Sorted into writable, showable and relational, the capability inventory for DDBA 8581 Week 3 argues how much of a role's knowledge can be recorded before its holder goes. Searches like "ddba 8581 week 3 assignment example", "ddba8581 week 3 sample" and "ddba 8581 week 3 example" land here.
What a finished DDBA 8581 Week 3 capability inventory looks like
Four to six pages with an inventory table. Each row names one capability the role depends on, drawn from the Week 2 decision log where one exists: knowing which customer contacts will accept a late shipment, reading an unusual vibration in a press, recalling why a contract clause was negotiated. Columns record the category, whether anyone else holds it, the evidence for that judgment, and whether it could be documented. Relational capabilities get their own section, drawing on Burt's work on brokerage to show where the role sits between groups that do not otherwise talk. The argument then sets Nonaka and Takeuchi's claim that tacit knowledge can be externalized against Tsoukas's objection that the act of articulating it changes what it is. The inventory states which side its own rows support.
How a DDBA 8581 Week 3 example is structured
Source, rows, categories, relational map, dispute, verdict. The source of each capability is stated first, because an inventory built from the holder's self-description overstates what is unique and one built from a manager's view understates it. Rows are then categorized with a rule applied consistently: writable if someone could follow a document to reproduce it, showable if it transfers only through observed practice, relational if it depends on who trusts whom. The relational map follows as a short diagram or table of the groups connected through the role. The dispute section tests the two positions on tacit knowledge against the showable rows specifically. The verdict closes the inventory by estimating what share of the role's critical capability could be recorded in a year and what share could only be transferred through overlap with a successor.
Where each row came from
Self-report, manager assessment, observation or document review: the inventory states its source for every capability. Different sources bias the count in different directions, and naming them lets a reader adjust.
Writable, showable, relational
One rule assigns each capability to a category, based on how it could reach a successor. Applying the rule to every row, including the awkward ones, is what gives the inventory analytical weight.
The role as a bridge
Some roles matter because two groups talk only through them. Burt's account of brokerage explains why that position is lost on departure even when every document is handed over, and the inventory maps it.
Can the showable be written down?
Nonaka and Takeuchi argue that tacit knowledge can be externalized; Tsoukas argues articulation transforms it. The inventory tests both positions against its own showable rows and says which holds up.
A share, estimated
The closing paragraph commits to how much critical capability could be recorded within a year and how much needs overlap time. That estimate sets up the transfer and development weeks later in the course.
Where marks go in DDBA 8581 Week 3
Categorization carries the heaviest weight. Graders check whether the rule separating writable from showable is stated and applied to every row, and an inventory that labels everything tacit has avoided the harder judgment. The evidence column is read for how each claim of uniqueness was established, since a capability asserted to be held only by the incumbent needs a reason beyond the incumbent saying so. Relational capability earns a distinct share, and inventories treating relationships as a line item instead of a mapped position lose it. Literature engagement is judged on whether the tacit knowledge dispute is applied to specific rows. The verdict's estimate earns the remaining credit when it is committed to and qualified, and loses it when it hedges into no number at all.
Get a DDBA 8581 Week 3 example written to your instructions
Upload the Week 3 prompt, the grading criteria, and your earlier role profile if there is one, since the inventory builds on it. The sorted capabilities, relational map and tacit knowledge argument come back inside 24 to 48 hours; a first order is free. Internal documents from any employer stay out of the paper entirely.
DDBA 8581 Week 3 questions, answered
How is a capability judged unique to the role?
By checking who else could perform it, not by asking the holder. Peer interviews, records of who handles exceptions, and what happened during past absences all serve as evidence. Where you cannot establish uniqueness, mark the row as uncertain. A grader will trust an inventory that admits uncertainty in several rows over one claiming every capability is held by a single person.
Does the inventory need Burt's network theory?
It helps wherever the role connects groups that otherwise do not communicate, which is common in account management, plant leadership and cross-functional coordination. If your role is purely technical, the relational section can be short. Other sources on social capital can substitute. What counts is that relationships are treated as a position in a structure and not as a list of contacts.
What if the organization already has documentation?
Then the inventory tests it. Existing procedures usually cover the writable rows and miss the showable and relational ones, and showing that gap is a strong finding. Review the documentation against the decision log, note which capabilities it covers, and focus the analysis on what it leaves out. Keep any internal documents themselves out of your paper.