Think of some examples of repair in everyday life. Maybe you had a car accident and took your car to the body shop. Maybe the head came off your child’s doll and you had to glue it back on. Maybe the handle of your shovel cracked and you wrapped the cracked area with duct tape to hold it together. These are examples of what could be called reactive repair, where an unexpected accident initiates a sequence of action and decision-making that ends in repair. In these cases, most of the thinking and planning surrounding repair takes place after a breakdown has been identified. This type of repair is often taken to be distinct from deliberate design, as it occurs within the context of technology that is already in operation, often has an improvisational character, and may be performed by end users or technicians rather than credentialed experts. But does repair always have to be reactive? And if not, what does this tell us about the distinction between design and repair, and their respective roles in shaping technological change? The short answer is that repair, like design, can play a dynamic and forward-looking role in shaping technological trajectories – not only stabilizing existing systems, but anticipating change and generating new technological futures.