Patterns Vs Trends

Usually Futurists don’t concern enough about the difference between trends and patterns, talking about both as if they were the same. But they era actually different and we should take those differences in consideration, in order to form better methods which are the basis for our work and investigations.

A trend is a change with a direction that is generally kept in a certain period of time. That period could be longer or shorter, and sometimes it can be interrupted to be continued later, but this is the mais idea. Increasing or decreasing trough time.

A patter is a repetition based on a condition, and is usually stated as “When A occurs, B occurs”. That repetition may be global and with no time limit, or it may be limited to a certain context. An example for a pattern could be “morning is the time of day with more stock market transactions” or “Monday is the day when more heart attacks occur”.

If we look at the first example we may transform the sentence so it doesn’t look like a condition, but it always maintains that relation between two events: morning and transactions.

If we look at the second condition, then it becomes clear that the country where this statement was made is a Christian country. This only happens because Monday is the first day of work, so in a country were Sunday was a working day, then Monday wouldn’t be the day with more heart attacks.

Back to the methods, the reason why is important to distinguish trends from patterns is that both of them have different methods to be detected and validated.

The best professionals to identify and validate patterns are not futurists, but historians and scientific investigators. Probably historians are better at discovering patterns, and scientists are better at validating, understanding and defining the conditions for patterns.

Trends on the other side, are usually better detected, understand and validated by futurists, or field professionals. The reason why historians and scientists are not so useful at identifying and studying patterns is that they are mostly focus on the past being limited to identify and study emergent change.

On an horizon scanning, both elements should be considered. Usually futurists tend to focus on trends, asking “what change is happening”, but we must never neglect patterns that comes in “How does change happens”, or “Why does change happens”.

When we use the Iceberg analysis, we usually justify smaller trends with bigger trends, but on a macro scale trends can not be totally justified by other trends. That would be the same as saying that “change happens because change happens”, which doesn’t justify how go from inaction to action. Only pattern analysis can justify the first existence of change. For a very simple example let’s consider that we have a lion and a zebra in the same space. The pattern says that if a zebra in a Zebra are in the same space, the Lion will chase, and the Zebra will try to escape. From that point Change is justified, and other changes will occur over time. If the lion is faster than the distance between both will decrease, but if they run at the same speed, then over time exhaustion will increase. So patterns are at the bottom of the study and trends are at the surface of change.

The patterns and trends that we identify in scanning must be crossed during the analysis. Futurists always ask how patterns will be changed by patterns, but it’s really important to analyze how patterns interfere with existing trends.