Purpose

This study aims to explore how corporate discourses enact legitimation strategies aimed at repairing pragmatic, moral and cognitive legitimacy types (Suchman, 1995) after a scandal involving sustainability, namely, the Volkswagen’s 2015 diesel scandal.

Design/methodology/approach

By drawing on the discursive nature of legitimacy, this study conducts a critical discourse analysis to identify how the scandal is depicted and which semantic, grammatical and lexical features characterise discourses. It then relates discourses and their features to legitimation strategies that help repair diverse types of legitimacy.

Findings

To repair pragmatic legitimacy, discourses on a few actors and processes enact strategies of creating monitors and avoiding panic. Such discourses include grammatical features only. Discourses on the event, actors, processes and topics of apology, trust and integrity aim to repair moral legitimacy. Enriched with grammatical and lexical features, they mobilise disassociation, excuse, justify and restructure strategies. Discourses on the event, actors, processes and topics of corporate qualities, history and future strategy help repair cognitive legitimacy by enacting an avoiding panic strategy. Grammatical, lexical and semantic features characterise such discourses.

Research limitations/implications

The study reveals the potentials of critical discourse analysis to bring out from texts practical modes of communicating, and specifically those discourses and features of discourses that serve legitimacy purposes.

Originality/value

This study offers insights into the connection among discourses, relegitimation strategies and legitimacy types by combining the discursive nature of legitimacy with critical discourse analysis. It also contributes to the growing literature on how organisations face the legitimacy challenges raised by scandals involving sustainability.

中文翻译：

---

通过话语修复合法性：来自大众汽车 2015 年柴油丑闻的见解

目的

本研究旨在探讨在涉及可持续性的丑闻（即大众汽车 2015 年柴油丑闻）之后，企业话语如何制定旨在修复务实、道德和认知合法性类型的合法化策略（Suchman，1995 年）。

设计/方法/方法

通过利用合法性的话语性质，本研究进行了批判性话语分析，以确定如何描述丑闻以及哪些语义、语法和词汇特征表征了话语。然后，它将话语及其特征与帮助修复各种合法性类型的合法化策略联系起来。

发现

为了修复务实的合法性，关于少数行动者和过程的话语制定了创建监视器和避免恐慌的策略。此类话语仅包括语法特征。关于事件、参与者、过程和道歉、信任和诚信等主题的话语旨在修复道德合法性。丰富的语法和词汇特征，他们动员分离，借口，证明和重组策略。关于事件、参与者、过程和企业质量、历史和未来战略的主题的讨论通过制定避免恐慌的策略来帮助修复认知合法性。语法、词汇和语义特征是此类话语的特征。

研究限制/影响

该研究揭示了批判性话语分析从文本中带出实用交流模式的潜力，特别是那些服务于合法性目的的话语和话语特征。

原创性/价值

本研究通过将合法性的话语性质与批判性话语分析相结合，深入了解了话语、重新合法化策略和合法性类型之间的联系。它还有助于关于组织如何面对涉及可持续性的丑闻带来的合法性挑战的越来越多的文献。