Why projects should start with decisions—not responsibilities.

Walk into almost any project kick-off workshop and, sooner or later, someone suggests creating a RACI.  It has become almost instinctive.  This starts with:

• Who’s Responsible?
• Who’s Accountable?
• Who do we Consult?
• Who do we keep Informed?

There is nothing inherently wrong with RACI. For decades it has helped projects clarify responsibilities, reduce duplication and improve communication.  The problem is that it answers the wrong question first. Projects don’t succeed because everyone knows their responsibilities.  Projects succeed because the right decisions are made at the right time by the right people.  That is a fundamentally different way of thinking that I believe the industry needs to change to.

The Most Expensive Thing on a Project Isn’t the Wrong Decision 
One of the biggest hidden costs on major projects isn’t making the wrong decision.  It’s not making one at all.  Every day a critical decision is delayed, the project continues to burn cash. Designers continue refining options. Commercial and assurance teams keep analysing scenarios. Environmental and early works specialists complete further investigations. Contractors remain mobilised. Project management offices continue coordinating meetings, producing reports and updating programmes.  The project feels busy.  People are working incredibly hard.  Yet no real progress is being made because the one decision needed to unlock the next stage hasn’t occurred.

On major infrastructure projects, daily burn rates can easily reach hundreds of thousands of dollars or more once consultants, contractors, project participants and client teams are fully mobilised. On the largest programmes, the cost of waiting can exceed many million dollars every week. Every week spent waiting for a decision is another week of salaries, overhead, plant, offices, overheads and opportunity cost, with little additional value being created.

The irony is that organisations often focus intensely on negotiating consultant fees or contractor margins while paying far less attention to the much larger cost of delayed decision-making. A two-week delay in obtaining a key approval can easily wipe out years of savings achieved through procurement negotiations.  That’s why the fastest projects are rarely those with the smartest people, the biggest budgets or even the best programmes.  They’re the ones with the clearest decision-making framework.

The Rise of Decision-led Project Delivery 
One of the most exciting developments in infrastructure delivery in recent times has been NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) Waka Kotahi’s Decision-led Approach for Project Development.  This fantastic guide is one that BRS has had the pleasure of now working with on a number of NZTA projects that have implemented this successfully as a way of working.

Rather than driving projects through a sequence of reports, business cases and gateways, the approach starts with a much simpler question:

What Decision are We Trying to Enable? 
Every workshop.  Every investigation.  Every report.  Every piece of analysis or evidence.  They all exist for one purpose—to support a decision.  That is a profound shift in thinking.

Instead of asking teams to produce more documents, the approach asks them to produce enough evidence for confident decision-making.  It encourages projects to identify critical decisions early, understand what information decision-makers actually need, avoid unnecessary analysis, and resist reopening decisions unless circumstances genuinely change i.e. not relitigating decisions previously made.  In many ways, this is exactly how high-performing organisations operate.  They don’t manage documents.  They manage and enable decisions.

RACI Starts Too Late 
Traditional RACI workshops on early stage infrastructure projects usually begin with activities and discussions including:

• Prepare the options assessment
• Complete the environmental investigations
• Develop the cost estimate
• Prepare the procurement strategy

Then someone asks:  “Who’s responsible?”  But there is a problem.  Activities only exist because they support decisions.  Without understanding the decision first, responsibility becomes blurred.
We’ve all heard comments like:

• “I thought they were making that decision.”
• “I assumed governance would decide.”
• “Who do we need to consult or speak to?”
• “We didn’t know we had the authority.”
• “Why are we even doing this work?”

These aren’t responsibility problems.  They’re decision and governance problems.

Introducing DARCSI 
Instead of starting with RACI, I believe projects should begin with DARCSI which is:

• D – Decision
• A – Accountable
• R – Responsible
• C – Consult
• S – Support
• I – Informed

Notice what comes first.  Decision.  Everything else flows from that.

Start Every Workshop With One Question 

Before assigning roles, ask:
What decision needs to be made?  Not next month.  Not at the next gateway review or critical milestone.  Not eventually.  What is the next meaningful decision that moves this project forward?

Examples might include:

• Should we proceed to option development?
• Which corridor should be protected?
• Has the preferred option demonstrated sufficient value?
• Should procurement commence?
• Is the project ready for investment approval?
• Is this design mature enough to release to construction?

Once the decision is clear, the rest becomes remarkably simple.

The Power of Decision Ownership 
The D in DARCSI forces project teams to answer questions that are too often overlooked.  This includes:

• What exactly is being decided?
• Who has the authority to make that decision?
• When does it need to be made?
• What evidence is required?
• What risks or opportunities influence the decision?
• What happens if the decision is delayed?

Only then do you assign accountability.  This creates genuine role clarity.  Not role clarity based on activities or busyness.  Role clarity based on decisions.

Accountability Suddenly Becomes Obvious 
Once the decision (D) has been defined, accountability becomes much clearer.  One person is accountable (A) for obtaining the decision.  Others become responsible (R) for producing the evidence.  Specialists provide advice or are consulted (C).  Technical experts support (S) delivery.  Stakeholders are informed (I).  The conversation shifts from task allocation to governance and decision making.  And that is where real project leadership begins.

DARCSI Is a Project Acceleration Tool 
DARCSI isn’t simply another role clarification framework.  It’s a project acceleration tool.  By explicitly identifying every critical decision, assigning ownership of that decision, agreeing what evidence or analysis is required and understanding who needs to contribute, projects dramatically reduce the waiting time between phases.

Instead of everyone asking, “Who’s responsible?”, the team is asking: “What decision are we enabling today?”

Work becomes more focused.  Meetings become shorter.  Reports become more purposeful.  Governance becomes more effective and intentional.  Most importantly, expensive project teams spend less time waiting and more time delivering.

Better Governance, Faster Projects 
One of the strongest messages from the Decision-led Approach is that projects should make decisions earlier, narrow uncertainty sooner, maintain affordability throughout delivery and avoid revisiting decisions unnecessarily.  That has enormous implications.  Many projects don’t run late because people aren’t working hard.  They run late because decisions aren’t being made.  Or worse…Nobody actually knows who is supposed to make them.  The consequence isn’t simply frustration.  It’s delay.  It’s wasted effort.  It’s escalating costs.  It’s lost opportunities.

What a DARCSI Looks Like 
Imagine a simple table as described below.

Notice that the conversation in the table starts with the decision.  Everything else revolves around enabling it.

A Small Change That Changes Everything 
Replacing RACI with DARCSI might appear to be a minor adjustment.  It isn’t.  It fundamentally changes the conversation from:
“Who owns this task?” 
to
“What decision are we trying to enable?” 
That one question aligns governance, assurance, leadership and delivery around what actually creates value.  Projects exist to make decisions.  Everything else is simply evidence to support this.

Final Thoughts
Perhaps it’s time we stopped asking project teams to complete another RACI.  Instead, let’s ask them to identify the critical decisions that will determine the success of the project.  Because when decisions become clear…

• Roles become obvious
• Governance becomes stronger and more transparent
• Teams become aligned and more collaborative
• Delivery accelerates
• Costs reduce
• And projects spend less time producing documents—and more time creating and delivering outcomes

After all, projects don’t move at the speed of design.  They don’t move at the speed of construction.  Projects move at the speed of decisions.  And that’s why I believe the future isn’t RACI.  It’s DARCSI.

A special thanks to NZTA and their staff in having the insight to implementing the decision led approach to their projects.  It is a proactive step forward in delivering better outcomes for their communities and stakeholders.