Why Your RACI Becomes TBD, Nobody, Everyone, and After It Broke
· Updated · Matt Citardi
A RACI usually breaks down because it gets filled in once at kickoff and never revisited, and because Accountable goes to a group instead of a person. When nobody is singularly accountable, everyone gets consulted on everything and people find out after something breaks. Three things hold one together, and I cover each below: a named person for every A, a review at every phase gate, and ties to the governance your lab already runs.
RACI matrices tend to fail the same way: TBD, Nobody, Everyone, and Informed after it broke. Here's why, and what actually holds one together on a LIMS project.
It's not really a joke. All too often, it's a project reality. Every one of those four failure states shows up on real LIMS projects, and they show up in the same order, usually at the worst possible time.
The graphic that started this one.
Here's why, and what actually stops it.
Where R Turns Into TBD
The Responsible column usually gets filled in during the kickoff meeting, when the project looks like configuration, validation, training, go-live and it's easy to guess who owns what. Then the project moves. The person configuring instrument integrations in week three isn't the person who was in the room when the RACI got built.
Nobody updates the document, so by the time a task actually needs an owner, the RACI is describing a project that no longer exists. TBD isn't a gap in the template, it's a RACI that was never revisited past kickoff.
How A Becomes Nobody
This is the one that actually breaks projects. Accountable gets assigned to a committee, a department, or a role instead of a named person, "the IT Steering Committee is Accountable for data governance," and that reads fine on paper. In practice, a group can't be accountable.
When a decision needs to get made under pressure, whoever's least willing to own the fallout waits for someone else to move first, and the decision just doesn't happen until it's forced. Nobody isn't a missing name, it's what happens when the name was never singular.
Why C Turns Into Everyone, Every Time
Over-consulting is a symptom, not the disease. When Accountable is genuinely unclear, everyone with a stake in the outcome has to be looped in on everything, because nobody knows who's actually going to make the call. The consult list balloons as a hedge.
Fix the Accountable column and the Consulted column shrinks on its own, because people stop needing to protect themselves by being in every meeting.
The Cost of I Landing After It Broke
This is where it gets expensive, and where it gets regulatory teeth. Informed should mean stakeholders know a decision is coming or has been made. When A and C are broken, Informed happens by accident, usually when something fails and the people who needed to know are finding out from the incident instead of the plan.
In a GxP environment, "found out after it broke" isn't just a communication failure, it's a finding waiting to happen.
A RACI That Holds Up Past Kickoff
Three things separate a RACI that survives contact with the project from one that becomes a meme.
Accountable gets a name, never a group. If the honest answer is "the committee decides," someone on that committee is still the one who calls the vote. Write that person down.
The RACI gets revisited at every phase gate, not just at kickoff. Configuration, validation, training, and go-live are different projects wearing the same timeline. The people doing the work change. The document should change with them.
It gets tied to the governance the lab already runs decisions through. Change control, validation sign-off, deviation review, whatever that structure already is, the RACI should point at it instead of existing as a separate artifact nobody opens after week one.
None of this is complicated. It's also almost never done, which is probably why you were laughing at that graphic instead of shrugging it off. Think it through once, plan for the phase gates, and the RACI stays a tool instead of a punchline.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a RACI matrix on a LIMS project?
A RACI matrix sets out, for each task or decision, who is Responsible for the work, who is Accountable for the outcome, who is Consulted, and who is Informed. On a LIMS project it usually gets filled in at the kickoff meeting, across configuration, validation, training, and go-live.
Who should be Accountable on a LIMS project?
A named person, never a group. Assigning Accountable to a committee or department reads fine on paper, but a group can't be accountable, and decisions stall until they are forced. If the committee decides, write down the person on it who calls the vote.
How often should a RACI be updated?
At every phase gate, not just at kickoff. Configuration, validation, training, and go-live are different projects wearing the same timeline, and the people doing the work change between them. The RACI should change with them.
Want more patterns like these? Spin the LIMS Cog and switch to The Project for common issues from vendor selection to go-live.
If your project's RACI looks more like the graphic than a working document, schedule a consultation before it costs you a finding.