The Reason I Keep Attending Overseas Exhibitions Is to Turn Future Forecasts into Decision-Making Tools

By the time the future makes the news, it is often already a little outdated. I have seen many times how technologies that are only just beginning to be discussed in Japan have been displayed overseas with a straight face long before that.

I am not going there to see new features. What I am looking at during CES or MWC Los Angeles is not which technology will win next, but which atmosphere is already gone for good.

Walking through the venue, sometimes the crowds tell you more than the explanations do. There is a reason why people gather in certain places, and that reason usually starts moving a little faster than it can be put into words in Japan.

Japan is just a little late to learn the names of the waves

Even when looking at the adoption rate of generative AI, Japan can still appear as a country that is cautious and slow to get started. Things that have already taken root as work tools overseas tend to remain at the trial introduction stage in Japan.

This is not just about generative AI; it is a scene that has been repeated every time a new technology spreads. It enters the workflow over there first, is put into words in Japan a little later, and then finally acts as if it has been understood.

Even though cautious words are lined up in meeting rooms, once you step outside, someone is already starting to build a track record with that technology. It may not be that Japan is lagging behind, but rather that it is hard to break the habit of thinking about how to swim only after learning the name of the wave.

By the time you realize it, it is not uncommon for achievements to have already been accumulated overseas, and even the way of talking about it to be well-established. By that time in Japan, people might only just be starting to discuss in meeting rooms whether or not to introduce it.

The atmosphere of two years from now is already placed at the venue

That is why, for me, overseas exhibitions are closer to places to go to see future forecasts than places to go to see products. CES is a place where you can see the swell of technology as a whole at once, and MWC Los Angeles was a place to read the next common sense starting from communication.

At CES, technologies that are just about to enter daily life are often lined up while still full of heat. At MWC Los Angeles, it was easier to see how that technology would head toward social implementation on top of connections and networks.

Even if it is the same future, I think the cross-section you see changes little by little depending on the exhibition. On one side, you see the outline of a dream, and on the other, you see the wiring to carry that dream into reality.

There are many things that cannot be understood from pamphlets or presentation materials alone that are scattered on the floor of an exhibition. The busyness of the staff, the depth of the questions, and the way business meeting seats are filled quietly reveal the temperature of that technology.

New things can all look attractive on a feature list, and they often look about the same. However, on the ground, the difference between what ends as a topic and what turns into a necessity clearly appears as a crowd.

You cannot read the future just by seeing it once

However, I do not think overseas exhibitions are places where you can feel like you understand everything just by going once or twice. What is important is to verify how your reading was right or wrong the following year.

When you watch the same exhibition every year, you sometimes find that a technology that looked like a decoration last year has moved to the center of business negotiations this year. Conversely, there are not a few things that were so prominent but quietly disappear a year later.

I think fixed-point observation is not just about chasing new features, but about continuing to watch the movement of heat. The true intentions of the market ooze out into which booths people gather at, where they stop, and what they spend their time on.

Even if the explanation of the functions is smooth, if there is no one in front of the booth, I think that future is still far away. Conversely, even if the explanation is rough, if people are swarming, the era is starting to turn its body toward that direction.

Only then do you realize whether your intuition was just a hope or if you were able to read the tide. The resolution of a future forecast increases after comparing the same scenery for many years, rather than from a single moment of excitement.

The difficult part is bringing the future you've seen back to the company.

Increasing the resolution of a future forecast might not actually be that difficult. If you walk, look, listen, and record, anyone can bring back a certain level of outline.

What is truly difficult is the process afterward, within the company, of turning the scenery you've seen into a reason to act. Upon returning, voices saying it's too early, there's no precedent, or we can't afford to fail sometimes rise up before the future itself.

While such words may be correct in terms of caution, they can sometimes become a force that pushes opportunities away. I have felt many times that the hard part is not the accuracy of the future forecast, but winning over the resistance within the company.

At exhibitions, everyone is listening to talk of the future, but once back at the company, the conveniences of today suddenly become stronger. It takes more energy than you might think to turn the changes you've seen into a reason to experiment and bring them back as seeds for future achievements.

Only those who start early can possess actual examples rather than just explanations.

Even so, I think new technologies often leave a quiet tailwind for those who started early. For those who moved first, experience remains, trial and error remains, and eventually, it accumulates as a track record.

Those who chase from behind first use their time just to catch up, which tends to narrow their field of vision. Meanwhile, those who started first increase their second and third case studies and become able to speak in their own words.

In the market, that difference gradually takes effect and can turn into a difference in perception. The company remembered as being knowledgeable is often not the one that was perfect from the start, but the one that moved first.

The future draws closer to those who bring it back than to those who just saw it.

That is why I view overseas exhibitions not as places to just observe, but as places to pick up material for decision-making. CES and MWC Los Angeles were not places to just look and finish, but places to bring things back and fight.

I think that while the future is shining in the distance, you can still watch it as someone else's business. However, once you see its outline, it becomes difficult to return to the same judgments you made before you saw it.

The scenery seen at an exhibition ends up as mere observation if you only remember it as information. But the moment it is brought back and turned into decision-making, that scenery finally begins to enter your own time.

Perhaps the scenery seen at an exhibition becomes the future not at the venue itself, but through the decisions made after returning.