Le dogme de l’innovation intensive se heurte désormais aux dégradations croissantes que cette course engendre sur l’environnement naturel, l’obsolescence des compétences et à la perte de sens pour les salariés. Il faut donc innover autrement et repenser l’innovation en intégrant les impacts sociétaux. Mais pourquoi et comment faire ? L’objectif de cet article est de proposer un agenda de recherche pour les sciences de gestion pour refonder la gestion des innovations à impact. En premier lieu, il s’agit de comprendre comment l’innovation est aujourd’hui cadrée, les impensés que ce cadrage produit et les impacts indésirables provoqués. En deuxième lieu, temps, il s’agit d’étudier et théoriser les pratiques d’innovation responsables à impact dans leur diversité, tout en proposant un cadre intégrateur. Enfin, en troisième lieu, nous esquissons des pistes pour changer les cadres cognitifs de l’innovation à impact, à savoir adopter une responsabilité projective, repenser l’instrumentation gestionnaire et mettre en cohérence les politiques publiques.

This paper is intended as a contribution to the social science literature on Patient Advocacy Groups (PAGs). It examines the recent emergence and development of cancer patient organizations that self-define as “oncogene-focused,” that is, as centered on tumor-driving genetic mutations that offer novel therapeutic opportunities for tumors to be targeted by precision drugs. Drawing on qualitative methods including interviews with representatives of oncogene focused PAGs, analysis of the groups’ publications (biomedical journals, eNewsletters), websites, and social media activity, the paper explores the characteristics of these PAGs’ forms of activism. It shows that their common denominator is a focus on patient survival. This shared goal translates into a form of activism that centers on therapeutic actionability, that is, a set of initiatives aiming at the articulation of research, clinical trials, and care to improve the patients’ quality of life and maximize survival thanks to awareness of and access to the latest therapies. Beyond individual differences between PAGs, we observe the increasingly seamless entanglement of their activities. Their mutually supportive interventions result in the establishment of an ecosystemic form of activism that also succeeds in mobilizing clinicians and researchers at the increasingly porous interface between research and care.

In an increasing number of countries, mainly but not restrictively in the global North, the combination of infrastructures’ degradation, budgetary constraints and rising environmental issues has gradually shifted professional and public concerns from extension to upkeep. This constitutes the crystallisation of a specific configuration of infrastructure management, which the authors propose to term an “age of infrastructure maintenance” and which contrasts dramatically with the modern infrastructural ideal. Focussing on French water network management, this paper draws on an 18-month in-depth institutional ethnography to investigate what this age of maintenance concretely encompasses. It shows that in France, and in Europe, such an age rests on a reproblematisation of maintenance, whose scope is reframed in a “more-than-corrective” perspective. This leads to a practical and ontological reconsideration of infrastructures, which is illustrated by three main transformations: infrastructures are rediscovered through proximal enquiries, they are carefully monitored as living entities, and they are put at the centre of new valuation processes. This specific moment of infrastructure maintenance appears to be generative, opening up multifaceted transformations that pave the way for a less modernist and industrial vision of infrastructure management.

Although graffiti writing has been the object of numerous analyses for fifty years, the entangled practices of graffiti writers and buffers’ interventions remain understudied. By considering their actual gestures in front of urban surfaces, this text emphasizes the similarities of practices usually seen as antagonistic. Drawing on Deleuze’s masterful work about repetition and difference, it notably points out the sensitive, attentional, and technical common features of graffiti writers and buffers, the choreographic dynamics at the core of their performances, and the layered material rhythm resulting from their intertwined actions. Whether they take the form of a soothed dialogue moved by a shared experience, a trench warfare in performances, or an intense unintended collaboration, the relationships between graffiti writers and buffers appear to be driven by the transformative principle of repetition.