Musings on Big Data, Customer Analytics, and Data Driven Business

On LinkedIn, Don Peppers is sharing his perspective on making better decisions with data.  This got me thinking and I want to share with you what showed up for me. Why listen to my speaking?  I do have a scientific background (BSc Applied Physics).  I qualified as a chartered accountant and was involved in producing all kinds of reports for managers and saw what they did or did not do with them. More recently, I was the head of a data mining and predictive analytics practice. Let’s start.

Data and data driven decision-making tools are not enough

Yes, there is a data deluge, and this deluge is becoming down faster and faster. Big enough and fast enough to be given the catchy name Big Data.  What is forgotten is the effort that it takes to get this data fit for the purpose of modelling.  This is no easy-cheap task. Yet, it can be done if you throw enough resources at it.

Yes, there are all kinds of tools for finding patterns in this data. And in the hands of the right people (statistically trained-minded, business savvy) these tools can be used to turn data into valuable (actionable) insight.  This is not as easy as it sounds. Why?  Because there is  shortage of these statistically trained and minded people: amateurs will not do, experts are necessary to distinguish between gold and fools gold – given enough data you can find just about any pattern.  It statistical savvy is not enough you have to couple it with business savvy. Nonetheless, let’s assume that we can overcome this constraint.

The real challenge in generating data driven decision-making in businesses is the cultural practices.  We do not have the cultural practices that create the space for data driven decision-making to show up and flourish.  A thinker much smarter-wiser than me has already shared his wisdom, I invite you to listen:

On the whole, scientific methods are at least as important as any other research: for it is upon the insight into the method that the scientific spirit depends: and if these methods are lost, then all the results of science could not prevent a renewed triumph of superstition and nonsense.

Clever people may learn as much as they wish of the results of science – still one will always notice in their conversation, and especially in their hypotheses, that they lack the scientific spirit; they do not have the distinctive mistrust of the aberrations of thought which through long training are deeply rooted in the soul of every scientific person.  They are content to find any hypothesis at all concerning some matter; then they are all fire and for it and think that is enough …….. If something is unexplained, the grow hot over the first notion that comes into their heads and looks like an explanation ….

– Nietzsche (Human, All Too Human)

It occurs to me that the scientific method never took route in organisational life. Put aside the rationalist ideology and take a good look at what goes in business including how decisions are made. I say you will find that Nietzsche penetrating insight into the human condition as true today as when he spoke it. The practice of making decisions in every organisation that I have ever come in contact with is not scientific: it does not follow the scientific method. On the contrary, managers make decisions that are in alignment with their intuition, their prejudices, and their self-interest.  It is so rare to come across a manager (and organisation) that makes decisions using the scientific method that when this does occur I am stopped in my tracks. It is the same kind of unexpectedness as seeing a female streaker running across the football pitch in a league match.

What are the challenges in putting data driven decision-making practices into place in organisations?

Technologists have a gift. What gift? The gift of not understanding, deeply enough, the being of human beings. Lacking this understanding they can and do (confidently) stand up and preach the virtues-benefits of technology.  If life were that simple.

Truth shows up as attractive to those of us who do not have to face the consequences of truth.  Data driven decision-making sounds great for those of us selling (making a living and hoping to get rich) data driven tools and services.

The challenge of putting in place data driven decision-making practices is that it disturbs the status quo. When you disturb the status quo you go up against the powerful who benefit from that status quo.  Remember Socrates:

The very nature of what Socrates did made him a disruptive and subversive influence. He was teaching people to question everything, and he was exposing the ignorance of individuals in power and authority. He became much loved but also much hated …. In the end the authorities arrested him for …., and not believing in the gods of the city. He was tried and condemned to die …

– Bryan Magee, Professor

Beware of being successful in putting in place a culture of data driven decision making!

With sufficient commitment and investment you can put in place a data driven decision making culture. Like the folks at Tesco did.  And by making decisions through harnessing the data on your customers, your stores, your products, you can outdo all of your competitors, grow like crazy and make bumper profits.  Again, again, and again.  Then the day of reckoning comes – when you come face to face with the flaws of making decisions solely on the basis of data.

Tesco is not doing so great.  It has not been doing so great for several years – including issuing its first ever profits alert in 2012.  What is the latest situation?  Tesco has reported a 23.5% drop in profits in the first half of this year.   What has Tesco been doing to deal with the situation? This is what the article says:

Last year, Tesco announced it would be spending £1bn on improving its stores in the UK, investing in shop upgrades, product ranges, more staff, as well as its online offering.

There are a number of flaws on data driven decision making. For one data driven decision making assumes that the future will be a continuation of the past.  Which is rather like saying all the swans that we have come across are white, so we should plan for white swans.  And then, one day you find that the black swan shows up!  The recession and the shift in consumer behaviour that resulted from this recession was the black swan for Tesco.

Furthermore, I hazard a guess that in their adoration at the pulpit of data driven decision making the folks at Tesco forgot the dimensions that matter but were not fed into the data and the predictive models. What dimensions? Like the customer’s experience of shopping at Tesco stores: not enough staff, unhappy staff, stores looking more and more dated by the day, the quality of their products ……

It looks like the folks at Tesco did not heed the sage words of one of my idols:

Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts.

– Einstein

Book review: Extreme Trust by Don Peppers and Martha Rogers

Let’s get up to date

If you have been reading the recent posts you will know that I have been diving into, exploring and sharing what I have learned as I have been reading Extreme Trust the latest book by Don Peppers & Martha Rogers.  This weekend I finished reading the entire book and so this post is my, personal and biassed, review of the book.  If you have not read these first 2 – 3 posts then here are the links:

Extreme Trust: can honesty be a means of competitive advantage (part 1)

Extreme Trust: can honesty be a means of competitive advantage (part 2)

What kind of a book is Extreme Trust?  Think back to The One to One Future

How best to describe Extreme Trust the latest book by Don Peppers & Martha Rogers?  Perhaps the best place to start is to compare it with the other books Don and Martha have written.  Which is the book that is the closest to Extreme Trust in its flavour?  The One to One Future.   That book, The One to One Future,  was a delight to read and it said what needed to be said about the state of marketing and spelled out the future.  Extreme Trust has a similar flavour and had provided me with a similar experience.   What did I like about it?  What spoke to me?  In Extreme Trust, Don and Martha do the following effectively:

  • Inject human beings and in particular the social/co-operative/empathic being of human beings back into the whole Customer conversation – yes, look closely and you are likely to find that for all the talks about relationships the focus of the Customer movement has been on processes, data and technology (that is as true for Don and Martha as any other authors);
  • Address the ‘elephant in the room’, the greed based, short term focussed, deceitful/manipulative context of ‘business as usual’ which is oriented towards/focussed on extracting revenues and profits from customers usually by taking advantage of the ignorance/vulnerability/helplessness of customers;
  • Explore the theme of trust – why it matters, how it operates, what difference it makes, what benefits it delivers to social life and business/organisational life; and
  • Spell out the why/how organisations will have to become ‘trustable’ whether they want to or not – social technologies, smartphones and the fundamentally social/moral wiring of human beings make it inevitable

Extreme Trust is not a book about marketing, it is not a book about customer service, it is not a book about social media.  Extreme Trust, if read/viewed through a wide angle lens, is essentially about a new paradigm in business which involves and impacts everyone – the Tops, the Middles, the Bottoms, the Customer, the Community.  Essentially, Extreme Trust sets out a new philosophy of doing business based on an understanding of the social being of  human beings and how social media has given real weight to the hollow sounding expression “The Customer is King”.   If that is the background of the book than the customer and the relationship with the customer sits in the foreground and can best be encapsulated in the following diagram:

Let’s take a brief look at the chapters

The chapter headings are meaningful and so I want to share them with you and provide my brief take on each one.

“Trust: not just a good idea. Inevitable.”  Don and Martha make a persuasive argument for the importance of doing the right thing by customers proactively and they spell out the benefits of being trustable (USAA) and the downside of taking advantage of your customers (AOL).

“Serving the interests of customers, profitably”.  Here Don and Martha describe and point out the ‘flaws’ of ‘business as usual’ and argue that the central challenge for Tops is to come up with an appropriate business model for the time – a business model that allows the company to generate “good profits” and rule out “bad profits” by aligning the interests of the customer and the company.

“Trustability: capitalist tool”.  In this chapter Don and Martha ‘get real’ – they get that the lever for effecting change in business is through the profit motive as opposed to being good or doing good.  So Don and Martha strive to show you doing right by the customer, being a trustable company, leads to superior long term performance.  In short, trustability is an asset like ‘brand’ is or at least used to be.

“Sharing: not just for Sunday school”.  The social nature of human beings as evidenced by co-operation, sharing, reciprocity, sense of injustice and punishment of cheaters is explored here.  The key point is that we do not have to be encouraged to share, to cooperate, to reciprocate, to punish those that do not share/cooperate/reciprocate – to be human is to be/do this stuff effortless, it is the default.  Social production and the radical implications it has for business is touched upon here.

“Trust and the e-social ethos”.  In this chapter Don and Martha take the social being of human beings and look at/describe how this shows up in the e-social world of social networks.  The implications are explored through real life examples of companies that got it right and those that did not. This chapter is heavily linked with the previous one.

“Control is not an option”.  Business as usual can be characterised by “command-control-secrecy-spin”.  Well this used to work great and is now well past it’s sell by date.  The world is much more interdependent, fluid, unpredictable – just look at what has been happening since the financial crisis of 2008.  And anyone who has studied ‘systems and systems thinking’ will get that control is an illusion.  Yet as Kahneman has shown in his latest book (Thinking Fast and Slow) we human beings are wired to strive for control, think we can control more than we can control, and look for/find order when none exists.  Don and Martha share these features of our existence and spell out some approaches that Tops can take to deal with the new reality.

“Build your trustability in advance”.  In this chapter Don and Martha spell out the advantage of being a trustable company through examples of real companies that encountered hard times and where reputation for trustability (with core customer base) made all the difference.  In short, if you look after your customers in the good times they look after you during your bad times.

“Honest competence”.  It is not enough to be honest, it is not enough to be competent, your organisation has to show up as being honest and competent.   Don and Martha divide competence into product competence and customer competence  and explore each one.  Turns out that organisations really struggle with customer competence.  The key issue – inability/failure to empathise with customers, to see the world through their eyes.  Don and Martha share the instructive story around Domino’s pizza.

“Trustable information”.  Information is data that makes a difference – it sheds light on a situation, it enables action, it helps attain desired outcomes. One way companies can contribute to customers and the wider community and thus build trustability is through sharing data and/or information that is held by the company.   What is often just data within a company, if released to a wide community in a usable format can be turned into information.  That is the key point of this chapter, Don and Martha gives some examples.

“Designing trustability into a business”.  This chapter completes the conversation, the story and Don/Martha do so by exploring what trustability would involve in various industries – mobile operators, financial services, automotive, airlines, enterprise computing…..

Why I have gone to all this effort to write this review?

Extreme Trust deserves to be read.  It opens up a new domain, a new conversation, a conversation that needs to happen.  Why?  Until this conversation happens, this domain is addressed, pretty much all the money spent on Customer initiatives is wasted.  Why?  Because the ‘elephant in the room’ is not being addressed and addressing that ‘elephant in the room’ is the key to cultivating genuine affection and customer loyalty.   I want to leave you with the parting words of Don and Martha in Extreme Trust:

“In the final analysis, it is almost certain to be the new companies and the start-ups that employ these tactics to overturn the old way.  They have less invested in the current paradigm, and less to lose by destroying it.  Gradually, they will use trustability to transform our entire economic system, in the same way that interactivity itself has so dramatically transformed our lives already.  They will deploy honesty as brutally efficient competitive weapon against the old guard. 

As standards for trustability continue to rise, the companies, the brands, and organisations shown to lack trustability will be punished more and more severely…..

For my part, I am keen for this future to turn up sooner rather than later – the thought occurs to me that this is a future worth operating from and living into.  How about you?

Extreme Trust: can honesty be a means of competitive advantage? (part 2)

I value what Don Peppers and Martha Rogers write and as such I am making my way through their latest book (Extreme Trust) and using it to write a series of posts on matters that are touched upon by Don and Martha.  In the first post I set out the bigger picture – why trust matters, what the  challenge is and how transparency will force companies to become “trustable”.

What is the core challenge of authentic customer-centricity?

In Extreme Trust Don and Martha name the key challenge of customer centricity.  Can you guess what it is?  I can tell you that it is not what most folks are working on: People, Process, Data, Technology.  According to Don and  Martha the key challenge is that of business model design – coming up with a business model that allows you to serve the needs and interests of your customers profitably.  Here are some quotes from Extreme Trust that shed light on the matter:

Untrustable business models thrive in our economic system today largely because being untrustable can be highly profitable – in the short term anyway – and many businesses are managed almost entirely for the short-term results………

a trustable company must find a business model that allows it to create shareholder value by acting in its customers’ interests.  It won’t  – and shouldn’t – sell its products or services at a loss, but to be trustable it must be sensitive to the customers’ point of view and try to deliver a fair deal

In the past, companies assumed a gap between what’s good for customers’ and what’s good for profits.  The trustable company sees no such gap, but – starting from scratch if necessary – figures  out how to use what works for customers as the basis for developing its business model and strategy.”

Whilst I find myself in agreement with what Don and Martha say I cannot help noticing something that strikes me as being falseThey say “In the past, companies assumed a gap between what’s good for customers and what’s good for profits.”  I disagree.  Right now, today, the  assumptions is there and the gap is there. This is an issue that needs to be addressed if companies are to become authentically customer-centric and it is not being addressed as the assumption is that authentic customer-centricity will drive down profits and profitability.

How do you tell if your organisation is “trustable”?

Don and Martha point out the Michael Schrage has put forward a litmus test: 

Are your best and most valuable customers dumb, uneducated or not paying attention?  (If the answer is “yes”, then you should engage in a little self-analysis of your business model.)  AOL may like ’em stupid, but no trustable company should.”

How exactly is a “trustable” company different from a merely “trustworthy” company?

According to Don and Martha:

” .. a trustable firm is always trying to understand what it’s like to be the customer, and then to make that experience as hassle-free and satisfying as possible……”

“A trustworthy firm will do what it promises to do, but a trustable company, like a friend, will do what’s best for a customer even if the customer isn’t really paying attention or isn’t well informed or knowledgeable as the company is…”

How does “trustability” show up in the lives of customers?

Lets take a look at some concrete examples that indicate and/or show up as being trustable:

Amazon:  just the other day I was about to buy an ebook for my Kindle and Amazon told me that I had already bought it.  I checked and sure enough I already had it.  Furthermore, Amazon makes reviews available on all the products it sells – one of the few sites to do so.

Apple: if you are about to buy what you have already bought through iTunes then Apple will alert you that you have already purchased it. Also any tracks that you purchased from Apple are protected so that you cannot lose them. And for a small annual fee you can apply the same kind of protection to any and all other tracks that you have stored in iTunes.

JacquieLawson.com: an e-card site alerts customers before their credit cards get hit with renewals so that customers who do not wish for the automatic renewal to occur can opt out and thus not get charged!  Now compare that with my recent experience in unsubscribing from various lists – the bloggers made it easy, the commercial marketers made it hard.

RBC:  the Royal Bank of Canada uses its superior insight into its customers to extend automatic overdraft to low risk customers – most of the customer base.  And RBC does not charge a fee for this and in the process forgoes revenue from penalties that most other banks rely on.

Why should you make the effort to be a “trustable” company?

The short answer is that the ‘workability and performance’ of our lives, our organisations, our communities, our societies improves dramatically when trust is present between us. We are social and as such we have a strong sense of empathy, fairness and justice.  Or as Don and Martha write:

The world we live in and raise our children just works better – for us too – when we play fair.…. Our own well-being is wrapped up in the well being of our society and empathy for others is a social stimulant, a catalyst for collective welfare.”

Now, I get that this simply will not speak to some of us.  So let me share another reason for you to transition your organisations towards “trustability”, again in the words of Don and Martha:

In the e-social world, companies will be expected to act toward their customers the way people act towards people.  With empathy.  Violators will be prosecuted.”

For my part I do not think that these companies will be ‘prosecuted’ as the law and the lawmakers have shown themselves to be pretty lax and advocates for ‘business as usual’.  I am of the view that the ‘public’ will name and shame companies and even persecute some of them – showing up the gap between fine words and the not so fine deeds.  Like was done with facebook (privacy), Netflix (price hike, division into two businesses, Shell (Nigeria/North Sea), Apple (Foxconn)……  And the tools they will use?  Smart phones, tablets, PCs and social media/networks.  I believe this is Don and Martha’s point – radical transparency will force companies to change.

What do I say about what Don and Martha say?

Broadly speaking I get Don and Martha in Extreme Trust and I am in alignment with them when they point towards the need for business model design and rethinking strategy to genuinely, authentically, act in the interests of customers whilst making the requisite profit.   About a year ago, I captured my point of view and put it forward in the following diagram:

This diagram is my way of saying that the world has changed and four environment pressures (digitisation, mobile/smartphones, the social customer, the economic environment of austerity) will force companies to revisit/rethink/revise/transform four critical domains of organisational life: Leadership, Business Model, Mission & Strategy, and Culture.  I see these as interconnected.  Only when these dimensions are adequately addressed does it make sense to start making adjustments in the People, Process, Data and Technology domains.  However, this is pretty much the opposite of what organisations have done in the realms of CRM, Customer Experience, Customer Focus and Customer-Centricity which is why so few companies are loved.  Really how many brands/companies would leave a hole in the lives/hearts of their customers if they ceased to exist?  Which is pretty much why there is little or no real (emotional as opposed to behavioural) loyalty.

Extreme Trust: can honesty be a means of competitive advantage? (part 1)

I enjoy reading what Don Peppers and Martha Rogers write.  In fact their point of view spoke to me in such a way that it called me to join up and become a part of  The Peppers & Rogers Group, for a while, back in 2000.  Don and Martha have published a new book Extreme Trust.  In this series of posts on trust I am going to share with you, comment upon and explore topics that are addressed by Don and Martha in their book.

Does trust matter?

Why don’t you take the salesman at his word and buy what he is selling you?  Because you have learnt that what is in the interests of the salesman, to make a sale and take our money, is not necessarily in your interest.  Why don’t you accept the advertising put out by companies?  Because you have learnt that advertising, as a whole, is not truthful – you know that it has been designed carefully, purposefully, to push your buttons so that you buy.  Put differently you simply don’t trust the advertising.

Trust matters.  Why?  Because our lives are tied up with each other.  Heidegger pointed out that the fundamental being of human being is being-in-the-world – we are not spectators in the stands, we are right there in the midst the world.  Who is there right with us and an essential component of the world?  Our fellow human beings!  Our experience of living and how our lives turn out depends on how we conceive of one another (selfish, co-operative, selfless) and how we treat each other (help one another, look out for one another, indifferent towards one another, exploit one another).  Whether we trust one another or not matters, what we trust another with or not matters, who we trust and who we do not trust matters.

How will you compete against the likes of USAA?

Don and Martha start Extreme Trust by sharing a great story and asking a powerful question that gets to the heart of the matter. Let’s start with the story. It is about USAA a financial service company that consistently comes out as the most trusted financial services organisation in the USA.  The culture at USAA if based on a single yet profoundly powerful statement: treat the customer the way that you’d want to be treated if you were the customer.

After the first Gulf War (1991) USAA  sent out refund checks to several thousand “members” (customers).  Why?  USAA figured out that men and women (armed forces) serving overseas weren’t driving their cars in the USA, suspended the premiums for those months, and sent out unsolicited refund cheques when these men and women got back to the USA.  USAA did not have to do this and no-one asked them to do it.  How did this turn out?  Nearly 2,500 of these refund cheques were sent back to USAA by grateful customers who told USAA to keep the money and simply be there “when we need you.”

Now, here is the question that Don and Martha pose: “How will you compete against a financial services institution that customers love so much they sometimes refuse to accept refunds and are loyal into the third generation and counting?”

What makes USAA (and other companies like USSA) so different from competitors?

I have repeatedly asserted that most of what passes for customer-centricity is simply a sham.  Specifically, the philosophical base, the moral grounding, the fellow feeling, that is necessary for customer-centricity to show up as customer-centric, in the eyes of the customer as a moral being is absent.  This is what Don and Martha say on the matter:

“Most businesses and other organisations operating today think that they’re already customer-centric and they are basically trustworthy, even though their customers would disagree……. Being “trustworthy” is certainly better than being untrustworthy, but soon even “trustworthiness” won’t be sufficient. Instead companies will have to be trustable.

..trustability is a higher standard still.  Rather than working to maintain honest prices and reasonable service, in the near future companies will have to go out of their way to protect each customer’s interest proactively, taking extra steps when necessary to ensure that a customer doesn’t make a mistake, or overlook some benefit or service, or fail to do nor not do something that would have been better for the customer”

In short, USAA and companies like USAA (Amazon, Zappos, Apple, Google…) are trustable and as such they practice are built on the three pillars of trustability.

The three pillars of trustability

According to Don and Martha (in Extreme Trust) the three pillars (they use the term ‘principles’) of trustability are:

Do the right thing.  Essentially this is about the distinction between ‘good profits’ v ‘bad profits’.  Doing the right thing involves giving up practices (like exploiting customers) that generate ‘bad profits’.  And it involves coming up with a business model that generates ‘good profits’ by creating genuine value for customers by aligning with the needs and interests of customers and getting a fair return in exchange. Doing the right thing lies in the realm of leadership and strategy.

Do things right.  This is all about operations and operational excellence.  It is about the domain of management and concerns itself with functions, processes and details so that you make it easy for your customers to do business with you across the entire customer journey and generate the right kind of customer experience at each touchpoint that matters.

Proactively.  In Don and Martha’s words “Knowing that a customer’s interests is not being well served and doing nothing about it is untrustable.  Not knowing is incompetent…. A company might be scrupulous in its ethics, completely honest in its brand messaging, and highly involved in tracking its customer satisfaction, but will it be proactively watching out for its customers interests?  If it wants to succeed in the age of transparency, yes.

What gets in the way of being a “trustable” enterprise?

Why aren’t more companies, even most companies, like USAA, Apple, Amazon, Zappos and the like?   This is a domain I have tackled several times and I say it is addiction to ‘bad profits’.  What do Don and Martha say?

“The fact is that far too many businesses still generate substantial profits by fooling customers, or by taking advantage of customer mistakes or lack of knowledge, or simply by not telling customers what they need to know to make an informed decision.”

Why become a “trustable” enterprise?

Don and Martha are clear that companies don’t have a choice – the tide has turned, customers have the power, and by wielding this power customers will force companies to become “trustable” or die.  This is how they put it:

“.. lots of traditional, widely accepted, and perfectly legal business practices just can’t be trusted by customers and will soon become extinct, driven to dust by rising levels of transparency, increasing consumer demand for fair treatment, and competitive pressure…… Things that companies, governments, and other organisations never meant for people to know they will know.”

“Transparency will increase because of technological progress, and progress is inevitable.  It cannot be avoided or slowed down.….. As important as our social nature is.. social media and other interactive technologies have injected it with steroids.”

What is my take on this?

My thinking and philosophical orientation is in line with that being shared by Don and Martha in their new book Extreme Trust.  As such it is no surprise to me that I am enjoying reading it.  Nonetheless, there are areas in which I find that I am not in agreement with Don and Martha.  They make the distinction between “trustworthy” and “trustable” and in my world that occurs as contrived.

In my world you are either pregnant or you are not pregnant you cannot be half pregnant.  In my world, either I can trust you because I know that your care for me and are looking after my interest or I know that I cannot trust you.  In my world most companies do not merit my trust – I, the customer, simply show up as a wallet to be emptied.  And then there are companies that I do trust because they have done the right thing.  How does the right thing show up as the right thing in my world?  When the company takes a course of action that leaves me better off and it costs the company money. When I hear about what the company is doing to contribute to a ‘good world’.  When I hear about the postive experiences of other customers.

I am 100% in agreement with the power of transparency.  The potential for the kind of disruptive change that Don and Martha are speaking about lies in us wielding technologies that unconceal that which has been concealed from us.  Great example in the UK are the MPs scandal.  Once UK politicians used to lecture the world on honesty, moral uprightness and look down on less developed countries on the account of their corruption.  For many years the UK politicans got away with being corrupt and then the bubble burst.  UK politicians are not in a place to lecture anyone.  Another example is Rupert Murdoch and the News of the World phone hacking scandal.  For many years Rupert, some would claim, was the Kingmaker and pretty much got what he wanted.   He even got the Conservatives to hand him BSkyB on a plate.  Then came the disclosure that a dead girls phone was hacked and the moral revulsion of the ordinary folks forced a public enquiry on a reluctant prime minister, the closure of a newspaper and the abandonment of the BSkyB takeover.

In the next post in this series I will share more of what I learn as I progress reading through Extreme Trust.  I will conclude the series of posts with a review of the book as a whole so that you can decide if you want to read it for yourself.