The role of corporate identity in the higher education sector
A case study
The Authors
T.C. Melewar, Warwick Business School, University of
Warwick, Coventry, UK
Sibel Akel, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
Abstract
Purpose – This paper analyses the strategic intent behind
the University of Warwick's corporate identity (CI) programme by
using the four components of the corporate identity model developed
by Melewar and Jenkins.
Design/methodology/approach – Information gathered from the
interview with Ian Rowley, Director of Communication at the
University of Warwick, is presented in support of the arguments. In
addition, the paper refers to two further documents: “University of
Warwick: Reputation Audit” and “The Corporate Identity Guide”.
Findings – Warwick's new CI is the reflection of the new
management strategy which is the move from a decentralised towards
a more centralised management style. In this respect the changes at
Warwick represent not a one-dimensional perspective to CI but
rather the first step of an evolving CI programme.
Originality/value – Application of the Melewar and Jenkins
identity model in the context of a higher education sector.
Article Type:
Case study
Keyword(s):
Corporate identity; Corporate image; Higher
education.
Journal:
Corporate Communications: An International
Journal
Volume:
10
Number:
1
Year:
2005
pp:
41-57
Copyright ©
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN:
1356-3289
Introduction
The globalisation of business has finally been embraced by the higher education sector in which education is seen as a service that could be marketed worldwide. Universities and other institutions of higher education have to compete with each other to attract high quality students and academic staff at an international level. Hence, competition is no longer limited within national borders. As education and training become a global business sector, education marketing is developing standards more akin to consumer goods marketing. This presents several challenges for UK universities such as the development of a more customer orientated service approach to education and an increased emphasis on corporate image.
In a market where students are recognised as customers, universities have to implement strategies to maintain and enhance their competitiveness. They need to develop a competitive advantage based on a set of unique characteristics. Furthermore, universities need to communicate these characteristics in an effective and consistent way to all of the relevant stakeholders (refer to Figure 1). Under these circumstances, universities have finally realised the role of corporate identity (CI) as a powerful source of competitive advantage. They understand that if managed strategically CI can help them develop a competitive edge over competitors (Olins, 1995). As a result, a growing number of universities have started to develop and implement CI programmes as part of their strategic growth and expansion (Baker and Balmer, 1997).
The University of Warwick is one of these universities. In May 2002 University of Warwick launched a new CI (www.warwick.ac.uk/services/publicity/id/index.htm) programme. The new CI focuses on the corporate visual identity (CVI) and includes changes in the university logotype, typography and colour. The objective of this paper is to review the new CI of the University of Warwick. Information gathered from the interview with Ian Rowley, Director of Communication at the University of Warwick is presented in support of the arguments. In addition, the paper refers to two further documents: “University of Warwick: reputation audit” (Jones, 2001) and The Corporate Identity Guide (2002) (www.warwick.ac.uk/services/publicity/id).
In the first section, the discussion revolves around the University's CI programme in the context of the CI model developed by Melewar and Jenkins (2002). The analysis examines each section of the model vis-à-vis communication and visual identity, behaviour, corporate culture and market conditions (refer to Figure 2). The second section discusses the changes that are taking place within Warwick's CI. We address issues such as why Warwick felt the need to change its visual identity and what were the motives for this change.
Furthermore, the paper discusses whether a visual identity-focused CI programme was the appropriate approach to close the gap between the University's brand values and perception. At this point, the paper discusses as to whether a more balanced approach to CI, where elements besides CVI, should have been considered by the University.
The corporate identity model
CI requires the presentation of the organisation as a whole and consists of several components, referred as the CI sub-constructs. Melewar and Jenkins (2002) identify four sub-constructs:
- communication and visual identity;
- behaviour;
- corporate culture; and
- market conditions.
The model adapts a multidisciplinary approach in the analysis of CI. It unites the psychological, graphic design, marketing and public relations paradigms of CI. In this way the model represents different views and school of thoughts of CI, aiming for a balanced combination between these different disciplines. Furthermore, in terms of its application, the model presents a practical tool for analysis with its simple structure summarised in a comprehensible graphic presentation.
Communication and visual identity
Corporate visual identity
The CVI of the organisation is reflected by five main components:
- corporate name;
- symbol and/or logotype;
- typography;
- colour; and
- slogan (Dowling, 1986; Olins, 1995).
According to Olins (1995 p. 2) these components “present the central idea of the organisation with impact, brevity and immediacy”.
The new CVI aims to project the University of Warwick as:
- high quality and responsible;
- forward looking and innovative;
- confident and creative;
- accessible and inclusive; and
- professional and business-like (Jones, 2001).
The above identity was pursued through the creation of a style that features:
- simplified use of the university logo;
- clear and modern typeface;
- blue as the dominant corporate colour;
- confident use of photography and layout; and
- highly professional feel.
The new CVI aims for the centralisation and consistency of visual identity, and greater emphasis is given to the name “Warwick”. As explained in The Corporate Identity Guide (2002) (www.warwick.ac.uk/services/publicity/id) these two elements increase the visibility of the university and help to make an immediate distinction between Warwick and its competitors.
The new visual identity maintains the “strong centre, strong department” structure of the university. Warwick consists of 30 academic departments. The decentralised structure of the university is reflected through the departmental logotypes used alongside the central Warwick logotype. Most of these departments have developed their own symbols and thus are considered as separate brands (refer to Figure 3). Departments such as the Warwick Business School (WBS) (refer to Figure 4) and the Warwick Manufacturing Group (WMG) (refer to Figure 5) have established a worldwide reputation in their areas of expertise. The new visual identity allows departments to retain their individual brand identity while maintaining a consistent and controlled style.
Within the new CVI a transformation of the university's colour scheme can be observed. Melewar and Jenkins (2002) state that colour is an important element of the CVI. According to Ian Rowley, Director of Communication at Warwick and the director of the CI programme, Warwick's move from the previous black and red as dominant corporate colours to blue and white was a pragmatic decision. Blue as the dominant corporate colour awakens positive associations as intelligence, communication, trust, efficiency, serenity, duty, logic, coolness, reflection and calm.
It is worth noting that the new CVI replaces the old and traditional university's crest (refer to Figure 6). The visual audit revealed that the crest was “out of touch” with the identity of the university. It does not reflect Warwick's modern and entrepreneurial spirit and character. Historically, the crest which is a complex visual language to stress medieval nobility has been established as a form of identification by most British universities. However, as explained by Bodoh and Mighall (2002 p. 10) “for universities founded in the 19th and 20th centuries, a coat of arms is the branding equivalent of mock Tudor architecture – inappropriate, slightly dishonest and just a bit naff”. Warwick's new CVI limits the usage of the crest to just international events where the Britishness of the university is seen as a differential advantage. On all other occasions the new CVI is used in almost all of the university's promotional materials.
Meanwhile, the marque “Warwick” (refer to Figure 7) as a shorthand to “The University of Warwick” (refer to Figure 8) represents an alternative to the full University of Warwick logotype. This is used not only on various signage and merchandise but also for commercial arms such as the “Warwick Conferences”. Through its simplified and clear design both the new logotype and the marque communicate Warwick's confidence in high quality teaching and research despite its relatively short history.
Corporate communication
As defined by Van Riel (1995) corporate communication is a management instrument to create and harmonise favourable relationships with external and internal stakeholders. As pointed out by Markwick and Fill (1997) it is vital to ensure that consistent corporate communication is delivered to all stakeholders. University of Warwick classifies its stakeholders into two broad categories:
- internal; and
- external stakeholders.
The external stakeholders cover a wide range of audiences from opinion leaders (business, media, academic, think tank, specialist education, government/political) to Warwick alumni and teachers. The internal audiences are divided into three main groups:
- students;
- academic; and
- non-academic staff.
In a research study conducted by the University (Opinion Leader Research) it was found that overall knowledge of the University differs considerably between these audiences:
On the whole, a far higher proportion of internal as opposed to external audiences state they know the University well. Among the internal audiences the academics in particular show a low level of knowledge of the university (Jones, 2001, p. 26).
Corporate communication covers management, marketing and organisational communications. Among the three, management communications is seen as the most important (Van Riel, 1995). Top level managers are seen as the main medium of management communications since they are responsible for transmitting the corporate philosophy and vision to the internal stakeholders (Melewar and Jenkins, 2002).
“The Vice Chancellor (VC) at Warwick is perceived as a high quality academic, well connected at the sectoral level” (Jarzabkowski and Wilson 2002, pp. 362-3). The VC, Professor David VandeLinde was appointed in 2001 as the new Warwick Vice Chancellor. His appointment as the VC symbolises the beginning of a period of change for the university. He has previously established University of Bath as one of the top ten institutions of higher education in England. One of his first aims is to enhance communications between all members of the university, across research, teaching, administration and student boundaries. A comprehensive intranet, Warwick InSite was set up to inform all of the audiences about the university's agenda (www.warwick.ac.uk/insite). The InSite also aims to ensure good communications between staff and students.
Architecture and location
Warwick's estate strategy demonstrates an increasing concern with the appearance of campus buildings. The University has a large number of capital projects under construction. Among these are new student residences and flats, sport facilities and expanded teaching facilities. The University mission statement and corporate plan states “our objective of developing the social and cultural infrastructure of the University in concert with academic expansion generates a need for improved sports facilities, additional on-campus residences and further landscape schemes to enhance the University environment” (www.warwick.ac.uk/services/agendas/ucp/pdf). Russel (2001) stresses the importance of corporate design and architecture, and implies that buildings can communicate an organisation's values and philosophies. He indicates that architecture should be used as a medium of communication.
In the case of the Warwick campus architecture, it is not always in sync with the university values. Capowski (1993) explains that it is difficult to achieve consistency in corporate design. He says that “corporate design swings like a pendulum” (Capowski, 1993, p. 37). Each building reflects the style of its era. Many of the Warwick campus buildings such as the library, humanities and the social studies buildings originated from the 1960s. These buildings reflect the “mass production” philosophy of the era when they were built. Their solid and anaesthetic look does not correspond with the innovative, creative and professional character and identity of the university. On the other hand, the more recent buildings such as the new Warwick Business School or the Ramphal building are more successful in revealing the university's true CI through corporate design.
Uncontrollable communication
Uncontrollable communication arises from “situations in which the behaviour is beyond the company's direct control” (Melewar and Jenkins, 2002, p. 82). The increasing attention given by marketing experts in the manipulation of word-of-mouth and research about profiling opinion leaders implied that the role of uncontrollable communication on CI may be more significant than anticipated. The research about main resources of information on the University by audience type (Opinion Leaders Research) confirms this view. Word-of-mouth and personal contacts score close to web site and newsletters which are the main tools of corporate communications.
Behaviour
Management behaviour
Given the current need for economic accountability and the increased focus on consumer choice, universities are viewing students and staff as customers. Consequently, to maintain the desired level of service quality the relationship between administrative staff and academics, and administrative staff and students has become more structured. Thus, the behaviour of management at universities increasingly resembles a commercial company.
The management behaviour at Warwick is affected by the definition of the word “customer”. Warwick differentiates between commercial and non-commercial customers. The commercial customers refer to businesses that work in collaboration with the University for research projects as well as the conference audience. Deriving 65 per cent of its income from non-funding council sources, Warwick considers these business contacts very seriously. This attitude is reflected in the combination of the top management team. The presence of two board members who have been top level managers in the industry prior to their involvement with the university is related to the business-orientated perspective.
Management at the University of Warwick has a decentralised structure. Despite the culture of “academic diversity and of institutional common purpose” a strong leadership at the level of the VC can be identified. Departments gain power through their performance in the following areas of strategic intent which include sustaining the research ranking expansion of the targeted faculty, developing the university's infrastructure, generating income from non-Higher Education Funding Council of England (HEFCE) sources. Success in these strategically important areas then determines their negotiation power in terms of resource allocation. Research reveals that “greater autonomy was accorded to those departments which performed excellently in the core business of research performance whereas lesser performers were subject to greater intervention” (Jarzabkowski and Wilson, 2002, p. 368).
Recently, the dominant pattern of top team thinking and acting is being shifted towards a more supportive and reinforcing top level management style. Pro Vice Chancellors favour a central management group that is “in touch with departments”. Activities such as “Meet the VC” create an opportunity for staff to communicate with the VC and top management without the constraints of formality.
Employee behaviour
Increasingly, academics acknowledge that a “corporate identity refers to an organisation's unique characteristics which are rooted in the behaviour of employees” (Balmer and Wilson, 1998, p. 15). As a result of reduced government funding and a larger social focus on consumer choice universities design courses that are in accordance to what consumers want rather than what universities believe should be taught. This new way of looking at “customers” of education has created a need to review the relationship between the customers and university employees.
Nevertheless, in the context of a university, the identification of the customer and the employee is not an easy task. First, as identified by Sirvanci (1996) the student-university relationship is not a typical customer-employee relationship. The university student differs from a “conventional” customer in the sense that the university student does not have full freedom of choice with the product (knowledge/education), responsibility for paying the price and might not even “qualify” to purchase the product.
Second, in an environment where the students are classified as internal customers the classification of academic staff is problematic. Academics are classified both under internal customer and academic staff. Warwick has approximately 3,850 staff comprising 775 academic staff (lecturers, readers and professors), 675 research staff, and 2,440 non-academic staff (www.warwick.ac.uk/services/Personnel/g-info.shtml). Evidence shows that relationship between academic and administrative staff is an area of potential conflict (Pitman, 2000). The tension is likely to originate from the fact that academic staff have different motives for working in a university from administrative staff members and used a different value system from their own.
Pitman (2000), in his survey of administrative staff in higher education, found that the quality of administrative service at universities has been overlooked. This can be based on two reasons:
Firstly, universities naturally remain focused on teaching and research, with the administration tasks existing to facilitate these aims. Secondly, most of what has been written is done by academics who focus on the areas that concern them the most. This has meant, however, that the role of administrative staff in tertiary organisational culture has been somewhat ignored (Pitman, 2000, p. 166).
However, it has to be remembered that in higher education administration customer service should move beyond mere “service transactions” and take on a wider focus. Still, most of what has been recently written about quality service at universities focuses on the teaching aspect of education (Pitman, 2000). In contrast, Bean and Bradley (1986) emphasise what they call the “institutional fit”, that is, the extent to which a student feels that she or he belongs to the institution. After all, the student as a customer perceives not only the academic and teaching as a criteria of quality but equally the extent to which he or she enjoys campus life (Pitman, 2000).
Corporate culture
Organisational culture has been an important focus of academic management since the early 1980s (Wiedmann, 1988). Culture is the commonly held and relatively stable beliefs, attitudes and values that exist within the organisation (Williams et al., 1993). Warwick's culture according to the research conducted by Jarzabkowski and Wilson (2002) is based on the following tenets:
- success-orientated;
- entrepreneurial and competitive;
- intra-organisational competition;
- low tolerance for non-performers;
- pioneering;
- competing at the highest level of sectoral environment, (Harvard, Berkeley, Cambridge and Stanford); and
- “strong centre, strong department”.
However, in an academic institution agreement on a single value set is difficult to achieve. Baker and Balmer (1997) in their study about the CI of University of Strathclyde identify that the problem arises mainly from the fact that each member of the university is an expert in a specific area and has therefore a very strong view about how to proceed in this area. In the absence of a general direction for the academic community to proceed in, this sub-cultures and multiplicity in identities may harm the successful implementation of a CI programme.
Nationality
Warwick accommodates students from more than 100 different nationalities. With increasing numbers of overseas students and academic staff the role of nationality is decreasing. However, Warwick prefers to emphasise its British character in the international arena. As is common among other UK universities, it capitalises mainly on the English language as the main language of commerce. Moreover, Warwick's international recognition in business and academic circles is a major attraction among overseas students.
Goals, philosophies and principles
The most common way of communicating goals, philosophies and principles is through a mission statement. Although, it is crucial for the corporate statement to reflect the uniqueness of the organization Berg and Gagliarde (1985) point out that the contents of many mission/vision statements lack the sense of differentiation.
In its mission statement, the University of Warwick emphasises the strong tradition of working in collaboration with business and industry as the driving force behind the establishment as one of Britain's leading universities despite the short history. However, in terms of its goals, Warwick mission statement is rather similar to the mission statements of many other universities (based on comparison with University of Strathclyde's mission statement as stated by Balmer, 1998). It highlights the importance given to top quality research and teaching, lifelong learning, close links with local and regional community. Moreover, it states that the future success is dependent on embracing and responding to new information and communication technologies remains as just another cliché and hence does not add value.
According to Baker and Balmer (1997, p. 369) the problem of differentiation between university mission statements is “the effect of a strong generic or industry-wide identity”. Universities feel that they have to emphasize certain accepted criteria for “good education” rather than the characteristics of their unique identity.
Organisational imagery and history
The mission statement and corporate plan reveals that Warwick is proud of having attained the position of one of Britain's leading universities in the short period since it was founded in 1965. Warwick's short but successful history is perceived as one of its key characteristics. Moingeon and Ramanantsoa (1997) stress the interaction between history and CI. They point out that the way history influences the definition of CI, i.e. “identity is the product of the history of the organisation” (Moingeon and Ramanantsoa, 1997, p. 386). They further state that identity influences history and shapes the perceptions and actions of the organization members. Thus, identity also produces history.
At the University of Warwick history created an identity in support of the entrepreneurial self-image and income generating orientation of the university (Jarzabkowski and Wilson, 2002). Warwick's emphasis on financial success, however, has also been target to criticism since the University was seen as being too businesslike. The priority accorded to the University's business links and commercial activities are a prominent concern among internal audiences (Jones, 2001). Staff and students often say that they feel like “second class citizens” in comparison to conference or business guests. On the other hand, this characteristic allowed Warwick to differentiate itself from the more traditional universities such as Oxford and Cambridge. Warwick is seen to have embraced a broad range of students often from non-traditional backgrounds.
Market conditions
Nature of the industry
The UK higher education market is crowded and competitive. The general rule in the market is that prospective students will often attend a leading university because of its overall reputation, even though it may be relatively weak in the specific subject chosen. The teaching and research assessment exercises that have been conducted regularly and the newspaper (such as The Financial Times, Guardian etc) publications of the ranking of universities reveal that certain universities are more respected and are perceived to be general leaders in the field (for example, The Sunday Times).
However, the generic characteristic of higher education makes the projection of a differentiated identity difficult. Some universities such as Cambridge, Oxford, Imperial College, Durham, LSE, UCL, York, Nottingham, Manchester and Bristol have succeeded in this difficult task. These universities have a higher visibility as brands (www.heist.co.uk/corporate branding/ukbranding). Globalisation of higher education presents new challenges for the universities in the UK. Increasing competition from overseas institutions and the desire to attract international students for prestige and income reasons make it inevitable for universities to develop a strong brand.
Corporate and marketing strategies
For the period up to 2004 Warwick specifies its strategies as “enhancing and promoting the University's reputation, particularly on the international stage” and “maintaining and developing our strengths in institutional governance and management” and “show that the university is planning to continue its business-like development” (www.warwick.ac.uk).
Corporate and marketing strategies not only determine desired future states of the organisation but they also influence the formation of brand and corporate perceptions. Thus, the way an organization defines its corporate strategies has a significant impact on how it is perceived by its stakeholders. Simoes and Dibb (2001) state that the notion of corporate identity is linked to the corporate brand concept. Also according to Ind (1997) corporate branding is more than a visual projection of the organisation – it is a manifestation of the organisational core values.
Discussion
Why do organizations need to change their CI? Van Riel and Balmer (1997) claim that CI mix is influenced by various factors such as the developments in the external environment, corporate reputation and organisational performance (refer to Figure 9). Furthermore, this diagram indicates that CI is not enduring as claimed by Albert and Whetten (1985). On the contrary, Balmer (2001, p. 19) talks about the “identity wheel of change” where change is a constant feature of organisational life.
The need for a CI change programme arises “when there is a lack of alignment between corporate rhetoric and reality” (Margulies, 1970, p. 31). Such a lack of alignment can have various reasons. Expansion into new areas of operation, industry pressure and even the change of management can trigger the need for an identity change programme. In the case of Warwick the need for change arises mainly because of the mismatch between its identity and reputation. The University of Warwick has a reputation of being an innovative and radical institution which was not reflected in its CVI system. The existing CVI not only lacked a fashionable appearance but also consistency across departments and services. Over the years there existed more than 20 different departmental logos and various types of university vehicle insignia in use. The Opinion Leader Research's reputation audit suggests that there is general consensus between stakeholders about what Warwick stands for even though this was not particularly represented by the existing CVI (Jones, 2001). Having identified these problems in the Opinion Leaders Report, 1 October 2002, the University of Warwick introduced a new CI. The corporate identity changes were an attempt to close the gap between appearance and (perceived) reality.
The Vice Chancellor views the new CVI as an essential development for Warwick. He explains that “these changes are an important step towards bringing our image in line with our reputation” (www.warwick.ac.uk/services/publicity/id). As stated by Ian Rowley the new VC is not just interested in the logo. At the same time he wanted to strengthen the internal communication channels in which he appointed the first internal communications officer working in a UK university. At Warwick the management of the visual identity is perceived as “equally important as the management of other business assets such as finance or human resources” (www.warwick.ac.uk/services/publicity/id). This shows that the university is aware of the power of CI as a strategic tool to develop differential advantage. Furthermore, Warwick expects to secure its place within the top five in the crowded UK higher education sector which will become even more challenging after 2006 with the introduction of the increased tuition fees.
However, the new Warwick CI programme is focused on the visual aspects of the CI mix. On this basis, one can argue that Warwick's new CI programme is one dimensional since it does not consider the remaining elements of the identity mix. Van Riel and Balmer (1997) criticise this approach. They state that the role of symbolism is now assigned a greater role and has grown from its original purpose of increasing organisational visibility to a position where it is seen as having a role in communicating corporate strategy (Van Riel and Balmer, 1997). Nevertheless, Warwick is not the only example where CVI is treated as the centre of CI. Balmer (2001) admits that “many identity change programmes are one or at best two dimensional”. This two dimensional approach to CI raises concern about the underlying motives of the CI change programmes in the higher education sector. Gioia and Corley (2002, p. 109) state that “business schools are often confronted with a forced choice between being good and looking good”.
This trend can be explained in several ways. The most common of these explanations is the nature of the CI consultancies. Many of these consultancies have a graphic design background and lack competency and expertise in organisational behaviour, strategy and corporate communication (Balmer, 2001). Thus, they emphasise the graphic design aspect of CI as a mean in projecting the CI of the company. Another explanation is based on the conflicting views about the content of CI. The CI literature emphasises the mix and claims that each element of the mix is equally important, whereas the industry and the professionals prioritise CVI over the rest of the elements.
The literature on CI sees corporate identity management (CIM) as a combination of various variables. CIM should take into account an organization's historical roots (Moingeon and Ramanantsoa, 1997), its personality (Balmer, 1995; Birkight and Stadler, 1986; Olins, 1978), its corporate strategy (Wiedmann, 1988) and the three parts of the corporate identity mix (behaviour of organizational members, communication and symbolism) in order to acquire a favourable corporate reputation (Fombrun, 1996) which results in improved organizational performance (Fombrun and Shanley, 1990). In theory, CVI is only one element of the CI mix (Melewar and Jenkins, 2002; Baker and Balmer, 1997).
Yet, some theorists sympathise with the industry's enthusiasm with CVI. They agree that “a change in logo can signal a fresh outlook on the part of the firm and its brand” (Kapferer, 1992). CVI is much easier to manipulate than the other elements of the mix. Therefore, CVI is one aspect of organisational life where senior managers can have absolute control, achieve consistency and bring about change relatively quickly. Moreover, they point out that CVI is an important motivator for change in other organisational areas as well (Olins, 1995; Topalian, 1984). Gioia and Corley (2002 p. 1111) state that:
… when organizations design and launch a planned change effort, they frequently employ a visionary projected future image as an impetus and a guide for achieving some desired vision in their structure, process, performance, and prestige.
For these reasons it is not surprising to find that managers tend to perceive CI synonymous with visual identity. Research revealed that:
… only 4 per cent of British managers equate corporate identity with “culture, values and philosophy” while 44 per cent associate it with only “visual presentation and logotype” (Schmidt, 1995).
In their study of the Strathclyde University, Baker and Balmer (1997) examine whether visual identity is the most important aspect of CI mix and if so in which way it differs from other elements of the mix. They come to the conclusion that “graphic design can be more than mere trapping” (Baker and Balmer, 1997, p. 381). A similar conclusion is reached by Gioia and Corley (2002). They suggest a “substance-image-substance” strategy, where image can transform substance as much substance can transform image. In this sense, image is not worthy without a solid substance, but at the same time a positive image plays a crucial role in developing the organisation further.
However, for image to be the source of organisational development other elements than the visual communication of the CI mix has to be taken into account. In this sense, a change in CVI has to be followed by changes in the other elements of the mix. The question of which elements of the mix should be considered and in which order depends on the gaps that has to be filled between actual and the desired identity at a given time. This implies that not every stage along in CI development process requires the same set of CI elements.
Resembling the concept of product life cycle, the development of a CI has stages varying from introduction to maturity. Some of these stages might need to focus primarily on CVI whereas others require emphasis on different aspects of the CI mix. For instance, at an early stage the programme attention can be drawn to the organisation's new CI through a striking change in CVI, while in the more mature stages a change in CVI might be less convincing. It should be remembered that a continuous transformation of CVI can be seen more as a sign of insecurity and inconsistency than a motivation for improvement. Thus, in this case the organisation should consider operational elements of the mix such as management or employee behaviour.
Conclusion
This paper has demonstrated that CI is an amalgamation of several elements. From a management point of view it would be a failure to assume one single element as being more important than the others. The management of CI should grasp the complex and multidisciplinary character of CI. Moreover, as Christensen and Askegaard (2001) state that CI should uncover the true “character” or “responsibility of the organisation behind it's various appearances”. In relation to this, management of CI at the University of Warwick with its focus on harmonising the relationship between corporate communication and visual identity can be seen as one dimensional and thus not sufficient in expressing the multidisciplinary construct of CI.
However, the change programme is not without strategic intent. The fact that the degree of change is kept at a minimum shows that the university management wants to avoid possible resistance from the various academic and non-academic departments. It also signalled a quick win for the new VC to stamp his own mark on the way Warwick presented itself both internally and externally. These changes brought Warwick's visual identity into line with other aspects of the University's communication and branding strategies.
Warwick's new CI is the reflection of the new management strategy, which is the move from a decentralised towards a more centralised management style. In this respect the changes at Warwick represent not a one dimensional perspective to CI but rather the first step of an evolving CI programme.
Figure 1Corporate identity
stakeholders
Figure 2The corporate identity model
Figure 3Brands within Warwick
Figure 4Warwick Business School
logotype
Figure 5Warwick manufacturing Group
logotype
Figure 6The crest
Figure 7The marque
Figure 8The logotype
Figure 9Corporate identity management
References
Albert, S., Whetten, D. (1985), "Organisational identity", in Cummings, L.C., Staw, B.M. (Eds),Research in Organisational Behavior, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, Vol. 7 pp.63-95.
Baker, M.J., Balmer, J.M.T. (1997), "Visual identity: trappings of substance", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No.5/6, pp.366-82.
Balmer, J.M.T. (1995), "Corporate branding and connoisseurship", Journal of General Management, Vol. 21 No.1, pp.24-46.
Balmer, J.M.T. (1998), "Corporate identity and the advent of corporate marketing", Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 14 pp.963-96.
Balmer, J.M.T. (2001), "From the Pentagon: a new identity framework", Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 4 No.1, pp.11-22.
Balmer, J.M.T., Wilson, A. (1998), "Corporate identity: there is more to it than meets the eye", International Studies of Management and Organisation, Vol. 28 No.3, pp.12-32.
Bean, J.P., Bradley, R. (1986), "Understanding the satisfaction-performance relationship for college students", Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 57 pp.293-312.
Berg, P.O., Gagliarde, P. (1985), “Corporate images: a symbolic perspective of the organization- environment interface”, paper presented at the Conference on Corporate Images SCOS, Antibes, .
Birkight, K., Stadler, M. (1986), "Corporate identity, Grundiagen, Funktionen und Beispielen”, Verlag, Moderne Industrie, Landsberg am Lech", in Van Riel, C.B.M. (Eds),Principles of Corporate Communication, Prentice-Hall, London, .
Bodoh, J., Mighall, R. (2002), "Brand new image", The Guardian, No.29 January, pp.10.
Capowski, G.S. (1993), "Designing a corporate identity", Management Review, Vol. 82 No.6, pp.37-41.
Christensen, L.T., Askegaard, S. (2001), "Corporate identity and corporate image revisited", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35 No.3/4, pp.292-316.
(The) Corporate Identity Guide (2002), The University of Warwick, Warwick, available at: www.warwick.ac.uk/services/publicity/id, .
Dowling, G.R. (1986), "Managing your corporate images", Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 15 pp.109-15.
Fombrun, C. (1996), Reputation: Realising Value from the Corporate Image, Harvard Business Review Press, Boston, MA, .
Fombrun, C., Shanley, M. (1990), "What's in a name? The reputational effects of corporate strategy", Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33 pp.233-58.
Gioia, D.A., Corley, K.G. (2002), "Being good versus looking good: business school rankings and the Circean transformation from substance to image", Academy of Management Learning & Education, Vol. 1 No.1, pp.107-21.
Ind, N. (1997), The Corporate Brand, Macmillan Press, London, .
Jarzabkowski, P., Wilson, D. (2002), "Top teams and strategy in a UK university", Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 39 No.3, pp.355-82.
Jones, S. (2001), Reputation Audit, Final Combined Report, University of Warwick, pp.1-61.
Kapferer, J. (1992), Strategic Brand Management, Kogan Page, London, .
Margulies, W.P. (1970), "Custom control of corporate identity: realistic system required", Business Horizons, No.February, pp.31-6.
Markwick, N., Fill, C. (1997), "Towards a framework for managing corporate identity", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No.5/6, pp.340-55.
Melewar, T.C., Jenkins, E. (2002), "Defining the corporate identity construct", Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 5 No.1, pp.76-91.
Moingeon, B., Ramanantsoa, B. (1997), "Understanding corporate identity: the French school of thought", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No.5/6, pp.383-96.
Olins, W. (1978), The Corporate Personality: An Inquiry into the Nature of Corporate Identity, Design Council, London, .
Olins, W. (1995), The New Guide to Identity, Wolff Olins, Gower, Aldershot, .
Pitman, T. (2000), "Perceptions of academics and students as customers: a survey of administrative staff in higher education", Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, Vol. 22 No.2, pp.165-76.
Russel, J.S. (2001), "Where to now?", Architectural Record, Vol. 189 No.6, pp.10-12.
Schmidt, K. (1995), The Quest for Corporate Identity, Cassell, London, .
Simoes, C., Dibb, S. (2001), "Rethinking the brand concept: new brand orientation", Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 6 No.4, pp.217-24.
Sirvanci, M. (1996), "Are students the true customers of higher education?", Quality Progress, Vol. 29 No.10, pp.99-103.
Topalian, A. (1984), "Corporate identity: beyond the visual overstatements", International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 3 pp.55-62.
Van Riel, C.B.M. (1995), Principles of Corporate Communication, Prentice-Hall, London, .
Van Riel, C.B.M., Balmer, J.M.T. (1997), "Corporate identity: the concept, its measurement and management", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No.5/6, pp.340-56.
Wiedmann, K.P. (1988), Corporate Identity als Unternehmensstrategie, Vol. 5 pp.236-42.
Williams, A., Dobson, P., Walters, M. (1993), Changing Culture: New Organisational Approaches, 2nd ed., Institute of Personnel Management, London, .
