For an HVAC distributor weighing maintenance contracts, the Week 3 audit tests each resource for value, rarity, imitability and organization, and says whether the move rests on anything rivals lack. Searches like "ddba 8006 week 3 assignment example", "ddba8006 week 3 sample" and "ddba 8006 week 3 example" land here.
What a finished DDBA 8006 Week 3 resource fit audit looks like
Four to five pages centered on an audit grid. The organization is a family-owned heating and cooling distributor deciding whether to sell annual maintenance contracts to commercial customers. Rows are the resources that move would depend on: licensed technicians, a fleet, dispatch software, supplier terms, and ten years of installation records tied to specific customer sites. Columns apply the criteria Barney (1991) set out, valuable, rare, imperfectly imitable and non-substitutable, plus the later question of whether the firm is organized to use the resource. Most rows fail early; technicians and trucks are valuable but available to any rival. The installation records pass every test but the last, since they sit in a system dispatch cannot read. The verdict follows from that row: contracts for installed sites only, once the records reach dispatch.
How a DDBA 8006 Week 3 example is structured
An opening paragraph states the decision and the owner, then limits the audit to resources the move would actually use, since an inventory of everything the firm owns buries the few that matter. The grid follows. Each resource is tested in the order the criteria imply, and a row stops at the first failure, which makes the grid readable at a glance and keeps the prose from defending resources that are merely useful. A section on the surviving resource explains why it is hard to copy, here because the records accumulated through a decade of installations no rival can replay. The organization question gets its own section, because a rare resource the firm cannot deploy supports nothing yet. The recommendation ties the decision to fixing that gap first, dated and priced.
Only the resources the move would use
Warehouse space and a retail counter matter to the distributor but not to maintenance contracts. Limiting the grid to what the decision draws on keeps the audit short enough to argue, and it prevents a long list of strengths from implying support the move does not have.
Rows stop at the first failure
A resource any competitor can hire or buy fails at rarity, and the grid records that and moves on. Carrying a failed row through every column invites the reader to think a useful resource is a protective one, which is the confusion this framework exists to clear up.
Why the records are hard to copy
A rival can hire technicians tomorrow. It cannot acquire a decade of site-level installation history without having done the installations. The audit makes that argument explicitly, since imitability is the criterion most often asserted and least often shown.
Rare but not yet usable
Records locked in an accounting system that dispatch cannot query support no contract today. The organization question is where the recommendation actually comes from, and the audit gives it a section rather than a checkbox in the grid.
A decision with a precondition
The recommendation launches contracts only for sites in the installed base, after the records are linked to dispatch by a stated quarter at a stated cost. The trade-off is named too: slower growth than an open launch, in exchange for an offer rivals cannot match.
Where marks go in DDBA 8006 Week 3
The grid is read for discipline before anything else. An audit that limits itself to resources the decision uses, applies the criteria in order, and stops each row at its first failure shows the framework applied rather than decorated, and that earns most of the application credit. Imitability claims are checked for argument: a resource called hard to copy without a reason is marked as asserted. The organization question separates strong audits from adequate ones, because a rare resource the firm cannot deploy changes the recommendation. Graders also expect the decision itself, stated with its precondition, cost and trade-off, so an audit ending in a list of strengths loses the recommendation share. Deductions come from inventories of everything the firm owns, from rows passed on enthusiasm, and from verdicts that ignore the organization test.
Get a DDBA 8006 Week 3 example written to your instructions
The organization, the move it is weighing and the Week 3 prompt with its rubric are what the desk works from; an audit with its grid and recommendation is back within 24-48h, the first free. Mention which form of the criteria your section uses. Every resource in the sample is constructed, and listing your organization's is your part.
DDBA 8006 Week 3 questions, answered
Would a SWOT's strengths column do the same job?
No, and that difference is what the week is built around. A strengths list records what the organization is good at; the audit asks which of those strengths a rival could not match for this particular move. Most strengths fail that test, which is useful to know before committing money to a decision that assumes they are protective.
What if no resource passes every test?
Then the audit has found that the move would rest on resources any rival can assemble, and the recommendation should reflect it. That can still mean going ahead, if the organization expects to win on speed or price for a period, but the decision is then argued on different grounds and the audit says so plainly.
How is imitability shown rather than asserted?
By naming what a rival would need in order to copy the resource, and why that is costly or slow to obtain. History that has to be lived, relationships built over years, and knowledge spread across many people are the usual reasons. A resource described as unique with no such account is recorded as asserted, and the grid treats it as unproven.