Know-How Exchange : Branding

If you are running this new funding under a different organization, then by all means have a second logo for that separate organization.

If the same organization, I'd lean toward 1 logo. You could consider trying to make a new logo for the organization as part of a rebranding to show that you aren't the closed organization you used to be.

But in general, if this is what I think it is, most reasearchers are always short of funds, so are keeping an eye out for funding opportunities. It won't take too much work at your end to get the word out about the new funding and have the requests coming in. I'd lean toward saving the money you would use to make a logo.

When you say "new logo" do you mean a new name and new positioning, or are you simply referring to a new graphic look for the way you present yourself visually?

For projects like this, the criteria are usually: (1) Is the target audience different? (2) Is the core benefit you offer the target audience different? If the answer to either question is "yes," then you probably need a new brand/name and positioning to communicate most effectively.

If you simply want to appear more inclusive to the same target audience, and offer them the same benefit, then a graphic design update could be enough, as long as you have a coordinated marketing plan to explain the change. (Simply changing the logo without a coordinated plan to communicate the change is not likely to have much impact.)

If I understand your situation properly, it seems you are changing the benefit -- from research results to administering the funding -- at a minimum. If that's the case, you probably need a new name, new positioning statement, and new logo.

Logos do not brand. All they do is mark some ... thing (company, entity, item, person, group, team, etc.,) as belonging to or as associating with some cause or other.

If the focus is on the new logo rather than the impact the money will have on whatever project its invested in, might there be something wrong with the overall business plan?

If the goal is to define the purpose of the funds in question, it's better, longer term to retain the current logo and to add to it (ideally, underneath it) a line of text in whatever your corporate typeface is that names the fund in some way.

There is NO NEED to craft a brand new logo. Doing so will only serve to dilute any existing feelings about what sounds like an already disjointed or misunderstood brand (given your assertion of being a closed shop of some sort).

If your colleague think a new logo will tell the story, that's not a logo's job: it's the job of your PR efforts to do that. So in that case, time and effort invested in creating content marketing around the funding and what it will do will suit your long term needs far better than a logo. Content marketing tells the story, and ultimately, that's what then underpins the value and meaning of your current logo, closed shop or not, and NOT the arrival of a new logo like a knight in shining armor.