A new way to think about RACI

by Elizabeth on 17/03/2010

Do you use the RACI model to help with stakeholder management?

RACI is a way of categorising stakeholders to help define their roles and responsibilities, and it is also useful for communications plans.  The most common way to see RACI used is in tabular form – with the letters across the top and the list of stakeholders down the side.  The letters across the top stand for:

  • Responsible:  these people have responsibility for certain tasks
  • Accountable:  this is the person accountable for the job in hand
  • Consulted:  these people would like to know about the task and we would seek their opinions
  • Informed:  this group get one-way communication to keep them up-to-date with progress and other messages

A tabular format is fine for documenting the RACI profile of your stakeholders.  If you have difficulty trying to remember how many you have in each group, think of RACI as a triangle:

There is only one person accountable for the task or project, and they are at the top.  You then have several people responsible for various elements.  A larger group is consulted and provides input.  An even larger group gets regular communications but are not active in any other way.

This is a useful project management tool which highlights the type of input each stakeholder or group of stakeholders is going to have – but you actually have to make sure that everyone is involved for the project to be a success.  At least RACI gives you a starting point in identifying and categorising stakeholders, so you can then properly engage them.

Share

No related posts.

  • http://msacademy.in/wordpress/ Ganapathy

    Nice representation of RACI. Easy to remember. Thanks.

  • Pingback: tangcov (Randy Tangco)

  • Pingback: crgpm (Chuck Graham)

  • http://www.techineffect.com Andy Stitt

    Very nice way of explaining the concept; it certainly helped me understand it. Thanks!

  • Pavel

    Hello Elizabeth

    Could you tell me your source for your RACI definition here?
    Most of the time I find different definition for R and A:
    R – responsible is the one who do a job
    A – accountable is the one who is ultimately accountable for the correct and thorough completion of the deliverable or task, and the one to whom Responsible is accountable

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_assignment_matrix

    Thank you!

    Pavel

    • http://www.elizabeth-harrin.com Elizabeth

      Hello Pavel

      Your definition is the one I am using, and I haven’t come across any RACI models that have different definitions of what R and A mean. ‘R’ is always the person responsible for doing the job. ‘A’ is always the person accountable for the work. You can delegate responsibility but not accountability. For example, I’m accountable (to senior management) for the completion of xyz project task, but I delegate the actual doing of it to one of my team. I hope that’s a bit clearer!

  • Pingback: jennifernavarro (Jennifer Navarro)

  • Pingback: sara_broca (Sara BROCA)

  • Pingback: dwaynewright (dwaynewright)

  • Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist, PMP

    Great post Elizabeth!

    I have been a proponent of the RACI and the RASCI (adding the dimension of people who “support” the effort) models for years. The one shortcoming has always been the “R” coming before the “A.” I think it has always caused confusion, not only in understanding the potential number of participants in each category, but also in the hierarchy/relationship so clearly depicted in your RACI Triangle.

    I think the originators likely thought “racy” was more catchy than “archy.”

    Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist
    http://community.ca.com/blogs/theitgovernanceevangelist/

    • http://www.elizabeth-harrin.com Elizabeth

      Steve, what a great idea to add in the S. Although this could make the acronym ARSCI, which is probably not the kind of ‘catchy’ the originators were after!

  • Pingback: itgEvangelist (Steven Romero)

  • Pingback: kareemshaker (Kareem Shaker)

  • Pingback: projektlotse (andrea hammer)

  • Pingback: itgEvangelist (Steven Romero)

  • Tariq Amin, PMP, PRINCE2 Practitioner, CKM

    Given the heightened awareness towards governance, I am in the opinion that the current RACI approach should evolve.

  • Elizabeth Souza

    Hi,

    great information. Now, I can understand the RACI concept.
    Have you more articles about RACI and BIA?

    Thanks.

    • http://www.elizabeth-harrin.com Elizabeth

      Not at the moment, but I’ll certainly consider writing some more!

Previous post:

Next post: