{"id":1139,"date":"2012-05-04T11:12:56","date_gmt":"2012-05-04T10:12:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/charisma.local\/charisma2023\/char1smaSSL\/?post_type=markets&p=1139"},"modified":"2012-06-20T14:28:34","modified_gmt":"2012-06-20T13:28:34","slug":"event-how-users-figure-in-innovation-projects-may-16","status":"publish","type":"markets","link":"https:\/\/www.journalofculturaleconomy.org\/charisma\/markets\/event-how-users-figure-in-innovation-projects-may-16","title":{"rendered":"Event: How users figure in innovation projects, May 16"},"content":{"rendered":"

An event at Goldsmiths, featuring Torben Elgaard Jensen – on the Charisma steering committee – and Morton Krogh Petersen. Organised by Alex Wilkie<\/a>, in association with the Interaction Research Studio<\/a> and the Centre for the Study of Invention and Social Process<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Doing Intervention and Enacting the ‘Everyday’: How Users Figure in Innovation Projects<\/h4>\n

\"Intervention<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Details<\/strong>
\n16th May 2012\u00a0| 16:30 – 18:30
\nNAB LGO1 (New Academic Building)
\nGoldsmiths, University of London
\nNew Cross, London
\nSE14 6NW, UK
\nThis seminar will include two 30 minute presentations (abstracts below) followed by a discussion.<\/p>\n

Intervention By Invitation<\/strong><\/div>\n
Torben Elgaard Jensen<\/div>\n
Over the past three decades, STS has increasingly moved from a position of often \u2018studying up\u2019 to a position of often\u00a0\u2018being invited\u2019 into scientific, technological and political projects. As a consequence, more and more STS researchers\u00a0now find themselves having\u00a0access not only to the sites, but also at times to the discussions and the decisions. With\u00a0these new points of entry, the key question about intervention may no longer be\u00a0if\u00a0STS will be heard, but rather\u00a0how\u00a0the contributions from STS will combine with those of other\u00a0participants in joint projects. The article investigates how\u00a0Danish STS researchers were invited to intervene under the auspices of a national programme to promote user-driven\u00a0innovation, and how they gradually developed new versions of the well-established\u00a0conceptions of the users known\u00a0from the STS literature. The new versions of the user raised higher hopes about the innovative potential of users, and\u00a0evoked deeper fears about elusive publics and disloyal customers. Finally, the article considers the peculiar \u2018middle\u00a0management\u2019 position that STS researchers may hold as mediators between users and projects, and it proposes the\u00a0term \u2018intervention-as-composition\u2019 to designate the type of intervention that may result from mediating between\u00a0previously unconnected actors.<\/div>\n

\n<\/strong><\/div>\n
The everyday enactment of \u201cthe everyday\u201d in an innovation project<\/strong><\/div>\n
Morten Krogh Petersen<\/div>\n
The everyday is often believed to hold an important key to\u00a0innovation. Hence, private and public sector organizations alike are currently\u00a0developing a keen interest in descriptions of the everyday lives of users, consumers,\u00a0citizens, employees etc. (Thrift 2006;\u00a0Cefkin 2009;\u00a0O\u2019Dell & Willim 2011). Through a wide\u00a0range of methods and activities, everyday lives are laboriously scrutinized and\u00a0attempts are made at bringing the resulting descriptions\u00a0into innovation\u00a0processes. Scholars within the field of STS on innovation and users have noted\u00a0this development and conceptualize the everyday in different and programmatic\u00a0ways (e.g.\u00a0Akrich 1992;\u00a0Suchman, Blomberg et al.\u00a01999;\u00a0Halse, Brandt et al. 2010;\u00a0Pantzar & Shove 2010). But what is this\u00a0everyday and how, more precisely, is it handled in innovation projects?\u00a0The paper develops the argument that the everyday is\u00a0by no means an unproblematic field of investigation ready for scrutiny and\u00a0subsequent utilization in innovation projects. It does so through a close\u00a0analysis of how the\u00a0everyday is studied, enacted and handled in a Danish,\u00a0government supported user-driven innovation project concerning work practices\u00a0at an outpatient clinic. The analysis shows how different versions of the\u00a0everyday at the clinic\u00a0are enacted and handled in the innovation projects\u00a0different user involving activities.\u00a0It is argued that this handling of the users\u2019 everyday is an\u00a0important aspect in understanding how innovation happens \u2013 or not \u2013 in\u00a0contemporary innovation projects.\u00a0Actually, finding ways of handling the everyday innovatively\u00a0may be one of the crucial challenges of current user-driven innovation\u00a0projects.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A seminar at Goldsmiths featuring (Charisma member) Torben Elgaard Jensen and Morten Krogh Petersen Read More<\/a><\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1,15],"tags":[277,381,378,28,380,379],"class_list":["post-1139","markets","type-markets","status-publish","hentry","category-all","category-announcements","tag-consumption","tag-everyday","tag-innovation","tag-markets","tag-sts","tag-torben-elgaard-jensen"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.journalofculturaleconomy.org\/charisma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/markets\/1139","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.journalofculturaleconomy.org\/charisma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/markets"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.journalofculturaleconomy.org\/charisma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/markets"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.journalofculturaleconomy.org\/charisma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.journalofculturaleconomy.org\/charisma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1139"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/www.journalofculturaleconomy.org\/charisma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/markets\/1139\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1269,"href":"https:\/\/www.journalofculturaleconomy.org\/charisma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/markets\/1139\/revisions\/1269"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.journalofculturaleconomy.org\/charisma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1139"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.journalofculturaleconomy.org\/charisma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1139"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.journalofculturaleconomy.org\/charisma\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1139"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}