Tuakiritaka Consultation Findings.pdf

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
Table 6: Design Principles Reflected in the Proposal
Question 2. Applicability of design principles
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