Abstract
Abstract This study aims to identify strategic responses in the official statements issued by the group of political agents mentioned on "Fachin's List". These statements in response to corruption accusations comprise a mediatized corpus of secondary data that was investigated using interpretive discourse analysis. This study uses an institutionalist approach to the political context considering the complexity and plurality of the institutional sphere, in which each voter is an interlocutor of political discourse. This study also included analyses on how the discursive constructions are formed using intertextual, rhetorical, ambiguous and semantic elements. The results outline five distinct strategies in the official notes, which apply both to individuals as well as organizations: (a) attack by expressing consternation; (b) empathy for supporting anti-corruption actions; (c) manipulation by projecting a political ethos ; (d) manipulation by revoking legitimacy; and (e) an adaptive posture in raising ambiguity – contributing to reflection and assessment of reactive behaviors of individuals and organizations in situations of crisis, scandals, guiltiness and corruption.
Highlights
Studies on the policy evaluation focuses on evaluation methods and techniques and their role in the concept of result-oriented public management (Anderson, 2008; Hill & Hupe, 2005; Weiss, 1998)
The institutional arrangements by which the evaluation of public policy are conducted in the various experiences examined in our study vary in their ability to promote public policy management and accountability improvements
The cases of Canada, Chile, France, Mexico, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States have shown the importance of the role of Legislative Branch in delegating power to institutions responsible for public policy evaluation
Summary
Studies on the policy evaluation focuses on evaluation methods and techniques and their role in the concept of result-oriented public management (Anderson, 2008; Hill & Hupe, 2005; Weiss, 1998). We start from the premise that the evaluation system institutional arrangements explain the results achieved by promoting governmental effectiveness and accountability of public policies (Anderson, 2008; Hanberger, 2011; Mark, Henry, & Julnes, 2000)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
