3 good reasons why you should kick committees out of your RACI

It is the worst illness in the workplace.

Do you know her?

Acute reunionitis.

You know, people get together for ages to get the illusion that they are aware of the main decisions to make.

In the end, nothing is decided. Or in contradiction with corridor committees.

It's not easy to put that in RACI of procedures, isn't it?

You know, in my consulting life, I have often participated in these committees steering committees, steering committees (yes, in English, it's more chic...), management committees, leadership team meetings...

In short, places where you are supposed to decide important things.

What I have often noticed is that these committees are in fact only registrars, a kind of registry that only acts on decisions already taken in the corridors by those who really have power.

So of course, it's part of the company's political game and I have nothing against that.

Fortunately, it exists because it is a way of moving projects forward.

On the other hand, the problem arises when it is necessary to show the decision-making committees in the RACI, the responsibility tables, in the procedures.

I recently corrected a procedure at a client that concerned the management of internal audits.

One of the roles of RACI was”Quality Council“(Quality Council). It is a kind of advice from wise quality specialists who are supposed to make decisions on any quality event that may impact product quality, patient safety or compliance with regulations.

And then I asked the question of “who” is”Quality Council“.

Can we shake his hand when everything is fine,

or Cut off his head if something really went wrong ?

Well, total white.

The writer of the procedure did not know who was”Quality Council“.

In summary, we have a role in the RACI who has responsibilities or accountability, but who is impalpable. It does not exist.

Now I'm going to show you 3 good reasons why you should kick committees out of your RACI.

A committee is not a role, but a task.

In theory, a committee is used to endorse decisions prepared in advance or debated in depth at the time.

So a committee is above all an action to take a decision.

In your RACI, instead of setting up a committee, you set up a “Decide to...” task.

In this task, start by identifying in C (as “consulted”), all members of the committee.

In I (for “informed”), identify the people who need to know the decision made in order to be able to carry out the tasks that will follow and who would not be present on the committee.

At least you identify the formal decision-making steps in your procedures, and that's already a first step in clarifying responsibilities.

You can also find the content of this article on our YouTube channel, and subscribe 👍

Give the power to remove RACI committees.

The major problem of committee, it is non-decision, with the endless search for improbable consensus.

We go in circles, we don't decide anything, we waste time and the teams waiting for decisions are getting impatient.

In short, it is rowing...

To avoid dragging on for too long, on the decision task, put one of the participating roles like “R” (responsible).

I know it's hard because by doing so you're clearly telling person R the decision task and all the other C's that there is a boss on board and that he or she is the one who decides in the end.

You are officially giving power, in broad daylight and clarifying an important responsibility.

Appoint a guardian of the temple.

One committee must make decisions, that's his role!

If the committee is dysfunctional or bypassed by hallway discussions, then it loses its impact and is useless.

A committee must be protected and someone must have the responsibility to ensure that this committee turns and delivers its decisions on time.

A temple keeper is needed.

To do this, put Accoutable the chairman of the committee.

Moreover, he may be the “R” of the committee as well, but not always.

A committee can have several types of decisions to make with different “Rs” depending on the nature of the decision and the “A” will be the chairman for all types of decisions.

In this way, if the committee malfunctions or makes the wrong decisions repeatedly, certainly the “Rs” will jump like champagne corks, but the “A” will get his head cut off as well.

Once again, it is a logic of clarification of responsibilities.

The final word.

You are free to share this content with your teams who are in charge of documentation and training.

Have them check the RACI and help them figure out who is A for each committee and who is R in each type of decision.

Be aware that by doing so, you will clean up responsibilities for the good of your business.

You can also get free access to a portion of our training on document simplification and the improvement of training in your company.

See you on the other side.

See you soon!