A finished DBA-839 Topic 4 data decision rights matrix example, separating owner from custodian for a retailer's product hierarchy and assigning each change decision to the function entitled to make it. Searches like "dba 839 topic 4 assignment example", "dba839 topic 4 sample" and "dba-839 topic 4 example" land here.
What a finished DBA-839 Topic 4 data decision rights matrix looks like
At its center the finished example places a matrix, with a short argument on either side. The opening pages reconstruct the incident: e-commerce split two categories to improve product discovery, the product information team applied the change as requested, finance's category margins stopped matching prior periods and supply chain's replenishment groups reshuffled overnight. Every step was authorized by somebody, and nobody had the authority to approve all of it. The matrix then lists the decisions that touch the hierarchy, from adding a leaf category to restructuring a level, against the functions affected. Each cell reads decide, approve, consult or inform. Khatri and Brown's decision domains organize the rows, and Weill and Ross's governance archetypes are used to name the arrangement the retailer actually had, which sat closer to feudal than to federal.
How a DBA-839 Topic 4 example is structured
The example runs incident, principle, matrix and consequence in six parts. Part one reconstructs the weekend change as a timeline, showing who requested, who applied and who discovered the damage. Part two distinguishes owner from custodian: the product information team maintained the record faithfully but had no standing to refuse a request. Part three sets out the decisions the matrix governs, grouped under Khatri and Brown's domains of quality, metadata, access and lifecycle. The fourth part is the matrix itself, with a sentence under each row explaining why that function holds that right. Part five proposes a browse taxonomy that e-commerce owns outright, separate from the master hierarchy it may only request changes to. The final part replays the original incident through the matrix and shows at which cell the change would have stopped for approval.
The weekend change as a timeline
Request, application and discovery are laid out hour by hour, showing that every actor had permission for their own step and nobody had it for the whole.
Owner separated from custodian
The product information team kept the record accurately but could not refuse a request, which made it the custodian of the hierarchy rather than its owner.
Decision rows grouped by domain
Adding, renaming, restructuring and retiring categories are sorted under Khatri and Brown's decision domains so each right attaches to a recognizable kind of choice.
A browse taxonomy e-commerce owns
Separating the website's display categories from the master hierarchy lets e-commerce move quickly on its own layer while finance and supply chain keep a stable structure.
The incident replayed through the matrix
Running the original change through the new rights shows where it would have paused for approval, the practical test any allocation of authority has to pass.
Where marks go in DBA-839 Topic 4
The loss graders see most here is ownership assigned by naming a team without saying what that team may decide. A matrix that labels merchandising the owner of the hierarchy and stops has named a custodian with a better title, since the incident turned on change authority rather than on responsibility. Papers also lose marks by blaming e-commerce, whose restructuring served a legitimate purpose, instead of the arrangement that let one function change a shared structure alone. Matrices with every function marked consult on every row produce a committee that can block everything and approve nothing. Citing governance frameworks without applying their categories to the retailer's actual decisions leaves the theory decorative. The political question, that e-commerce's growth has given it informal power the matrix now limits, is often left out, though it decides whether the matrix survives a quarter.
Get a DBA-839 Topic 4 example written to your instructions
Send the DBA-839 Topic 4 instructions and the rubric from your classroom, with the case or organization your section assigned. We write a custom example to them, with owner separated from custodian, each decision right argued row by row and the matrix tested against the incident that prompted it, in 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free.
DBA-839 Topic 4 questions, answered
How does a data owner differ from a custodian?
An owner decides what a shared element means, approves or refuses changes to it and is accountable when a change harms another function. A custodian keeps the element accurate and applies requested changes faithfully, without standing to turn one down. The example shows a retailer whose product hierarchy had a diligent custodian and no owner, which is why one function could restructure it alone.
What are Weill and Ross's governance archetypes?
In their work on IT governance, Weill and Ross describe recurring patterns of who holds decision rights, including business monarchy, IT monarchy, feudal, federal, duopoly and anarchy arrangements. The example borrows that vocabulary to name how the retailer actually decided things about its product data, and it extends the idea to data decisions without claiming the authors prescribed any matrix of this kind.
Will more approvals slow the business down?
Some changes will take longer, and the example accepts that cost openly. Its answer is to narrow the decisions needing approval to those that affect other functions, and to give e-commerce a layer it controls outright. Changes touching only the website move as fast as before. Changes that alter margin reporting or replenishment pause, because other functions bear their consequences.