How universities can avoid brand bloat
When does a university need a sub-brand?
Universities often overflow with sub-brands – departments, research centres, and initiatives all fighting for attention, leading to "brand bloat." When a department secures funding, there's often a rush to create a new logo, identity, and brand. However, not every initiative needs a full sub-brand. The key question is: will you invest resources to promote this sub-brand? Without a budget for promotion, creating a new identity becomes a wasted effort. A sub-brand without support won’t grow and will be forgotten once funding runs out.
Cash is king—but it’s not the only thing
While money is crucial in deciding whether to develop a sub-brand, it's not the only consideration. A true sub-brand requires careful positioning, a distinct identity, and alignment with the university’s broader strategy. It should stand on its own, with its own mission, vision, and values while maintaining a connection to the parent brand. Meanwhile, departments and faculties should align closely with the main university brand. They can have a unique character without needing a separate identity that risks diluting the university’s core brand.
The pitfalls of brand bloat
Managing multiple sub-brands can quickly overwhelm the central marketing team, especially when each new initiative wants its own identity. What happens when the funding dries up? The effort invested in building the sub-brand often goes to waste. Worse, having too many sub-brands confuses your audience. If every group, department, or project has a distinct look, it can dilute the university’s overarching brand, making it harder for stakeholders to connect with the institution.
Fewer, bigger, better: A strategy for success
The solution lies in restraint and focus. Before creating a sub-brand, ask key questions:
Applying these criteria ensures that sub-brands are strategically aligned and have the resources to succeed.
Making the most of your brand resources
The difference between sub-brands and identities comes down to clarity and purpose. A sub-brand is a major commitment that needs investment and support. An identity, on the other hand, should operate within the existing brand framework, adding depth without fragmenting the message. It can help unite a disparate group behind a clear purpose – particularly useful for research groups for instance, but the intention is quite different to that of a brand.
Focusing on fewer, bigger initiatives helps streamline branding efforts, reduces confusion, and strengthens audience connections. It’s not about rejecting new ideas; it’s about making sure every idea gets the attention and support it needs.
Conclusion: Keep it simple, keep it strong
Brand bloat is common in higher education, but it can be avoided. By strategically deciding when to create sub-brands and when to stick to identities, universities can maintain a cohesive, strong brand that resonates with their audience. The goal isn’t to create more brands; it’s to create the right ones.
When budgets and resource allocations are tight it's also a more commercially efficient way to deliver impact effectively.
Call to Action
How does your university manage sub-brands and identities? Have you faced brand bloat or found a way to streamline your branding effectively? Share your thoughts in the comments!
Interested in creative translation and audience engagement
5 个月Insightful as always Ian, particularly this point "An identity, on the other hand, should operate within the existing brand framework, adding depth without fragmenting the message", how there is wiggle room for some personality in a university's brand.
HE and Research Brand Expert | Founder and Strategy Partner @ Firehaus
5 个月Great article. I think a critical aspect of this is the organisation or system in which these decisions are made. In many institutions, the typical HE marketer probably agrees with what you're saying wholeheartedly but is perhaps not empowered to make it happen.