The great thing about patterns is they are movable. You can work out the pattern from one scenario and then use it in a similar scenario to gain new insights and solve different problems.

Let me explain by taking an IQ test type question as an example:

Which of the answers (a, b, c or d) completes the above sequence?

[If you want to work this one out for yourself, answer it before you read on because I’m about to reveal the answer.]

Our first task is working out the pattern in the first place. Assuming you’ve never come across a problem like this in the past the first thing we need to do is figure out how to solve it.

Using our powers of deduction (we won’t get into those here) we find the following patterns:

1. The dot, in the corner of the square, moves from corner to corner in a clockwise direction.
2. The series of lines also move in a clockwise direction, one side at a time.
3. One series of lines gains an extra line during each progression of the sequence.
4. The other series of lines loses a line during each progression.

So if we follow these patterns one at a time...

The dot in the next square should end up in the top left-hand corner. This leaves answers a, b, and c.

One sequence of lines is increasing one at a time. In the first square there is one; in the second square, two; right up to the fifth square where there are five. So in the sixth square there should be six lines. This further reduces the answers to a and c.

Finally, the other sequence of lines begins with five lines, then four, three, two and finally one in the fifth square. Therefore the sixth box should reduce one more, leaving no lines in that sequence. This leaves only answer a.

Now that we’ve solved this problem, the following similar problem should be easier.

Same question: Which of the answers (a, b, c or d) completes the above sequence?

Let’s go through each of the patterns from the previous question.

The dot, in the corner of the square, moves from corner to corner in a clockwise direction.

This time it is not the dot that moves, but rather the colour. And instead of moving clockwise it moves anticlockwise. So, the small square in box 6 should be red – that leaves c and d

The series of lines also move in a clockwise direction, one side at a time.

This is exactly the same, so box 6 should have lines outside the triangle. This still leaves c and d.

One series of lines gains an extra line during each progression of the sequence.

Again, this is exactly the same. So by time it gets to box six there should be five lines. This leaves d.

The other series of lines loses a line during each progression.

This is irrelevant to the next question

So the answer is d.

You can see how much easier it is to do a similar question, once you have answered the first one. Building intelligence involves accumulating lots of these patterns in our brains and applying them in different contexts.

Now let’s look into the real world and apply this concept to a problem practically every one of us has faced in our childhood. This is something that you have probably forgotten was ever a problem because it seems so obvious now. But at one moment you had to work out how to use...

...door handles!

You’ve probably forgotten by now, but when you were a child you will have had your first encounter with a door handle. The door was closed and no matter how hard you pushed it, it would not open.

By observing others, experimenting, or a combination of the two, you figured out how to open that door. You probably did a little victory dance and then forgot about it.

Until, that is, you came across another door. Luckily you won’t have completely forgotten your first encounter. The image of an object fixed to the middle of the door would have triggered the memory of the previous encounter. It is possible that you first had to experiment again before your memory was jogged, but eventually the connection would have been made and each subsequent door would have become easier and easier until you didn’t really think about it.

During this process you will have abstracted the pattern of opening a door form the situational context.

Then, one day, you would have come across a door knob. Suddenly you didn’t know how to operate it. You may have tried pulling down on it but nothing would have happened. But a bit more experimenting and you will have worked that you had to twist the knob instead of pushing it down.

This may seem a bit silly now, but recently I came across a similar problem again. I was trying to open a door that led out of a classroom. I tried pushing it down and pulling the door; but that didn’t work. I tried pushing the door; but that didn’t work either. I tried a bit of force, and that didn’t work – so I assumed the door was locked.

But it turned out I had to lift the handle up, in order to get out. It was a simple solution but I was as good as trapped until I figured it out.

So why was it so difficult for me to work out?

Quite simply I’d never come across this pattern before. I tried all the previous patterns for doors that I’d come across. I tried pulling down, wriggling it, pulling the door, pushing the door, applying more pressure, lifting the door slightly, and after that I assumed that the door had been locked. After that I simply stopped trying.

This reminds me of a story about a bank robber trying to make his escape. He’d got his stash, was heading for the door, was almost home free, but was thwarted at the last moment.

He tried to push the door open, but it had been locked. The woman behind the bullet proof glass had tripped the silent alarm which automatically locked the exit. He was trapped in the bank; there was nothing left but to wait for the police to arrive.

When the police turned up they were perplexed as to why he was sitting there. After all he had to do was pull the door open instead of push.

The bank robber had made the mistake of assuming the door was locked after applying only one pattern to it. When it didn’t match, he assumed only one alternative – that it had been locked.

The robber must have known the concept of pulling a door and failed because he was stressed; which just goes to show how important state-of-mind is. I, however, failed to open my door because I lacked a pattern that explained how to do it.

I have that pattern now because my friend told me what it was. But if I had been alone it may have taken me a little longer to get out. I would have got to the stage where I didn’t automatically know how to get out and would have had to be more creative.

To do this I would have taken the pattern of a door not opening and searched my memory for times when this problem occurred in the past.

This would have provided the following solutions:

- Look more closely at the situation
- Try another door
- Bang on the door for help
- Call for help
- Climb out a window
- Wait until the door was unlocked
- Kick the door down
- Find a key

The top scenario would have been the best response. It is wise to make sure all the things we consider as facts are not things we have just presumed. I could have checked to make sure the door was lockable, investigated where the door was catching and looked for anything unusual. In this case it would have revealed that the door handle was upside down and the solution would have become immediately obvious.

So in order to use a solution from a previous problem, you must:

1. Identify the pattern (or situation) accurately
2. Search your memory for times when that pattern happened before and see how it was solved then.
3. Apply the solution to the new context.

This is a natural process, but one you may have to follow more consciously if you get stuck on a problem. When you’ve mastered this, you’ll no longer have to reinvent the wheel.