An Integrative Approach to University Visual Identity and Reputation
- PDF / 213,454 Bytes
- 13 Pages / 595 x 765 pts Page_size
- 68 Downloads / 217 Views
Volume 9 Number 4
An Integrative Approach to University Visual Identity and Reputation Sue Westcott Alessandri Department of Public Relations & Advertising, S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY, USA Sung-Un Yang Department of Public Relations, S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY, USA Dennis F Kinsey Department of Public Relations, S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY, USA
ABSTRACT
This study focuses on the concepts of university identity and university reputation as they relate to a large private university in the Northeast United States. In the first part of the study, the concept of university identity was investigated. We used methodology to find the most distinctive visual identities of the university among students. In the follow-up study, the authors explored the concept of university reputation, using survey methodology. The implications of the study on the practice of branding – specifically, branding a university – are discussed. Corporate Reputation Review (2006) 9, 258–270 doi:10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550033 KEYWORDS: university
visual identity; university image; university reputation; organizational identity; corporate identity
INTRODUCTION
Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 258–270 © 2006 Palgrave Macmillan Ltd, 1363-3589 $30.00
258
In 1970, the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education developed a classification system for all US-based colleges and universities in an attempt to name and classify all
www.palgrave-journals.com/crr
the various forms of higher education available. While the Carnegie Commission developed its system simply to further its own research and policy analysis, it in adventently pitted schools against each other by grouping schools according to academic offerings. As a result, colleges and universities began to look at ‘peer institutions’, and schools around the country became increasingly aware of the need to differentiate themselves from the competitive pack in order to attract students – and donors (Melewar and Akel, 2005). As a result of this marketing mindset, the educational market has begun to behave like other commercial markets: What used to be the knowledge business has become selling an experience, an affiliation, a commodity that can be manufactured, packaged, bought, and sold. Don’t misunderstand, the intellectual work of universities is still going strong; in fact, it has never been stronger. Great creative acts still occur. Discoveries are being made. But the experience of higher education – the accessories, the amenities, the aura – has
Alessandri, Yang and Kinsey
been commercialized, outsourced, franchised, branded (Twitchell, 2004: 116). The behavior Twitchell discusses helps to explain the tremendous expenditures made by universities in the recent past. Some toptier universities, mostly those in the Ivy League, have begun to offer close to 100 per cent financial aid for students from low-income families (Jaschi
Data Loading...
