Responsibilities Project RACI matrix
The RACI matrix assigns four roles to each activity of a project, and the exercise is well documented. Two points are much less so, and they decide whether the matrix will be used: the single-accountable rule, held as a constraint and not as a piece of advice, and the fact that a responsibility matrix does not stop at the door of your organization.
The four letters, without ambiguity.
The most frequent confusion concerns the first two, and it comes from translation.
R, Responsible
The one who does the work. There can be several on the same activity, and that is normal.
A, Accountable
The one who answers for the result before the others. There is only one, never two.
C, Consulted
Their opinion is required before the decision. Consulting them afterwards is not consulting them.
I, Informed
Told afterwards, with no right of veto. It is the most widely distributed letter, and the least costly.
Five steps, in this order.
1. List activities, not tasks. An activity is something someone must answer for: "approve the specifications", "accept work package 2", "decide on a milestone postponement". If the line cannot be approved, it has no place in the matrix.
2. List the roles, on both sides. Those of the supplier, and those of the client. It is the step almost no one takes, and it changes everything else.
3. Place the As before anything else. Only one per row. Starting there forces you to settle right away the question that matters: who answers for this activity.
4. Complete the Rs, then the Cs, then the Is. In that order, because each letter costs less and less to assign.
5. Review by row and by column. A row with no R is carried by no one. A column overloaded with As points to a bottleneck, and it is usually the person who goes on leave at the wrong moment.
One accountable person per activity, and it is not negotiable.
The web mentions it. Almost no one holds it as a constraint, and that is where matrices become decorative.
Two accountable people means none
When two people answer for the same activity, each assumes the other has decided. The decision waits, and no one is at fault.
Zero accountable people is worse
A decision with no owner is the most common cause of projects that bog down. It appears in no minutes, since no one carried it.
This is why the rule deserves to be carried by the tool rather than by discipline. A matrix kept in a spreadsheet accepts two As without complaint; a matrix kept as an entry constraint forces a decision at the moment the question arises, which is the right moment.
The RACI that stops at the client's door.
Every published matrix assigns roles inside a single organization. They implicitly assume the project plays out at your end. Yet, on a contracted project, the client carries As and Rs: they approve specifications, they accept deliverables, they provide access, they decide business priorities.
The consequence is immediate and everyone has lived it: the client's delay is written down nowhere. An acceptance that waits three weeks on the client side appears in your schedule as a slip, with nothing to establish where it comes from. At invoice time, the discussion is then about recollections.
A two-sided matrix does not make the relationship harder. It makes it symmetrical: your delay is traceable, the client's too, and both are recorded instead of argued. This is exactly what operational commitment management equips.
A standard two-sided matrix, ready to reuse.
Seven activities that come back on almost every supervised project, distributed on both sides of the contractual link. To be adapted, not applied as it stands.
| Activity | Supplier project director | Supplier project manager | Client sponsor | Client business lead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Write the specifications | C | R / A | I | C |
| Approve the specifications | C | R | I | A |
| Produce the work package | A | R | I | I |
| Accept the work package | I | C | I | A / R |
| Provide access and environments | I | C | A | R |
| Decide on a milestone postponement | R | C | A | C |
| Decide on an amendment | R | I | A | C |
SOURCE Outline drawn from orgatypik practice, tested on supervised projects in IT services companies. The As in bold are those that fall to the client: they are the ones missing from the usual matrices.
RASCI, RACI-VS, DACI: one line each.
RASCI adds an S for "Support": the one who helps the responsible person without answering for the result. Useful when an activity mobilizes several teams.
RACI-VS adds a V for "Verifier" and an S for "Signatory". Relevant in a regulated environment, heavy elsewhere.
DACI shifts the emphasis to the decision: Driver, Approver, Contributor, Informed. It is the variant closest to the spirit of operational commitment management, because it names the one who drives the decision.
The choice matters less than one thinks. A four-letter matrix held seriously is worth more than a six-letter matrix filled in once.
In pylotik.
The matrix stops being a project kick-off document and becomes a property of the tool.
One matrix per type of project
It is proposed at the start, then adjusted. You do not start from a blank sheet on every deal.
Roles on both sides of the contract
The client has its own roles, with its approvals. The delay that falls to them is seen like yours.
The single-accountable rule, enforced
It is not an instruction in a guide: it is a constraint at the moment responsibility is assigned.
Rights deduced from positions
Governance positions open the corresponding access. There is no rights matrix to maintain alongside the responsibility matrix.
The overall framework is on project governance. The full tour is on the product page, and the contractual modes on the commitment levels.
What we are asked about the RACI.
What is a RACI matrix?
A table that assigns, for each activity of a project, four roles: Responsible, who does the work; Accountable, who answers for the result; Consulted, whose opinion is required beforehand; Informed, told afterwards. An activity never has more than one accountable person.
Can there be two accountable people on the same activity?
No. Two accountable people amount to none: each assumes the other has decided, and the decision waits with no one at fault. If two people must weigh in, one is A and the other C.
How do you include the client in a RACI matrix?
By giving them their own rows and their own letters, on the same footing as your roles. On a contracted project, they carry As, notably on approving specifications, acceptance and providing environments.
What is the difference between RACI and RASCI?
RASCI adds an S for "Support": the one who helps the responsible person without answering for the result. It is useful when an activity mobilizes several teams, and superfluous otherwise.
When in the project should the RACI be built?
At the start, before the first production, and by reviewing it at each change of phase. Built after the fact, it documents what happened instead of organizing what is going to happen.
What should you do when the delay comes from the client?
Record it like the rest, on its date. If the matrix assigns the client the approval of an acceptance, an acceptance that waits is an attributable delay, not a grey area. It is the condition for the discussion to stay factual.
Going further.
- Project governance: bodies, roles, artifacts.
- Committee minutes: where decisions and actions are recorded.
- Operational commitment management: the definition of the category.
- The product tour: roles, rights, action logs.