On capturing responsibilities or why RACI or DACI are too complicated

More and more companies are using frameworks like DACI, RACI and RAPID in an attempt to improve decision-making by assigning clearer decision-making responsibilities. In theory, many of these frameworks make a lot of sense. In practice, I have not seen them work well.

All of these frameworks introduce specific roles to make decisions. Here’s what the commonly used acronyms stand for:

• RAM — Responsibility Accountability Matrix
• RACI — Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed
• DACI — Drivers, Approvers, Contributors, and Informed
• RAPID — Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, and Decide

There are many other frameworks: RATSI, RAXIQ, RACIO, PACSI, CLAM.

Why is there a need for all these frameworks and why don’t they work as advertised? Many of these frameworks seem good on paper. Yet, in practice, they are too complicated.

First of all, these frameworks tend to overly specify (legislate) what, in a well run team, happens organically.
When working through a problem and debating options, you don’t think in canned roles. You work through it as a group.

The problem is that Approvers often have a hard time staying in their role. Rather than reviewing and approving final decisions, most have learned to lead by controlling or influencing the decision-making process itself…