Identities and Ways of Being

Abstract

Most innovation systems’ theories assume that they are engaging with naturalised phenomena, that they have the ability to illustrate performativity in the field, and can therefore make prescriptions. Pollock and Williams (2016), however, note that “there seems to be a gap between what might be thought of as ‘espoused’ performativity and the studies of performativity in practice” (p. 22). When we examine innovation practices we find that they do not often conform to overarching narratives about what actors actually do (Deuten and Rip 2000). The idea that there is a specific and ideal method for managing a digital technology enterprise directs much of the activity of hubs, labs, accelerators and incubators. There is a sense that certain presentation, mien and enactments are required because they act as proxy indicators for expertise and eventual success. This is a useful entry into a discussion about how coloniality persists not only in meta-recommendations about how to bring about progress, but in directions for individuals and communities on how to ‘become’. Digital technology entrepreneurs are often envisioned specifically as ‘high-value startup entrepreneurs’, which represents a set of particular know-hows, skillsets and mindsets. Digital economies are more varied and encompass a wide range of activities beyond this highly specific form of entrepreneurship and its rhetoric and expectations, but the mythology of the high-value startup has had an outsize influence on our mental models for and archetypes of technology innovation, sometimes limiting imagination and therefore enactments. This is evident in representations of technology entrepreneurs in media and popular culture, and even in policymaking oriented efforts towards ‘enabling tech ecosystems’.