Speaking of silence

Negotiations about a culture of silence in Gothenburg city

Abstract

In this article, we explore arguments surrounding a report that identifies a culture of silence concerning undue influence within social service administrations in Gothenburg’s socially vulnerable areas. We examine how agenda-setting power is expressed in negotiations over this culture of silence, how actors shape the agenda by assigning different meanings to the term, and how various interests influence whether the issue is emphasized or dismissed. Our analysis demonstrates that the culture of silence is negotiated through three main themes: the report, management, and brand. Thus, the term functions as a power tool, used to establish or challenge the agenda in both politics and administration. By analyzing these dynamics, we highlight how the concept is strategically employed to legitimize certain perspectives while marginalizing others. Our study contributes a new perspective on culture of silence in organizations. While existing literature focuses on how managers silence employees and what influences whether employees break or maintain silence, we show how the term itself is mobilized to sustain different interests and positions within public bureaucracy.