[Build] RACI (responsible, accountable, consulted, informed)

[Naomi Most]

You guys are making a very convincing argument for coming up with our own terms.

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Shannon Lee <shannon at scatter.com> wrote:
> The person doing a task always ends up, to one extent or another, deferring
> to the Cost of the task: the cost in time, the cost in effort, the cost in
> money and social capital. In order to prevent the Costs from becoming the
> ultimate arbiter of what gets done, someone else should be responsible for
> looking out for the Value of the project: making sure that what's being done
> is done completely and as it needs to be in the end.
>
> I think that the Responsible party (in RACI) should have the authority they
> need to get tasks done; the Accountable party should have the authority to
> tell the Responsible party whether they're done or not. Some of you will
> recognize this as a Product Owner / Dev Lead split.
>
> --S
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Michael Schaffer <mwschaffer at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Thank you David for that clarification.
>>
>> In my experience, the one "rule" is that Responsibility and Authority
>> should be closely bound.  If you carry the responsibility (for getting
>> something done), you need the Authority to make decisions (for example, to
>> spend money).  The "responsible" party is the one that sets the direction
>> ... the "what", in terms of "what are we doing?", and perhaps "why?"
>>
>> David's renaming of "Accountable" to "Assists" is helpful, in that it
>> clarifies that those people are supporting the decisions and direction of
>> the Responsible party.
>>
>> That said, a good "Responsible" party should use his/her team (of all the
>> other roles) to build consensus and seek expertise wherever it resides.  The
>> "Assisters" (the "doers") need enough authority to execute the plan (they
>> are responsible for the "how", as "How are we going to do this task?")
>>
>> ---
>>
>> I hope that bit of Management 101 is useful.
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------------------
>> Michael Schaffer
>> mwschaffer at gmail.com
>> ---
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 9:43 AM, davidfine <d at vidfine.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Wish I could have been there to clarify how the RACI model was used at my
>>> nonprofit. (We used the version called DARCI because it was less of a flat
>>> hierarchy).
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_assignment_matrix#RACI_.28alternative_scheme.29
>>>
>>> Responsible There should be exactly one person with this assignment for
>>> each task.  They delegate and work and make sure their team has everything
>>> they need to get it done to spec. They make adjustments to the plan as
>>> needed. They are the point of contact, and the one that reports back about
>>> progress. They are the one person whose neck is on the line.
>>> Assists aka Accountable
>>> Those who assist completion of the task. The worker bees. Most tasks will
>>> have many, all coordinated by the 'Responsible'. They often have more
>>> expertise in their work than the 'R' does, so they get to choose what tools
>>> to use and other specifics that weren't covered by the spec. For small tasks
>>> the 'R' and 'A' may be the same person.
>>> Consulted Those whose opinions are sought; and with whom there is two-way
>>> communication. Outside experts. Other teams who will be impacted by your
>>> work.
>>> Informed Those who are kept up-to-date on progress; and with whom there
>>> is one-way communication. The mailing list.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/25/14, 7:25 AM, Naomi Most wrote:
>>>
>>> Greetings Rebooters,
>>>
>>> TL;DR -- if your name was on the board yesterday, please start a
>>> thread right now on the Build list to describe your area(s) of
>>> Accountability and recruit help.
>>>
>>> We talked last night about using the "Responsibility Assignment
>>> Matrix" to manage our projects.
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_assignment_matrix
>>>
>>> Click on that link to the expanded definitions.
>>>
>>> Last night we attempted to assign an "accountable" role to each
>>> project and collect any interested "consulting" or "responsible"
>>> roles.
>>>
>>> The "informed" role goes to the Build mailing list.  I'll read it
>>> obsessively and occasionally pry for more information when I think
>>> someone's missed some information that another project needs.
>>>
>>> CONCERNS about this system:
>>>
>>> There was a lot of mixup between "accountable" and "responsible" in
>>> our discussion last night.  I was a little sleep-deprived and couldn't
>>> keep them straight myself.
>>>
>>> We may want to make the world easier *and* more fun for ourselves by
>>> making up our own parallel system.  For example:
>>>
>>> Accountable = BOFH
>>> Responsible = Developer
>>> Consulted = Bikeshedder
>>> Informed = Mailing List
>>>
>>> (We can do better than that, of course.)
>>>
>>> Or we can just all agree to get really good at knowing the difference
>>> between "responsible" and "accountable", but as a user interface, I
>>> wouldn't call this nomenclature intuitive.
>>>
>>> DISCUSS!  :)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Naomi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Build mailing list
>>> Build at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/build
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Build mailing list
>> Build at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/build
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Shannon Lee
> (503) 539-3700
>
> "Any sufficiently slow descent into barbarism is indistinguishable from
> normalcy."
>
> -- @mediapathic
>
> _______________________________________________
> Build mailing list
> Build at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/build
>



-- 
Naomi Theora Most
naomi at nthmost.com
+1-415-728-7490

skype: nthmost

http://twitter.com/nthmost