Rhetorical Strategies of Legitimacy
Abstract
This paper describes the role of rhetoric in legitimating profound institutional change. In 1997, a Big Five accounting firm purchased a law firm, triggering a jurisdictional struggle within accounting and law over a new organizational form, multidisciplinary partnerships. We analyze the discursive struggle that ensued between proponents and opponents of the new organizational form. We observe that such rhetorical strategies contain two elements. First are institutional vocabularies, or the use of identifying words and referential texts to expose contradictory institutional logics embedded in historical understandings of professionalism, one based on a trustee model and the other based on a model of expertise. A second element of rhetorical strategies is theorizations of change by which actors contest a proposed innovation against broad templates or scenarios of change. We identify five such theorizations of change (teleological, historical, cosmological, ontological, and value-based) and describe their characteristics.
Cite this
Roy Suddaby, Royston Greenwood (2005). Rhetorical Strategies of Legitimacy. Administrative Science Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2005.50.1.35
@article{roy2005rhetorical,
title = {Rhetorical Strategies of Legitimacy},
author = {Suddaby, Roy and Greenwood, Royston},
year = {2005},
journal = {Administrative Science Quarterly},
doi = {10.2189/asqu.2005.50.1.35}
}Citations in this library
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2,436 citations exist upstream.