Based on the 26 years I spent in academia, IMO it is generally a bad idea to let non-university, business-marketing people do any sort of marketing or branding for a university. They just don't understand the difference between marketing/branding in the commercial space versus universities (the latter of which rely more on reputation bui…
Based on the 26 years I spent in academia, IMO it is generally a bad idea to let non-university, business-marketing people do any sort of marketing or branding for a university. They just don't understand the difference between marketing/branding in the commercial space versus universities (the latter of which rely more on reputation building around excellence than traditional media buys). Traditional marketing is OK for non-traditional student spaces (such as online degrees and certificates), but does not work as well for attracting traditional students and dollars. A bit is OK for athletics, but don't let them make the choices. They should be listening to alumni and faculty, not some overpaid consultants. Also always blew my mind how they would screw faculty on pay and then overpay some business marketing blowhards, under the excuse that it comes from different pools of money.
The ONLY people I have ever heard complain about Cal being Cal are faculty at other UCs (especially UCLA). But why should we do anything to placate UCLA? If anything, now is the time to take the University of California back. Mix in a little Berkeley association here and there (for athletics) and use UC Berkeley for academics...but NO "Cal Berkeley".
Based on the 26 years I spent in academia, IMO it is generally a bad idea to let non-university, business-marketing people do any sort of marketing or branding for a university. They just don't understand the difference between marketing/branding in the commercial space versus universities (the latter of which rely more on reputation building around excellence than traditional media buys). Traditional marketing is OK for non-traditional student spaces (such as online degrees and certificates), but does not work as well for attracting traditional students and dollars. A bit is OK for athletics, but don't let them make the choices. They should be listening to alumni and faculty, not some overpaid consultants. Also always blew my mind how they would screw faculty on pay and then overpay some business marketing blowhards, under the excuse that it comes from different pools of money.
The ONLY people I have ever heard complain about Cal being Cal are faculty at other UCs (especially UCLA). But why should we do anything to placate UCLA? If anything, now is the time to take the University of California back. Mix in a little Berkeley association here and there (for athletics) and use UC Berkeley for academics...but NO "Cal Berkeley".