Higher Ed Brand Identity: Australia

by | Dec 1, 2021 | Branding, Graphic Design, International Institutions

Redefining Value: Key issues in HE Marketing, Recruitment and Identity

The following blog post is translated from a presentation that was offered at the Redefining Value: Key issues in HE Marketing, Recruitment and Identity conference in Australia hosted by Twig Marketing. The content of this post differs in format from previous posts. A video of the presentation will be posted as soon as it is available.

Some notable takeaways:

  • Australia’s range of higher ed brands has many similarities to brands in the U.S.
  • A significant use of red across most institutions.
  • Most brands feature serif typefaces.

The highlighted brands below were designs that stood out to me.

The gallery of 39 logos is displayed at the bottom of the page. Let me know what you think on Twitter or LinkedIn!

Download Now:
Higher Ed Brand Identity – Australia

PDF presentation from the Redefining Value: Key issues in HE Marketing, Recruitment and Identity conference.

Serifs

Advantages

  • Classic academy
  • Historical; legacy
  • Less corporate
  • Pairs well with other ornate elements
  • Visual contrast to minimalist icons

Disadvantages

  • Ornamentation decreases legibility
  • When stacked, should only be in capital letters for flush cap-height
  • Mixing of all-caps and lower case can be jarring for logo but
    not copy.

Composition + Typography

  • Two-column left placement (11)
  • Two-row top placement (8)
  • Upper-case only (15)
  • Small caps (1)

Observations

  • USQ is the most dynamic
  • CQU has a fresh approach but has technical issues
  • Queensland typography is beautifully composed
  • Shields enclosures have too many elements

Sans-Serifs

Advantages

  • Less complex builds
  • More expressive (bolds)
  • More legible, visible from a distance

Disadvantages

  • Risk depersonalization
  • Overuse of specific typefaces

Composition + Typography

  • Two-column left placement (9)
  • Two-row top placement (3)
  • Upper-case only (8)
  • Upper and lower-case (5)

Observations

  • Typesetting has less space between letters, in some logos feels more compact
  • Generally sans-serifs pair better with icons of any style either by virtue of stylistic match or contrast

Logotypes

Advantages

  • Literal “visual language”
  • Unique versus icons
  • Typefaces can be custom-designed
  • Expressive using existing and accepted visual elements (letters)

Disadvantages

  • Too much to read
  • Depending on the composition, too hard to read
  • Versus icons, can be perceived as ‘lacking’
  • Not personality-driven

Composition + Typography

  • Typically block justified
    or single-line
  • Sometimes vertical at 90-degree rotation (diminishes legibility)

Observations

  • QUT logo is bold and stark with matching diagonal ‘cuts’ to separate the letters – smart
  • UNE uses QUT tactic with comparable results
  • ECU logo is expressive primarily through color and composition, not type

Abstract Icons

Advantages

  • Fresh; unique
  • Colorful; brighter
  • Visual movement
  • More complex builds
  • More expressive
  • More legible, visible from distance

Disadvantages

  • Underdeveloped
  • Cliché
  • Risk depersonalization
  • Not serving “spirit”

Composition + Typography

  • Two-column left placement (7)
  • Two-row top placement (3)
  • Upper-case only (7)
  • Upper and lower-case (3)

Observations

  • SCU logo is impactful but also a shield (“visual double entendre”)
  • Newcastle logo has clever positive/negative concept, scalability issue
  • USC logo takes risks, stands out from the pack
  • RMIT feels unfinished

Shield Icons

Advantages

  • Range in shape, scale, color, interior content, metaphor
  • Works in single and multiple-colors
  • Still space to innovate

Disadvantages

  • 57% of all institutions in Australia have a shield for their logo!
  • The shield metaphor is so overused it means nothing; merely a visual motif to trap content inside of it

Observations

  • SCU logo is impactful but also a shield (“visual double entendre”)
  • Newcastle logo has clever positive/negative concept, scalability issue
  • Macquarie U fits everything in it shield, color, detail, campus building)
  • Shield icons that are flat and have no dimension feel plain and uninspired
  • Shields with too many articulate elements inside of it are too complicated to be noticed
  • CSU logo is a unique solution amongst all the shields for its illustrative execution

    Campus Buildings

    Observations

    • This branding solution type tends to create more focus in its design by virtue of placing a well-known or highly-visible campus building in the center of the design.
    • Campus buildings can suffer from too much detail. MU’s design offers just enough flat details to best highlight the building.
    • The opposing triangles within the shield container help frame the campus building, which also bleeds into the white background and taking advantage of the space surrounding it.
    • Overall, an attractive and progressive brand design

      Official Seals

      Observations

      • Seal icons tend to have too much detail in them and subsequently aren’t scalable – so they usually don’t look as best as they could be on a business card.
      • This seal has less interior details than many others, but still has scalability challenges.
      • Seals attempt to input as much visual metaphor as possible to tell a story or get a point across, but the visual busyness tends to distract and not lead a viewer through a journey; should follow “less is more”

        Monograms

        Observations

        • Monograms can be tough to design because they require just the perfect blend of letter size, placement, and intrinsic letter design to work, be read well, flow, and ultimately be aesthetically engaging.
        • MU’s icon looks like an M and U – good; the interior of the second “arc” of the M, with the pointed diagonal, is an interesting focal point
        • The bottom curves of the U have two abrupt points that, to the trained eye, is disruptive to the flow of the design

          Book Motifs

          Disadvantages

          • Too many details overall, challenges scalability of whole icon
          • Risk depersonalization by leaning into what everyone else is doing

          Observations

          • You can render the same object an infinite number of times and still have it be interpreted as one thing in one specific tone – which can mute any unique characteristics of a school and its identity

            Animal Icons

            Observations

            • Clear metaphors
            • More direct interpretations
            • Less detail permits for more expression and dynamic
            • Applying color fills to icons makes them more visually interesting and appealing – black doesn’t necessarily ‘pop’ and can obscure finer details

              Repeated Elements

              Advantages

              • Red grabs attention, pops off of white
              • Different shades of red can be interpreted to mean different concepts: legacy, tradition, life

              Disadvantages

              • Slightly under half of institutions use red, can create confusion in the marketplace
              • Repeated use of red things the metaphorical meanings of the color; interpreted as solution to just grab attention

              Observations

              • Several logos include elements from the Flag of Australia, a fitting connection
              • The metaphorical meanings of the 7-point star and constellations is already understood in the public visual lexicon, institutions leverage this to add depth of meaning to their identities

              Observations

              • Not all the stars/constellations need to be present in order to make the visual connection between the institution and the country

                Take a look at the brands below and share your thoughts with us on Twitter! #CommCentered