BY ITSELF, strictly of itself, the new logo is unobjectionable. It compares well with the mess that is the upper three-quarters of the current logo. However it is in my opinion, unsuitable as a logo to represent Local Government, that is supposed to be the local Authority.
Many London Local Authorities wisely include the word 'Council' in their logo; some have Coats of Arms that lend some gravitas. What we have is a kind of restrained theme park logo. At a cost of £86,000.
The Cabinet Member responsible was probably right when he said there is no good time to launch a new logo. However, some times are worse than others. How easily can the Council afford this. Now?
There is no good time to do something pointless and stupid. There is no good time to waste money - especially other people's money.
There is no good time to focus scarce resources, effort and energy on the trivial when large looming problems are getting worse.
Choosing the wrong priority and doing it better and more efficiently is not preferable to choosing the right priorities.
The writer on management C.Northcote Parkinson formulated a number of "laws" which are still extremely useful. His "Law of Triviality" proposes that organisations often give disproportionate weight to trivial issues. He observed that people in senior positions or Boards of companies who couldn't get their heads round big issues, or were embarrassed to show their ignorance of these issues, could spend a huge amount of time discussing something small which anyone could express an opinion on.
The example given in Parkinson's book is a company bikeshed. (Wikipedia says this phenomenon has become known as "bikeshedding".)
JoeGo's Logo is Cllr Goldberg's bikeshed. His day job is a 'Brand Strategist' so this is within his comfort zone.
Alan, I agree that logos ought to be a low priority at any time. Just to clarify what I meant by a bad time. I don't mean this month or this year.
I mean from the time of the £850 billion bank-bailout and financial crisis of October 2008 … and for many years to come.
I'm grateful to you for Bikeshedding analogy. A colleague on the Ally Pally Trust Board once told me how one of the members – not having the ability to grapple with the big issues – would point out in a meeting of the Board of Trustees that a lamp had failed on an approach road. I won't mention her name, particularly as she was once candid enough to admit in respect of AP plans that "I don't know what's going on".
Perhaps, just perhaps, that's the most frequent contact most residents have with the council. So get it out there early. And they'll hope the jest dies early too - that the logo should be inside - not on - the rubbish lorries.
As Alan Stanton observed, the council cabinet member responsible for authorising this is, in paid employment, a brand strategist, so it can't be down to imperfect officer advice - it's his prime business competence. Or....
Or maybe not. I have just rung Veolia to enquire about the non-collection of our non-recyclable waste today. It's 4.15pm and this has usually been done by about 7am. I was told "there may have been a problem with the trucks". Too embarrassed? Paint has to be dry on all vehicles?
Mark Smith helpfully put together all the then current London Borough logos (plus the City) in June on HoL - link here, if comparisons are wanted.
Only one other council, Southwark, departs from a formal typeface - their logo can be read as a handwritten signature by/for the borough, with a nod to the shape of the River Thames as part of the borough boundary.
Nice idea, Clive. And some good jokes.
Although it's a shame you've had to do your LibDem Punch-n-Judy stuff and turn it into an anti-Labour poster. Labour loyalists may feel they have to defend the new Logo despite their personal feelings. And I can assure you that many Labour Party members are as withering in their scorn as you are.
Puerile Council logos are not a Labour Party policy. This is yet one more wasteful JoeGo vanity project.
Alan, just two points about the party context:
That red is about as close to the Labour Party's own logo colour as it is possible to get; while Cllr. Goldberg has been a 'Cabinet' Member for some time. There can be no doubt that this is a Labour Cabinet sanctioned production.
I would also make the point that this is not the fault of Council staff. It is politically driven and the Labour 'Cabinet' needs to take political responsibility for it.
I have no doubt that this tawdry, costly, vanity project will dismay many decent, objective Labour Party members.