One independent hotel's idle conference wing sets the question: the Week 5 matrix cross-pairs its SWOT into four candidate strategies and defends converting the wing to extended-stay suites. Searches like "ddba 8006 week 5 assignment example", "ddba8006 week 5 sample" and "ddba 8006 week 5 example" land here.
What a finished DDBA 8006 Week 5 strategic options matrix looks like
A two-by-two matrix anchors four to six pages. The organization is a ninety-room independent hotel two blocks from a regional medical center, with a conference wing that sits empty most weekdays. Weihrich (1982) supplies the framework: strengths and weaknesses from inside the organization are paired with opportunities and threats from outside, and each pairing yields a strategy rather than an observation. The quadrants hold four options. Strengths against opportunities: convert the wing to extended-stay suites for traveling clinicians and patient families. Weaknesses against opportunities: seek a block agreement with the medical center. Strengths against threats: price the suites against short-term rentals. Weaknesses against threats: lease the wing to a clinic operator. A selection section then scores the four against cost, timing and risk, and chooses.
How a DDBA 8006 Week 5 example is structured
The matrix is only as good as its inputs, so the SWOT items come first, each stated specifically and sourced: occupancy figures for the wing, the medical center's expansion plans from its public announcements, the growth of short-term rentals nearby. Items that could describe any hotel are cut. The matrix follows, and each quadrant holds one or two options written as actions with an owner, not as themes. A selection section compares the options on the same three criteria, capital required, months to revenue and exposure if demand falls short, in a small scoring table. The chosen option gets its own section explaining why it wins on this organization's conditions, what it gives up, and which weakness it leaves unaddressed. A short implementation note and references close the paper.
SWOT items that belong to this hotel
An item such as strong customer service could describe any property and generates no strategy. Items tied to this organization, a wing empty four weekdays in five and a medical center adding beds next door, are the ones that produce options when paired.
Each pairing yields an action
The quadrant for strengths against opportunities does not settle for a theme like leveraging location. It proposes converting the conference wing to ten extended-stay suites by the second quarter. Options written as actions can be compared; themes cannot.
Options scored on the same criteria
Capital, months to first revenue and exposure if demand disappoints are applied to all four options in one table. Scoring on shared criteria stops the preferred option from being judged on its strengths while the others are judged on their risks.
The chosen option and what it costs
Conversion wins because it uses the location strength directly and can be reversed if demand fails. The paper names the price: the wing's occasional wedding revenue ends, and the renovation ties up capital the owners had set aside for the roof.
The weakness left standing
No option fixes everything, and the paper says which weakness the choice leaves open, here the hotel's thin sales staff for negotiating long-stay contracts. Naming it shows the selection was a trade, not a clean win.
Where marks go in DDBA 8006 Week 5
What this matrix is graded on is the move from description to choice. SWOT items specific to the organization and sourced satisfy the inputs criteria; generic items cost marks early because every later quadrant inherits their vagueness. The quadrants are read for options written as actions, and a matrix holding themes such as leverage strengths earns the framework points without the application share. The heaviest credit sits in selection: options scored on the same criteria, a choice argued from this organization's conditions, and the trade-off stated in money or time. Graders also look for the weakness the choice leaves open, since admitting it shows judgment. Deductions follow matrices with empty quadrants, selections justified only by enthusiasm, and recommendations that silently drop the capital question.
Get a DDBA 8006 Week 5 example written to your instructions
Include the Week 5 prompt and its rubric with the organization and the choice in front of it, and a finished options matrix with its selection argument lands in 24-48h, free the first time. Mention it if a scoring table is expected. Occupancy and capital numbers in this sample are placeholders; your organization's records supply the real ones.
DDBA 8006 Week 5 questions, answered
Is a TOWS matrix the same as a SWOT analysis?
It starts from one and goes further. A SWOT lists internal and external factors; the matrix pairs them so that each combination suggests a strategy. Weihrich's contribution was that pairing step, which turns an inventory into options. Sections that ask only for a SWOT still tend to reward a paper that draws strategic options from it.
How many options should each quadrant hold?
One or two. More than that usually means the options are themes rather than actions, and themes cannot be scored. A quadrant with a single well-specified option gives the selection section something concrete to compare. If a quadrant produces nothing sensible, the paper can say so, which is itself a finding about the organization's position.
Can the chosen option combine two quadrants?
Yes, and combinations are common when one option depends on another, such as the suite conversion relying on a block agreement for its first year of occupancy. The paper states the dependency and scores the combined option as one package, so its cost and timing are not understated by splitting them across two separate entries.