Character as defence : A study of Vattenfall's communication following an incident at the nuclear plant at Forsmark, Sweden

Purpose – The incident in 2006 at the Vattenfall owned plant in Forsmark turned out to be one of the most serious ever in Sweden. Vattenfall's communication during this crisis did not meet the accusations, instead their line of defence was not to engage in discussions of the accusations, but to refer only to their own character as safe, thorough and scientific. Apparently, this strategy worked; the company ranked high in public confidence before the incident, and according to polls this confidence remained unharmed throughout the crisis. This paper aims to analyze under which circumstances a defence built on character may meet the demands of the stakeholders, especially those of the general public. Design/methodology/approach – The purpose is reached through a mainly rhetorical analysis of both Vattenfall's press releases during the crisis, and the media coverage. Findings – The analysis shows that the success of Vattenfall's communication strategy relies on their use of the general reputation held by the company at the start of the crisis. With a high level of general trust, not addressing accusations directly can be a successful move. Practical implications – The paper shows that to a company facing a crisis situation, context analysis is crucial. The strategy adapted by Vattenfall could seem potentially damaging to themselves, but worked in the actual circumstances. Originality/value – The paper shows that not meeting accusations may work as an apologetic strategy, if the reputation established in the pre‐crisis situation is sufficiently strong.