Victoria’s costly identity crisis

Victoria University’s name change could cost almost $1 million over the next couple of years, while the tertiary institution’s leader denies the proposal is a personal vanity project.

Vice-chancellor Professor Grant Guilford says the university’s international identity crisis is costing it in donations and prestige, because its current moniker is confusing and the branding is muddled.

The university’s council agreed in principle to changing the name from Victoria University of Wellington to University of Wellington on Friday, with a 50-page discussion paper released to the public to launch two weeks of consultation.

Once feedback is received, the council will decide whether to endorse the change, before giving the final sign-off to Education Minister Chris Hipkins.

Documents obtained by Stuff, under the Official Information Act, showed the university had already spent $157,151 investigating the merits of this proposal.

Yesterday, Guilford confirmed the figure had leapt 50 per cent to $236,151 in the space of about five weeks – with resources spent on ‘‘external legal costs’’, review work and market research by Colmar Brunton.

Should the council give the project the go-ahead in August, another $230,000 was likely to be released, putting the estimated spend for 2018 at $466,151.

Guilford said if the university was able to generate the amount

of revenue it was aiming for, a further $216,000 could be spent in 2019.

Budget permitting, $280,000 would be spent on hiring six fixed-term web staff to help with the delivery of the name change – bringing the total estimated spend to $962,151.

Guilford stressed these future numbers were ‘‘estimates’’ and would only be spent if the university could generate the necessary revenue.

One of the key reasons for change has been to avoid confusion over the university’s location in the world, particularly among the lucrative international student population.

Victoria hoped to lure 850 new students to the institution should the naming proposal come to fruition.

Fending off criticism the name change campaign was his ‘‘pet project’’, Guilford insisted the proposal was in the university’s best interests.

‘‘I think this would be the last thing you’d want to be doing as vice-chancellor, because you know it’s going to be unpopular. You know people are going to have an emotional reaction to a name that they value. We understand that.

‘‘What you’ve got to in my role is do the right thing for the institution, not the popular thing. It’s likely to be unpopular.

While a Facebook group opposing the change had gained traction in recent days, a public meeting on the issue last month attracted just six people.

‘‘My legacy, if there’s going to be legacies, won’t be dropping one word from our name,’’ said Guildford.

‘‘I now know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that this is the right thing for this institution’s future.’’