A Responsibility Assignment Matrix (RAM), also known as RACI matrix or Linear Responsibility Chart (LRC), describes the participation by various roles in completing tasks or deliverables for a project or business process. It is especially useful in clarifying roles and responsibilities in cross-functional/departmental projects and processes.
RACI is an acronym derived from the four key responsibilities most typically used: Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed. A RACI matrix defines the exact roles and responsibilities of a team in charge of a certain project or objective. A RACI matrix considers 4 types of roles:
- Responsible: It defines who will do the work to achieve the task.
- Accountable: It defines the person (and only one) that is ultimately accountable for the completion of the task.
- Consulted: It defines who will provide opinions on how to achieve the task.
- Informed: It defines who will receive status of the tasks in progress and end-results.
Variations: There are also a number of variations to the meaning of RACI participation types:
RACI (alternative scheme): There is an alternative coding, less widely published but used by some practitioners and process mapping software, which modifies the application of the R and A codes of the original scheme. The overall methodology remains the same but this alternative avoids potential confusion of the terms Accountable and Responsible — understood by management professionals but not always so clearly differentiated by others: · Responsible – Those responsible for the performance of the task. There should be exactly one person with this assignment for each task. · Assists – Those who assist completion of the task. · Consulted – Those whose opinions are sought; and with whom there is two-way communication. · Informed – Those who are kept up-to-date on progress; and with whom there is one-way communication. |
RACI (decisions) This alternative is focused only on documenting who has the authority to make which decisions. May be suitable for use within a small work group. · Recommends – Responsible to recommend an answer to the decision. · Approves – Authorized to approve an answer to the decision. · Consulted – Those whose opinions are sought; and with whom there is two-way communication. · Informed – Those who are informed after the decision is made; and with whom there is one-way communication. |
Alternatives: There are a number of alternatives to the RACI participation types:
RASCI: This is an expanded version (Hightower, 2008) of the standard RACI, less frequently known as RASIC (Baker, 2009) breaking the Responsible participation into: · Responsible – Those who are responsible for the task, ensuring that it is done as per the Approver. · Support – Resources allocated to Responsible. Unlike Consulted, who may provide input to the task, Support will assist in completing the task. |
RACI-VS: This is an expanded version (Blokdijk, 2008) of the standard RACI, with two additional participation types: · Verifier – Those who check whether the product meets the acceptance criteria set forth in the product description. · Signatory – Those who approve the Verify decision and authorize the product hand-off. It seems to make sense that the Signatory should be the party being Accountable for its successor. |
DACI: Another version that has been used to centralise decision making, and clarify who can re-open discussions (Kendrick, 2006). – Driver – A single Driver of overall project. – Approver – One or more Approvers who make most project decisions are responsible if it fails. – Contributors – Are the worker-bees who are responsible for deliverables; and with whom there is two-way communication. – Informed – Those who are impacted by the project and are provided status and informed of decisions; and with whom there is one-way communication. |
References
Answers Corporation (2011). RACI. http://www.answers.com/topic/responsibility-assignment-matrix#ixzz1KFGpxRX0
Baker, D.(2009). Multi-company project management: Maximizing business results through strategic collaboration. J. Ross Publishing. p. 58.
Blokdijk, G. (2008). The service level agreement (SLA Guide) – SLA Book, Templates for Service Level Management and Service Level Agreement Forms. Fast and Easy Way to Write Your SLA. Lulu.com. p. 81.
Bolman, L. (2008). Reframing organsations: artistry, choice, and leadership. John Wiley and Sons. p. 112.
Brennan, K. (2009). A guide to the business analysis body of knowledge (BABOK Guide). International Institute of Business Analysis. p. 29.
Dickstein, D. (2008). No excuses: A business process approach to managing operational risk. John Wiley and Sons.
Gem-Up Consulting Inc. (2009). Glossary. http://www.managementscorecards.com/resources/glossary.htm
Hightower, R. (2008). Internal controls policies and procedures. John Wiley and Sons. p. 83.
Kendrick, T. (2006). Results without authority: Controlling a project when the team doesn’t report to you. AMACOM Books, A Division of the American Management Association. p. 106.
Margaria, T. (2010). Leveraging applications of formal methods, verification, and validation: 4th International Symposium on Leveraging Applications, Isola 2010, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, October 18-21, 2010, Proceedings, Part 1. Springer. p. 492.
Project Management Institute (2010). A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide). PMI Standards Committee.
Smith, M. (2005). Role and responsibility charting (RACI)]. Project Management Forum. p. 5.
