Arguing for a license to operate: the case of the Swedish wind power industry

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the way organizational actors argue to obtain a license to operate for new ventures.Design/methodology/approachThe design, which addresses the issue at the industry level, consists of a case study of the ways in which power developers argue for the development of wind energy in Sweden.FindingsThe study shows that wind power developers proffer a necessity‐ability‐acceptability line of argument that relies not only on the convincing character of claims grounded in premises, but also on the persuasive character of values, knowledge and opinion likely to win the adherence of the audience.Research limitations/implicationsFrom a theoretical perspective, this is an illustration of the relevance of bridging the divide between argumentation theories in tune with formal or informal logic and those oriented toward rhetoric and the social practice of communication.Practical implicationsMore practically, the paper suggests that in order to obtain a license to operate, managers need to combine and balance in their practice of argumentation a logical approach to factual knowledge with a situational sense for the rhetoric favored by the audience.Originality/valueThis study emphasizes the key role played by argumentation in corporate communication.