Recently, I had another opportunity to engage with DACI as a tool. \u00a0In my previous post on this topic<\/a>, my central point was that while RACI is best for discrete projects, DACI functions well for ongoing ownership of processes.\u00a0 While I still believe this to be the case at large, this project gave me some food for thought.<\/p>\n Specifically: the key to selecting a model should be based on how you structure accountability, and what implications that has to a successful workflow.\u00a0 As an aside, if you are looking to develop workflows, check out these posts: Business Cartography<\/a>, Business Cartography 2<\/a><\/p>\n The team was committed to using DACI.\u00a0 This commitment meant that my team had to work through how to structure DACI to support discrete projects.\u00a0 We ran into some challenges with this in a few key areas:<\/p>\n To not bury the lead too far: DACI proved useful for this team in managing these discrete projects.\u00a0 However, there were characteristics of the team that impacted this.\u00a0 When evaluating models, there are lots of internal and org cultural things to consider.<\/p>\n Here is what we learned in a nice and easy numbered list.<\/p>\n A core premise of the DACI model is the driver.\u00a0 This is the person who makes sure that the project or process continues moving forward.\u00a0 They get the people together and make happen what needs to happen.\u00a0 During the project, a big question that came up was should the driver change depending on the step in the workflow?<\/p>\n The answer is no.\u00a0 It is crucial that the driver be consistent throughout.\u00a0 If you are going to be shifting the person in this role from step to step, then use RACI.\u00a0 This is because if you are going to assign a driver, that person needs to have the full picture and context of the effort.\u00a0 Anything less will cause drag as context naturally degrades in hand-offs.<\/p>\n In RACI, it is easy to move accountability around depending on the step.\u00a0 If the project is in a creative development stage, then whoever manages that team or project is accountable to seeing it move forward.\u00a0 When projects are broken cleanly into steps, this is easy as the accountability for each step is discrete.\u00a0 However, this falls short because sometimes ownership of the overall project gets lost.<\/p>\n However, with DACI, accountability should always sit with the driver.\u00a0 The driver is ideally the person accountable to the results of the effort, and thus should hold that capital A.\u00a0 At the end of the day, someone needs to hold the wheel (har har).<\/p>\n The trick with this is that sometimes accountability is going to sit with someone who doesn\u2019t have direct control over the team working on a particular step.\u00a0 This means they might be limited in their power to push their effort forward.\u00a0 Leaders should be thinking about how to maintain flexibility for the driver here.<\/p>\n That being said, it does encourage the driver to be actively collaborating with team leads to ensure things are getting done.<\/p>\n If your organization has strong collaboration, DACI can be great.\u00a0 But for siloed teams, you will run into challenges here.<\/p>\n Organizations, particularly large ones, struggle to promote collaboration.\u00a0 Teams tend to operate in siloes.\u00a0 Division of labor is natural.\u00a0 However, if you are going to use DACI, you need a strong culture of collaboration.\u00a0 This is a tricky area for many companies.<\/p>\n In a RACI-structure it is easier to have a siloed team manage their process internally and do their work since accountability can be assigned to that team leader for that step.\u00a0 This isn\u2019t to say that collaboration doesn\u2019t happen, but more that there are defined areas where each team gives their input, and then hands-off to the next.<\/p>\n In DACI, the accountable party is consistent across steps (assuming you keep the driver consistent).\u00a0 This means they have to drive collaboration from other teams.\u00a0 If you don\u2019t have a good culture for this, then they will repeatedly run into walls and delays as teams have other priorities.<\/p>\n This requires some internal honesty, because everyone wants to say their team is super collaborative.\u00a0 But are you?\u00a0 Really?<\/p>\n However, marketing doesn\u2019t often work that way.\u00a0 If your team puts out work that looks different from project to project, having a single individual who holds the whole picture and all the context is beneficial.\u00a0 Accountability sticks with this person, so they must maintain that vision throughout the project.\u00a0 As mentioned before, context degrades with every hand-off, so when the context is unique to the project then it should really be held by a single driver.<\/p>\n There are plenty of things to consider in RACI vs. DACI, but if you are looking into expanding your process then you are likely talking a lot about accountability.\u00a0 This is the most important consideration when selecting your model.<\/p>\n Don\u2019t just think about how you want accountability to work, the bigger (and better) question is: how does accountability best serve your projects?\u00a0 Accountability is a tool for leaders to both empower their people and to ensure that things are getting done.\u00a0 Think about how you want to use it and decide your structure based on that.<\/p>\n And if you have any questions, feel free to reach out!<\/p>\n The post RACI vs. DACI 2: Deciding on Accountability<\/a> appeared first on Heinz Marketing<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" By Tom Swanson, Senior Engagement Manager at Heinz Marketing Recently, I had another opportunity to engage with DACI as a tool. \u00a0In my previous post on this topic, my central point was that while RACI is best for discrete projects, DACI functions well for ongoing ownership of processes.\u00a0 While I still believe this to be […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":99512,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[98],"tags":[14930,46460,25608,46459],"dealstore":[],"offerexpiration":[],"class_list":["post-99511","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-marketing","tag-accountability","tag-daci","tag-deciding","tag-raci"],"yoast_head":"\n![\"MO](\"https:\/\/www.heinzmarketing.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Marketing-orchestration-scorecard-cta2.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
The driver does not change.<\/h2>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
\n
The driver is accountable.<\/h2>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
\n
DACI demands a solid collaboration culture.<\/h2>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
\n
DACI is best when there is variability in outputs.<\/h2>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.heinzmarketing.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/DALL\u00b7E-2025-02-19-17.18.27-A-stylish-business-centric-black-and-white-illustration-featuring-two-assembly-lines.-The-design-should-be-clean-modern-and-professional-with-cr-768x768.webp\")
RACI works great when the outputs are standardized.\u00a0 If accountability is going to shift from step to step, it is key that the expectations of the outputs are always the same.<\/div>\nConclusion<\/h2>\n