How do you use the RACI matrix to manage stakeholder expectations?

Something I always do whenever I am working with stakeholders or on a cross-functional project is to 1) document and write down all the teams I am working with 2) identify their goals, aspirations and key measures of success 3) get to know them personally before working with them When you better understand who you are working with, what motivates them, and what metrics they care about, it becomes much easier to understand how to best engage with your stakeholders

I do a brainstorming exercise with my students, to assure that they're thinking at the ::::Program:::: level, so I challenge them to take the long-term, broader view necessary at that level. This has the additional benefit of identifying Program-level risks. I also have them consider two other things the 'experts' often leave out: :::stakeholder attitude :::unexpected alliances between opposing stakeholders

In my experience, RACI matrix is a useful first step in understanding the stakeholder landscape and relative influences on a strategic decision. This is useful in calibrating the potential response of different stakeholders to proposed strategic actions, and preparing communications strategies. However, users should be aware that stakeholder mapping and communication planning does not avoid the need to make difficult strategic choices between stakeholder interests. Choice is the essence of strategy - mapping helps reveal the choices and implications but doesn't make them for you.

I hate RACI matrices. With a passion. RACI is a bastardized version of a Responsibility Assignment Matrix. Four codes (R, A, C, and I) are seldom enough to clearly define who is going to do what. In addition, the distinction between "responsible" and "accountable" is unique to the project management discipline: every reputable English dictionary views them as synonyms, and so will most of your stakeholders. Better option: PARIS. Or roll your own.

One thing I've found helpful is adding an extra letter: S. S stands for support. The people listed under S are collaborators that can pitch in as needed but aren't accountable, or responsible, for doing work. A person under S could fall under C. I make a distinction between S and C. People under C give feedback as needed and may influence direction. People under S help accomplish an objective.

In my experience, the RACI matrix always helps program managers to run projects efficiently. It is essential to include all the stakeholders during the planning phase of the project/program. You may need to add more stakeholders to the matrix if the scope changes over the period.

A responsibility matrix helps define and align project responsibilities across all members of the project team. Without it, there's no clarification regarding who is responsible for project tasks and could cause huge issues later in the project cycle.