jump to navigation

Ramblings on RACI Matrix for Projects September 25, 2014

Posted by Edwin Ritter in Project Management.
Tags: , , , , , ,
4 comments

A lot of things need to occur to get a project started. For the project manager, understanding the basics about the project – the goal, timing, budget are some of the tasks to getting organized. Included in that understanding is who will do what tasks for the project.

A great way to get organized and develop that overall understanding about the make up of a project is to document. No, really, it is. There are several basic documents that come to mind. As separate and distinct files, those include the scope, charter, schedule and raci matrix. Each of these is important for upfront planning and also during execution of the project. I have found that writing or contributing to each of these is very helpful. Being able to communicate the knowledge of  the what, how and who during a project kick-off meeting helps get the team up to speed quickly. Most of the documents are easy to understand conceptually by their title. The last one, the responsibility matrix thing, might be a bit unclear.

Six-Sigma-RACI-MatrixEssentially, the raci matrix lists who is responsible for what on a project. As an acronym, it stands for Responsible, Accountable, Consulted and Informed. A brief definition of each will assist in why this document is useful for the project manager, the team and stakeholders.

Responsible – Those who do the work to achieve a task. There is typically one role with a participation type of Responsible.

Accountable – Those who are ultimately accountable for the correct and thorough completion of the deliverable or task, and the one to whom Responsible is accountable. Typically, the Process Owner is Accountable for a process, and there must be only one Accountable specified for each task or deliverable.

Consulted – Those who are not directly involved in a process but provide inputs and whose opinions are sought.

Informed – Those who receive outputs from a process or are kept up-to-date on progress, often only on completion of the task or deliverable.

There is a variation that includes another role for support. There are templates available for a RASCI as well. The ‘s’ stands for support and the definition is :

Support – Resources allocated to Responsible. Unlike Consulted, who may provide input to the task, Support will assist in completing the task.

=====================================================

The RACI matrix is not only used in project management. It is used in other IT processes and methodologies. The RACI matrix is part of the ITIL process for service design and driving service improvement. For Six Sigma methodology, the RACI matrix reflects the basic principles of the process.

Having a RACI helps everyone understand the specific interactions and dependencies involved with the who and what on a project. The RACI matrix is useful for communicating across the organization when a project needs support. This can be very useful in matrixed organizations and reduce the overall time required to get resources.

RACI MatrixAn example of a RACI Matrix will help show the value. Here is a sample matrix that will use SharePoint. From this visual,  you can quickly determine who does what.

On this sample, you can see the project manager is accountable for almost everything. Additionally, you can see what each person on the team owns and will drive to completion. A subtle point here in that it also indicates what tasks each person should plan, be involved with for, or otherwise be aware of. From my experience, it also visually emphasizes teamwork and that a team effort is required to deliver the project. Note – the astute among you will notice that the example matrixes shown in this post are transposed. However they are oriented, the concept remains the same.

Comments invited on this tool in project management, ITIL or Six Sigma.

Advertisements

Making Decisions with Data March 25, 2014

Posted by Edwin Ritter in Miscellaneous, Project Management.
Tags: , , , , ,
add a comment

How familiar is this phrase “We are going to be data driven”? I have heard this a few times in my career. Great concept and useful to manage a business if you are serious and use it consistently. However, when crunch time comes, and everyone’s nerves are worn thin, how many managers stick with the data vs. using their instinct to make a decision?

No one intends to make a poor or bad decision. Assumptions can be wrong; risks occur that are not foreseen. It happens.

The concept is obvious of course, but, one of the most effective ways to make a decision is to use solid data. What is not obvious is the process to define, collect and evaluate data to make an informed choice. Other real world considerations like time, money and deadlines may circumvent staying true to a data driven process.

Decision Matrix

Decision Matrix

All things being equal and when there is adequate time, the process I most prefer uses selected weighting on a set of criteria. The process is commonly known as root cause analysis as a decision making  method. Most refer to this process as Kepner-Tregoe analysis. It is named after the two people who invented the concept and today, their company is a multi-national consulting company. This method is one widget in the Six Sigma toolkit and is considered part of ITIL practices for problem management.

An overview of process includes :

  1. State the issue, problem, and decision to be made.
  2. Explain the use of the decision matrix technique to participants.
  3. Draft a matrix … with candidate choices positioned as rows and criteria as columns.
  4. Weigh the criteria, if required (e.g., 1-5 weight).
  5. Rate each choice within each decision/selection criteria (e.g, 1-5 score – do not rank here).
  6. Multiply the rating by its relative weight to determine weighted score.
  7. Total the scores.
  8. Review results and evaluate, using common sense and good judgment.
  9. Reach consensus.

Once complete, you have criteria and weighting configured in the decision matrix. When evaluating choices, the score helps narrow the discussion to the best choice(s). The discussions on reviewing the results can lead to animated discussions. Ultimately, the best choice comes down confidence in what the numbers tell you. I like to include a tie-breaker or ‘other’ category in the matrix and give it a small weighting of 5 to 10%. That allows a way to include intangibles discovered during the evaluation. Depending on the score for that facet, it can illuminate the best choice and help the team decide between two otherwise equal choices.

This evaluation process can be used for a range of  situations where decisions must be made. I have used this for vendor selection, candidate interviews and for strategy roadmaps. In the end, having data can confirm your choice and give confidence. Using this framework also minimizes biases and leads to an improved appreciation of choices you would not have considered otherwise. Having data is always good; having a process to make a choice with that data is even better.

What process do you use to decide?