The announcement about the logo includes this nugget -
the new look reflects the rapidly changing and highly competitive landscape of higher education and will enable Queen’s to significantly raise its profile and reputation locally, nationally and globally to meet its ambitious vision.
I think that means, ‘everyone else has a crest so I guess we need one too.’
As there as so many of these things it really boils down to how well implemnted they are. This one is pretty good - the symbols in the crest are decently drawn and interesting in themselves.
The wordmark is more interesting - seems like it’s set in a tweaked [Brandon Text Black][brandon] which is a nice open serif with the sharp corners rounded off. That may or may not be your thing, but it is a bit different for a University, and once you’ve gone down the well trodden path of the crest, then different is good.
The branding guidelines say that there are two version - portrait and landscape, but there’s no guidance which is the preferred option. There is a stipulation that the rather odd mongram pattern that fills in the Q should always be used, but at smaller sizes it seems to just fill in the Q in a rather messy fashion.
It’s a shame since the Q itself is an interesting and engaging shape - made even more so in contrast to the ugly Q used in the sans serif type accompanying the logo.
I assume the sans serif is meant to offset the more ‘traditional’ feel suggested by the flowing Q, but along with the pattern it feels insipid and a little more oomph is needed for the type to hold up it’s end of the bargain.