Dear Em,

As your request is for a large quantity of official information or
necessitates a search through a large quantity of information and meeting
the original time limit would unreasonably interfere with the operations
of the University, and consultations necessary to make a decision on your
request are such that a response cannot reasonably be given within the
original time limit, the University has extended the time limit for your
request by 20 working days under section 15A(1)(a) and (b) of the OIA.

The new maximum time limit for the University’s response is 17 April 2025;
we will respond to your request as soon as reasonably practicable.

Yours sincerely,

Farleigh Quinlivan

show quoted sections

Dear Em,

 

I refer to your request of 20 February 2025.  We apologise for the delay
in our response.  The University’s response follows:

 

‘1) the rationale behind the decision to propose a new logo, including any
strategic, branding, or design considerations;’

 

The University’s new Marketing and Recruitment Strategy was approved by
the University Executive Committee (UEC) for implementation in 2024. The
Strategy highlights the need to be more competitive, more cohesive, and
more efficient.

 

In response to this strategy, the University Marketing Team set out to
create clarity amongst the thousands of logos owned by the University.
This is a situation that has evolved organically over the University’s
long history but is no longer practical to manage in terms of cost, time,
and resource. At this time, a proposal was endorsed by UEC to divest this
proliferation of logos in favour of presenting the University in a more
cohesive manner with fewer layers. As part of this proposal, it was
suggested that if all areas of the University were to use one logo it
would be timely to address the known issues with that one logo.

 

Over time the University’s primary logo had gradually slipped behind in
terms of legibility, accessibility, equity and partnership standards and
models, so five core objectives were formed to guide the refresh of the
logo:

 1. Improve legibility
 2. Increase territory
 3. Modernise and align with our sense of place
 4. Simplify
 5. Improve equity and partnership

 

‘2) the cost associated with the logo change, including projected
expenses, design fees, implementation costs, and any cost-benefit analysis
conducted;’

At this stage in the project, it is not possible to confirm the costs
associated with the ‘logo change, including projected expenses, design
fees, implementation costs, and any cost-benefit analysis conducted’ as
this work is ongoing.  We are therefore refusing this part of your request
under section 18(g) of the OIA, because the University does not hold this
official information.

 

However, the University does accept that there is a public interest
consideration in this material, and as such, can confirm that the initial
visual recommendation provided to the University, cost $22,170 and final
testing and adjustments were completed by the University’s in-house design
team.

 

The University aims to significantly reduce the potential cost of
implementation by employing a soft roll out approach. This means that the
University has no expectation that everything will be changed overnight.

 

The University is asking that, from 8 April 2025, any new material will be
required to use the refreshed logo.  There is no mandate to replace things
that are not being updated organically. Signage, for example, will not
receive a blanket update across our campuses.  New and/or replacement
signage, will however, be required to adhere to the new guidelines.

 

The cost to maintain the previous model far outweighs the cost to
implement the new model. 

‘3) any internal or external communications, discussions, or documentation
regarding the proposal. If no feedback or discussions with staff or other
stakeholders have occurred, please confirm that no such records exist;
and’

This part of your request has been framed very broadly and so it is not
possible for us to limit the scope of a search for this material to a
manageable number of staff or stakeholders. For example, it is possible
that any staff member in any Faculty, might have sent or received an email
that is related to the logo change in some way. Accordingly, the
University has refused this part of your request under section 18(f) of
the OIA. Neither extending the time limit, imposing a charge, nor
consulting with you would enable this part of your request to be granted.

 

However, the University does accept that there is a public interest
consideration in this material, and as such, can advise that it engaged
with:

 

o UEC (30 July 2024, 18 February 2025 and 25 March 2025),
o Deans and Directors of Large-Scale Research Institutes (LSRIs),
o Professional Staff Leadership Team, Strategic Engagement Leadership
Team, and Digital Services
o International Office, Communication and Marketing Managers, Directors
of Faculty Operations,
o Testing protocols: students, staff, alumni, and mana whenua.

 

If you would like to make a further request for specified official
information, the University will action it and respond in due course under
the OIA.

 

‘4)the timeline for implementation;’

At present, the University anticipates that it will take around 18 months
to implement, however, we note that some more permanent, higher value
assets with an expected lifespan of longer than 18 months will remain in
use for longer (for example, existing high-rise signage).

 

You have the right to make a complaint to an Ombudsman if you are
dissatisfied with this response.

 

Yours sincerely,

Farleigh Quinlivan

show quoted sections