23 August 2023
By email
: [FYI request #23481 email] Tēnā koe M Sinclair
I refer to your information request dated 13 July 2023 made under the Official Information Act 1982
(the Act). You requested information in relation to the University of Otago’s new brand.
We note that on 11 August 2023, we responded to your request in part, and extended the remainder
of your request (questions 3 and 5) to 23 August 2023.
Please see below our response to the remainder of your request.
3. Correspondence to/from/involving senior leadership team, University Council members
and/or operations/marketing/administration staff at the University which discuss the
timing, appropriateness, or decision of rebranding.
In our response dated 11 August 2023, we noted that your request in its original form was very broad.
Given the size of the University, there are a number of staff in “operations/marketing/administration”
positions (arguably, all University staff could be considered operational or administrative), and it
would not be practically possible for us to ask all of these staff members to search their records for
information within scope of your request. In order to make this part of your request practically
manageable, we advised that we were collating correspondence from the following staff since 1
January 2023:
• The University
’s Senior Leadership Team
• The University Chancellor
• The Director, Marketing Services
Subject to the following comments, please see
attached correspondence held by the Senior
Leadership Team, Chancellor, and Director, Marketing Services since 1 January 2023 that “discuss the
timing, appropriates, or decision of rebranding”:
• Having given careful attention to public interest considerations in accordance with section 9(1)
of the Act, we have withheld or redacted information where we consider that good reasons
exist for withholding information. We have redacted or withheld information:
o pursuant to section 9(2)(a) of the Act, on the basis that it is necessary to protect the
privacy of natural persons. This includes, for example, names, emails addresses, and
other identifying personal details of the individuals who sent the emails.
o pursuant to section 9(2)(g)(i) of the Act, on the basis that withholding information is
necessary to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through the free and
frank expression of opinions between employees of the University and/or other
parties providing opinions on matters relating to the rebranding project. Some of the
information withheld also includes material relating to the drafting of media releases,
webpages, emails, communications strategies, and FAQ documents. The final versions
of all such communications are provided where applicable, or they are publicly
available online through the University
’s webpage on the new brand.
• we have also removed information that is out of scope and not relevant to your request.
• most feedback on the University’s new brand was received by way of a survey. The Tuakiritaka
Consultation Findings document (publicly availab
le online) contains information on the
background to the proposal, how the University consulted on the proposal, and an analysis of
the findings from the survey. Please see
attached a copy of this document.
5. Briefing documents or memos provided to the decision makers at the time the rebranding
decision was confirmed.
We note that no briefing documents or memos were provided to the decision makers (University of
Otago Council) at the time the decision to approve the University’s new brand was confirmed. The
decision was made at a Council only session held on 11 July 2023 and confirmed later that same day
during the Part 1 – Open Committee section of the University Council meeting. On that basis, this
would constitute a decline on this part of your request pursuant to section 18(e) of the Act, as the
document alleged to contain the information does not exist.
However, we note that University Council members were briefed in a series of meetings on the brand
proposal, the first of these briefings being in July 2022. The documents provided during these briefing
meetings were reviewed by Council members during the non-public parts of Council meetings. We
note that the Chair of the University Council may move that the public be excluded from the whole or
any part of the proceedings of a meeting if the public conduct of those proceedings would be likely to
result in the disclosure of information for which good reasons for withholding it would exist
(consistent with section 48(1)(a)(ii) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act
1987). These documents were withheld from the public pursuant to one or more of the following
withholding grounds:
• section 9(2)(i) of the Act on the basis that we consider withholding this information is
necessary to enable the University to carry out commercial activities without prejudice of
disadvantage;
• section 9(2)(j) of the Act on the basis that we consider withholding this information is
necessary to enable to the University to carry on negotiations without prejudice or
disadvantage; and
• section 9(2)(k) of the Act on the basis that we consider withholding this information is
necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of this information for improper gain or improper
advantage.
Having checked with the University Chancellor (Chair of the University Council), we can confirm that
the reasons for withholding this information still remain as the documents contain confidential
commercially sensitive information. On that basis, we decline providing you with copies of these
documents pursuant to section 9(2)(i) of the Act, as we consider withholding this information is
necessary to enable the University to carry out commercial activities without prejudice or
disadvantage. We are concerned that release of this information could still have a prejudicial effect on
the University’s ability to carry out its commercial activities as:
• the information is detailed and sensitive.
• the information is not in the public domain.
• the information relates directly to the University’s commercial activities.
We also note that the documents we have withheld also include information that is subject to
obligations of confidence (correspondence with our design consultants), is legally privileged (regarding
advice on trademarks), is private (such as private communications with alumni), and contains free and
frank opinions.
We acknowledge that there is public interest in releasing such information, namely accountability in
the context of spending public money. However, we do not believe this outweighs the good reasons
that exist for withholding the information. The University’s brand is an important commercial aspect
of its operations. We are operating in a highly competitive commercial environment with other
tertiary institutions. Therefore, the University’s brand is a core component of what sets it apart from
its competitors.
In case it is helpful, we note that the documents we have withheld include:
• presentations on the project, including project history, project approach, key project
personnel, discovery research insights, brand audit, creative concepts, and design updates.
• project updates.
• consultation plans and timelines.
• decision criteria.
• communications strategies.
• draft versions of FAQs and webpages.
• feedback received from key stakeholders.
• budget estimates.
• survey feedback analysis.
• market research briefings.
• guidelines on the use of the new visual identity.
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.
Yours sincerely
Kelsey Kennard
Official Information and Compliance Coordinator
Office of the Registrar
