Organization Align

RACI

RACI names who is responsible, accountable, consulted, and informed, so a piece of work has one owner.

The questionFor each piece of this work, who does it, who answers for it, who must be asked first, and who only needs to be told?

Also called a responsibility assignment matrix, RACI chart, or linear responsibility chart. Pronounced RAY-see.

Matrix · Project management practice, Date unclear

Task	Sponsor	Project lead	Team member	Reviewer
Approve scope	A	R	C	I
Draft the plan	I	A	R	C
Review the deliverable	I	A	C	R
Report status	I	A/R	C	-

Illustrative example of a small RACI matrix. Each row has exactly one A.

When to use it

A cross-functional process such as month-end close or a product launch has steps that two or three people each assume someone else is handling.
A reorganization moved work between teams and nobody has rewritten who approves what.
A project is starting with people from several departments, and ownership needs to be agreed at kickoff.
Handoffs fail repeatedly and escalations keep going to the wrong person.

When to avoid it

The real problem is that the owner lacks authority, budget, or time. The matrix will assign the work and leave that unfixed.
The work sits in one team and everyone already knows who owns what. The chart is overhead.
The contested question is who decides something high-stakes. Decision-roles tools such as DACI or RAPID separate the person who recommends from the one who decides.
The work is exploratory and roles will change every week. The matrix will be out of date by the time it is circulated.

Overview

RACI assigns each task or deliverable a role for every person or team involved: responsible for doing it, accountable for the result, consulted before it goes ahead, or informed after. It supports one choice: who owns each piece of work when several functions touch it. The main rule is one accountable role per row, and most of the value comes from finding the rows that have two or none.

The matrix settles who is named, not whether that person has the authority, time, or budget to deliver. It also covers tasks, not contested decisions, where tools such as DACI and RAPID separate the people who recommend from the one who decides. Treat the filled grid as a set of claims to check with the people in the cells.

The four roles

Responsible

Does the work. Every row needs at least one. More than one is fine when the work is shared, but each extra name makes it harder to see who finishes it.

Accountable

Answers for the result and signs off on it. The convention is exactly one per row. The same person can be both A and R. When two people are accountable, neither is.

Consulted

Asked for input before the work goes ahead, in a two-way exchange. Each consulted role adds a wait, so each should be able to change the outcome.

Informed

Told about progress or the result, in one direction. Informing someone is not asking them. Long informed lists tend to fill up with people who asked to be included.

What it is not

A chart of authority. It names who answers for the result. It does not give that person budget, headcount, or a way to direct the people doing the work in another department.
The same thing as DACI or RAPID. Those assign roles in a single decision. RACI assigns roles across the tasks of a project or process.

The steps

List the work as rows

Write each task or deliverable as a verb and a noun, such as "approve supplier invoice." Aim for 15 to 30 rows. If you have more, split the matrix by phase or by team. What comes out is the list of rows, agreed with the people who do the work.
List roles as columns

Use roles, not names, unless one person fills one role. A job title or a team is usually the right level. What comes out is the set of columns, with no more than ten.
Assign the R, then the A

Begin with who actually does the work. Then name the single person who answers for it, normally someone with authority over the people doing it. Flag any row with no R, no A, or two As. These are the findings that matter, so mark them before moving on.
Add C and I sparingly

Consulted means a person whose view you need before work proceeds. Informed means someone told afterward. Count the Cs on each row, and for each C ask whether the outcome could change as a result of that person's input. Drop the ones where the answer is no.
Test with the people in the cells

Walk each A and R through their rows. Ask whether they accept it, have the time, and have the authority. Count the Rs and As in each column to see who is overloaded. What comes out is a revised matrix and a list of rows that need escalation.
Set a review trigger

Add the matrix to the project or process documents and name the events that call for a revision, such as a new team member, a change of scope, or a reorganization. A matrix that nobody reopens goes stale as people move.

In practice

The month-end close at a mid-sized distributor had 31 tasks, and the controller suspected that a handful of them had no owner. A first draft of the matrix took ninety minutes to complete with the finance team in the room, with tasks as rows and seven roles as columns. It showed three problems. Five rows had no accountable role. Two rows had two: both the plant accountant and the regional finance manager signed off on inventory accruals, each assuming the other had checked the numbers. The revenue review listed six consulted roles, and the team admitted that two of them had never changed anything.

The controller took the five orphaned rows and named the regional finance manager as the sole A for accruals. The consulted roles on the revenue review dropped to two. Each A was then given a due time in the close calendar, so that a missed sign-off showed up as a name on a date.

What you leave with

A matrix with one accountable role in every row.
A list of rows that were disputed, each with a resolution or a named person to escalate to.
A count of R and A assignments in each column, showing who is overloaded.
A review trigger and an owner for keeping the matrix current.

Failure points

Two accountable roles, or none

Shared accountability turns out to mean that nobody owns the result. The grid looks complete unless each row is checked for exactly one A.

An accountable role with no power over the doers

The A answers for the result, but the Rs report elsewhere. Every request becomes a negotiation or an escalation, and the A gets blamed for work they could not direct.

Too many consulted roles

Consultation becomes a veto in practice, and each C adds a wait. The work slows, and people begin to route around the process.

A chart made in a workshop and filed

Everyone agrees in the room. Nobody checks the matrix again, people change jobs, and the chart describes an organization that no longer exists.

Roles assigned without a capacity check

A named person is accountable for forty rows and responsible for twelve of them. The chart is complete on paper, and the work still lacks an owner who has time for it.

The failures above are usually Stakeholder Algebra: while the analysis was precise, the people who decide were not handled correctly.

Origin

RACI descends from responsibility assignment matrices and linear responsibility charts used in project and organization management. No single originator can be named with confidence, and the Project Management Institute's PMBOK Guide discusses the technique without owning it. There is no trademark on RACI.

Variants add or swap letters. RASCI adds a role for support. CAIRO and similar versions add a role for people who are explicitly left out. DACI uses driver, approver, contributor, and informed, and is usually applied to decisions. RAPID, which stands for recommend, agree, perform, input, and decide, is a separate decision-roles tool published by Bain and Company in 2006 and is a registered Bain trademark. It is related to RACI and should not be described as RACI.