Paradoxically, some of the changes prompted by the widespread availability of big data will not yield
much certainty. Big data lows continuously—consider the analysis of brand sentiment derived from
social media sources—and so metrics will inevitably rise and fall over time. Such “digital smoke
signals,” as they have been called, can serve as an early warning system for budding problems. But
they are indicative, not conirmatory. Managers will have to establish guidelines for when early
warnings should cue decisions and action. Additional uncertainty arises from the nature of big data
relationships. Unless they are derived from formal testing, the results from big data generally involve
correlation, not causation, and sometimes they occur by chance (although having greater amounts of
data increases the likelihood that weak results will be statistically signiicant). Some managers may be
frustrated by these facts. If the issue under consideration is highly important, further investigation
may be warranted before a decision is made. The use of prescriptive analytics often requires changes
in the way frontline workers are managed. Companies will gain unprecedented visibility into the
activities of truck drivers, airline pilots, warehouse workers, and any other employees wearing or
carrying sensors (perhaps this means all employees, if smartphone sensors are included). Workers
will undoubtedly be sensitive to this monitoring. Just as analytics that are intensely revealing of
customer behavior have a certain “creepiness” factor, overly detailed reports of employee activity
can cause discomfort. In the world of Analytics 3.0, there are times we need to look away.