Polle de Maagt 
Polle de Maagt
This started as a note about a conversation with Tom Palmaerts. I returned to it in 2026, when the idea found a practical home in Movements.
A thought that stayed.
Tom Palmaerts and I regularly exchanged thoughts about digital, culture and what was changing. During one of those conversations, he mentioned an idea almost in passing: ripples, rather than trends.
Small movements. Some barely visible. Some that might grow into waves, and others that would fade away.
I found it a striking way to look at change. Not because it offered a better prediction of the future, but because it changed the question. Instead of only asking which big trend we should prepare for, we could ask which small movement was worth paying attention to, and doing something with.
The ripples idea was Tom’s. What stayed with me was the invitation to move from watching to testing.
A ripple is not yet a trend.
A new habit in a small community. A different expectation voiced by a few customers. Someone using an existing product in a way it was not designed for. Those can be ripples: signs that something might be moving, before you know how far it will travel.
A trend is a stronger claim. It suggests a pattern beyond one observation: something recurring, spreading or holding over time. One interesting example is not enough to establish that.
The distinction matters in both directions. If you wait until everyone agrees that something is a trend, you may miss the chance to learn early. If you call every ripple a trend, you turn curiosity into false certainty.
Small does not automatically mean important. New does not automatically mean lasting. A ripple is a reason to investigate, not a forecast you have to believe.
From watching to testing.
What I liked about Tom’s framing was that it made change approachable.
A megatrend can feel like something that happens to you: adapt or be left behind. A ripple gives you something smaller to work with. You can talk to the people involved, look for another example, or try a modest experiment.
You do not have to bet the company on it. You do not even have to be certain it will grow. You need a question worth exploring and a way to learn without pretending you already know the answer.
That also means being willing to let it go. If the pattern does not hold, the useful result is not a more persuasive trend story. It is knowing that your first interpretation was wrong.
Why I started Movements.
That thought stayed with me, and it is part of why I started Movements.
I wanted a way to follow what is changing without turning every new example into the next big thing. To look for evidence rather than hype, see what develops over time, and revisit a claim when the evidence changes.
The idea was there long before I could make it work in this form. AI made the timing right. For me, Movements is only feasible with AI: it makes the work of following, connecting and revisiting signals manageable alongside my other work.
That does not make AI the judge of what matters. It makes room for the work; I still have to make the calls. What is a useful signal? What is supported by evidence? What deserves attention, and what should I let go?
In 2015, the ripples idea gave me a way to think about change. By 2026, AI had made it practical to build something around it. The thought and the means finally met.
Movements is a quarterly read built around four or five movements. Weak signals stay separate from validated movements. Sources are linked, and the next quarter is an opportunity to ask what became stronger, what changed direction and what no longer holds.
Not every ripple belongs in the report. Not every movement is small. The connection is the attitude: pay attention before the answer is obvious, but be clear about what you do and do not know.
For me, that is the useful middle ground between watching from a distance and announcing the future. Notice something. Follow it. Test what it could mean. Change your mind when you need to.
Name one small change you have noticed in how customers or colleagues behave. Write down what you actually observed, separately from what you think it means. Find another example or run a small test. Decide what evidence would make you follow it, and what would make you drop it.
Source: the ripples idea from a conversation with Tom Palmaerts, recorded in my draft of 29 March 2015. Updated 5 October 2026 with my reflections on ripples, trends, and how AI made Movements feasible. The distinction and practical interpretation above are my own. Skipping stone made with Midjourney.
