed  
Kia maia, kia manawanui!”
or neutral. 
Of the positive responses, most were both general and supportive in their feedback: commending the name change, the 
work being put into the design and consultation process, and the direction in which the University is going. 
“I would like to express my extreme distaste for the new design. I believe 
The main theme of negative feedback focused on cultural awareness, with 25 comments including negative sentiment 
the crest has much stronger connotations of academic excellence,  is very 
towards issues around embracing Māori culture, and specific concerns that the driver behind the proposal was “woke”. 
recognisable and joins together ex and existing students. The new font looks 
like something out of a corporate magazine.
A loss of heritage was the next most common theme, with comments arguing that the alumni cohort would be isolated 
if the proposal was to go ahead, given their time studying under the current University of Otago logo. This was also 
captured in 11 comments expressing concern about the potential damage to the University’s international reputation. 
Conversely, three email respondents thought the heritage of the University was positively impacted by the proposed 
changes. 
The cost of the proposal was mentioned negatively 20 times, with opinion that money earmarked for the design and 
potential implementation could be spent better elsewhere. There was a strong correlation between concerns about 
cost and cultural awareness. 
Feedback about the proposed name change to Ōtākou Whakaihu Waka was polarising, with 11 comments in favour 
and 13 against. This included a number of people who believed the official name of the University of Otago would be 
changing, which is not included in the proposal. 
The tohu was not received well; 13 of 17 emails mentioning it were negative. 
52
53

---

Tuakiritaka Consultation Findings
Tuakiritaka Consultation Findings
Thanks to participants
A huge number of people have engaged with the University to share their point of view regarding this proposal. 
Respondents have shared their hope, joy, anger, fear and confusion openly and honestly. The level of engagement is a 
clear indication of the importance people place on their connection with the University.
Thank you to each and every person who took the time to respond to the proposal. Be assured that the information  
you shared was treated with the utmost respect that reflected the intent in which it was given.
54
55

---

---

Document Outline

• Irish OIA Response - 18 August 2023.pdf
• 1. Register of Interests.pdf
  • Disclosure of Interests
• 2. Meeting Minutes.pdf
  • University Council Minutes
• 3. Consultation findings.pdf

---