From theoretical budgets on argumentation (Shiffrin, 1987; Wegman, 1994; Gryner, 2000; Gille, 2001) allied to studies which deal with opinative speeches (Shiffrin 1990; Shi-xu, 2000) and researches developed in the scope of evaluation (Labov, 1972; Linde, 1997; Martin, 1999, 2003), this study looks into the evaluative dimension of argumentation in opinative speech by professionals at a company in process of change. The study methodology takes into account the analysis of interviews given by four employees of the company towards their evaluation of the organization administrative group and of their own possibilities to act in this context. The data analysis found out the appearance of standards that identify the evaluation as an argumentative move, and unveiled as well the evaluative marks that pervasively occur in the argumentation structure of the opinion discourse by the informers of this research. The results also show that evaluation may assign opinion by the exchange of author and animator roles (Goffman, [1979] 2002, 1981), besides the possibility of being shaped in sustaining through inferential syllogism based on factual, hypothetical or fictive narratives (Oliveira, Bastos e Pereira, 2007).