Ignition Tradition? A Case Study of the Florida State University Athletics Department’s 2014 Logo Redesign

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325301659_Ignition_Tradition_A_Case_Study_of_the_Florida_State_University_Athletics_Department's_2014_Logo_Redesign

Discussion and Implications

In terms of the results, FSU Athletics Department representatives indicated

that during their two-year process of working on the new brand marks, the

opinions of former and current student-athletes, current coaches, Seminole

Boosters, and the Seminole Tribe of Florida were included. While the exact

number of individuals included in this process is not known, it does appear that

FSU Logo Redesign

10

several important constituent groups (e.g., students, alumni who were neither

Seminole Booster members nor former student-athletes) were not included. In

other words, the opinions of two of the largest groups of FSU stakeholders were

not included. Moreover, groups like “current coaches” may have limited interest

in FSU’s brand marks, because their job responsibilities include managing their

teams and winning intercollegiate competitions, not what logos are used or

displayed by the Athletics Department.

In addition, FSU Athletics Department representatives indicated that “you

have to stop your focus group somewhere” (Slade, 2014c). While having too many

opinions is a genuine concern in any data collection, modern survey research

techniques can be utilized with great eect to gather the opinions of large groups of

people. As noted by Slade (2014a), FSU had promoted the changes to the original

logo as “subtle,” and the primary word FSU Athletics ocials used to describe

the changes was “rened” (Seminoles.com, 2014). Aer the new logo rst was

photographed at Walmart and shared on social media, many people felt it had

undergone much more than subtle changes or renements (TomahawkNation.

com, 2014). ere is little doubt that because the logo was initially revealed on

social media, rather than through more traditional university-controlled press

releases and events, FSU was not able to control the narrative and eectively

discuss the redesign process. However, as noted by Slade and others, FSU also may

not have accurately represented the purpose and extent of the redesign (2014a,

2014b, 2014c).

Regarding the reported behaviors over the last 12 months compared to the

intended future behaviors in the upcoming 12 months, the results indicated that

the eect of not changing the logo would result in increases for both the amount

of FSU-branded merchandise respondents intended to purchase, and the amount

of FSU-branded merchandise they intended to wear (3.9 to 4.1 and 4.2 to 4.3

respectively), while a change from the original logo to the new logo would result in

a large decrease between the last 12 months and the upcoming 12 months in terms

of the amount of FSU-branded merchandise respondents intended to purchase,

and the amount of FSU-branded merchandise they intended to wear (3.9 to 1.9

and 4.2 to 1.9, respectively). In previous research, this type of result has rarely

been documented, in that such a large decrease in both the intention to purchase

and wear team-branded merchandise would decrease because of the change

in the team’s brand marks. For example, Ahn and colleagues (2012) displayed

results showing that the purchase intentions of highly and lowly identied fans of

merchandise with the each teams’ logo would increase due to a logo change. e

results of this research indicate that opposite eect is present for FSU fans. ese

dierent results are perhaps indicative of FSU fans feeling strongly connected to

the history and traditions of FSU as represented by the original (and hybrid) logos.

However, it should be noted that at the time of data collection FSU had recently

won a national championship in football, which may have positively inuenced

future sporting event attendance intentions.

Hedlund, Gordon, Yoshida, St. Germain, and McPhatter

11

Finally, Ahn et al. (2012) reported results that indicated that highly identied

fans reacted negatively to logo redesigns, while lowly and moderately identied

fans had a positive reaction to the same type of logo change. In the results shown

in Figure 1, slightly dierent results are found. e die-hard (highly identied)

FSU fans had a similar negative reaction to the new logo compared to both the

old and hybrid logos, however, the not die-hard fans of FSU also had a more

negative reaction to the new logo compared to both the old and hybrid logos. is

should act as a cautionary tale for athletic administrators, marketers, and graphic

designers when contemplating a substantial change to the overall brand identity

of a college sport team.

In conclusion, Kaikati and Kaikati (2003) created a list of strategies that may

mirror some of the challenges the FSU Athletic Department’s redesign of its brand

marks faced. First, as was noted earlier in this research, because the announcement

and displaying of the redesigned logo happened on social media, rather than

through a more controlled event, the phase-in/phase-out strategy that ties the

original brand marks to the new ones could not be successfully completed. FSU

fans had more than one week to vocalize their feelings through social media prior

to the ocial announcement. Second, while FSU fans had been told that a subtle

or rened approach had been taken with the redesign of the brand marks, when

the actual reveal happened on social media, many fans perceived the changes

as much more extensive than expected. Kaikati and Kaikati (2003) termed this

the as the “translucent warning strategy.” In other words, customers are alerted

beforehand of the change, however in the FSU case, the changes were much more

extensive compared to fans’ expectations.

Another strategy that could be used to mitigate potential issues during

rebranding would be to engage in crowdsourcing the (re)design of a logo. In the

June 2006 issue of Wired magazine, Je Howe coined the term “crowdsourcing”

(also termed as “user-generated content”), which he described as tapping into

and using the talent of a crowd to complete a project or solve a problem (Howe,

2006). In a historical and legal review, Gibbons (2012) noted that crowdsourcing

the creation of brand marks is not a new practice. For example, in early 2014,

before their debut in Major League Soccer (MLS), the New York City Football

Club (NYCFC) asked fans to submit logo designs for the team and vote on them

(Edwards, 2014). In a press release published aer voting had completed, NYCFC

unveiled its ocial team badge and noted that more than 100,000 votes had been

cast over the course of four days and fans appeared to be supportive of the new

logo (New York City Football Club, 2014). Crowdsourcing the creation or redesign

of an organization or sport team’s brand marks and logos provides opportunities

for consumers and fans to feel like they have a direct relationship with the team,

because they can directly impact the identity of the organization through the

production and choice of the team’s brand marks and/or logos. In addition, the

organization could also receive benecial increases in brand equity through the

marketing of the logo (re)design process.

FSU Logo Redesign

12

Finally, organizations also have the opportunity to engage in retrobranding.

During this process, organizations can maintain (i.e., not completely abandon)

their previous brand marks (Kaikati & Kaikati, 2003). In sports, there are

numerous examples of this, oen called “throwbacks,” which occur when teams

wear or produce merchandise modelled on a previous look or images related to

the brand. In the case of FSU’s original logo, it could still be licensed and produced

for consumption by fans in limited quantities. In an article posted on FoxSports.

com (2014), in reference to apparel with the original logo, FSU Athletic Director

Stan Wilcox is quoted as saying that teams “all have what is called ‘vintage’ apparel.

You’ll still be able to get [merchandise with the original logo] through [stores and

online]. So I think people that love the new logo will go out and buy the new logo.”

While perhaps not ideal in terms of branding (i.e., having two separate logos),

continuing to license and allow the production of merchandise with the original

logo might appease a large cross-section of fans and consumers that have a strong

preference toward the original logo.