Making When Ends Don’t Meet: Articulation Work and Visibility of Domestic Labor during Do-It-Yourself (DIY) Innovation on the Margins

Charting RAD Research as an Orientation to Creativity in Writing Studies

“…Three of the 15 RAD articles consider professional and technical writers’ use of creativity (Rajan, 2021; Sarraf, 2022; Zhang & Saari Kitalong, 2015). Rajan (2021) and Sarraf (2022) explore creativity in extra-institutional technical and professional communicators, finding that DIY innovators and freelance writers use creativity to navigate business and writing-related challenges, repurpose content, and promote their businesses. In contrast, Zhang and Saari Kitalong’s (2015) study of self-identifying technical communicators employed by organizations in various industries reveals that participants used creativity to reinvigorate dry content and address problems by applying novel solutions.…”

“…As writing studies scholars direct their attention toward social justice, the field should highlight the communicative and creative expertise required for extra-institutional work in the majority world. For instance, Rajan's (2021) study of do-it-yourself (DIY) innovation in the majority world asks writing studies scholars to consider the "oppressive implications of excluding the majority world's under-resourced inhabitants" (p. 315). Rajan highlights global technological innovations and establishes the family as a rich site of innovation and creativity.…”

“…Theme 2: Professional and technical communicators' applications of creativity. Three of the 15 RAD articles consider professional and technical writers' use of creativity(Rajan, 2021;Sarraf, 2022;Zhang & Saari Kitalong, 2015) Rajan (2021). andSarraf (2022) explore creativity in extra-institutional technical and professional communicators, finding that DIY innovators and freelance writers use creativity to navigate business and writing-related challenges, repurpose content, and promote their businesses.…”

A Tale of Two Perspectives on Innovation and Global Equity

“…However, whereas IS experts tend to have management and economics backgrounds and view innovation and equity through the lens of the marketplace, their STS counterparts are humanists and social scientists who look inside the "black box" of technologies to understand how social norms and biases shape even the most technical details, and how innovation can stabilize particular moral and political orderings. We also challenge the perceived boundary between technology and society, demonstrating how "users" profoundly shape the design and implementation of technologies, and how "laypersons" often produce crucial innovation (Birtchnell 2011;Oudshoorn and Pinch 2003;Rajan 2021). We thus call attention to how characterizations of producer, consumer, innovator, layperson, and expert are politically laden.…”

Taking stock and charting the future: the management and implications of DIY laboratories for innovation and society

“…They used the labs as avenues to express their critique of traditional innovation models while also establishing a counterculture characterised by openness, excellence, anti-establishment, and single-handedness (Delgado and Callén 2016;Ferretti 2019). DiY labs are therefore characterised by civic technoscience and participatory research, serving as incubators for social, democratised, and frugal innovation (Burnside et al 2019;Rajan 2021). They demystify science, encourage interdisciplinary collaborations at the grassroots, and provide a springboard for diverse forms of knowledge production that straddle the boundaries between academic, practitioner and citizen research (Lhoste 2020;.…”