The University of Warwick has come under fire after a senior executive appeared in a glossy Vogue Singapore advertorial promoting the institution¡¯s new branding strategy,?with academics calling it ¡°tone-deaf¡± and a ¡°self-inflicted embarrassment¡±.

The campaign, part of a wider ¡°Brand Evolution Project¡± marking Warwick¡¯s 60th anniversary, included?a paid-for?, the university¡¯s chief communications, marketing and content officer, discussing his ¡°journey from the world of luxury into higher education¡± and Warwick¡¯s future as a ¡°globally recognised, loved and progressive education brand¡±.

¡°Warwick is distinctive because it¡¯s real,¡± Mr Teli says in the article, published in June, alongside professionally styled photos captioned ¡°talent¡¯s own wardrobe¡±.

¡°Using university funds to pay for an advertorial in Vogue Singapore where an executive is featured in a fashion photoshoot and discusses his legacy is possibly one of the most tone-deaf moves I¡¯ve ever seen in UKHE, and the bar was already incredibly high,¡± said Peter Crowther, a senior technician at Birmingham City University, on?

91ÇÑ×Ó

A media kit from Vogue Singapore shows that branded content typically costs between S$8,500 and S$42,000 (approximately ?4,900 to ?24,000), although the university declined to say what it paid.?A Freedom of Information request has been submitted.

Critics have also questioned the strategic direction behind the wider campaign, which focuses on the concept of ¡°Beyond¡±.

91ÇÑ×Ó

This is?described as ¡°a conceptual destination¡± that reflects ¡°curiosity and forward-thinking potential¡± in branding guidelines released as part of the campaign. These describe the?university¡¯s tone as ¡°provocative¡±, ¡°curious¡± and ¡°optimistic¡±.

¡°Universities across the UK are merging into bland sameness, with meaningless straplines and generic website templates,¡± Michael Veale, associate professor in digital rights and regulation at UCL, told Times Higher Education.

¡°It¡¯s ironic ¨C they vastly overclaim their distinctiveness whilst sounding hyper-generic, entirely concealing their truly distinct components: departments with their own quirky, hard-earned, widely renowned identities. The obsession with umbrella branding seems structurally incompatible with showcasing a university¡¯s strengths.¡±

Only Warwick¡¯s central brand team is permitted to use ¡°Beyond¡± in official headlines, the guide explains, giving examples of phrases such as ¡°Beyond creates a power source for Arctic exploration¡±.?Staff are encouraged to favour copy such as: ¡°Lab-grown diamonds: how to shortcut a billion years¡±.

91ÇÑ×Ó

In a statement to Times Higher Education, a University of Warwick spokesperson defended the campaign, saying:?¡°We have leveraged our academic expertise as part of the Vogue media partnership as well as our professional services marketing and communications work.

¡°The Brand Evolution Project is a co-created strategic project. We have consulted extensively with our Warwick community: staff, students, alumni as well as key external audiences. The views of 3,500 people helped to shape the proposed early-stage concepts. These were then tested with over 7,000 people taking part in an online survey.

¡°The requested information on costs would be likely to prejudice the commercial interests of the University. Like every business, we have costed the project in line with our financial strategy.¡±

But the rebrand even prompted satire from abroad.?The department of political science at Radboud University in the Netherlands posted a spoof on social media: ¡°Our Brand Proposition motivates through innovative synergies, powerful purpose, and marketing values uniquely derived from our strategic positioning¡­This is #beneath.¡±

91ÇÑ×Ó

tash.mosheim@timeshighereducation.com