Get this template emailed to you
Three fields. Lands in your inbox in a couple of minutes. No drip campaign.
Sent.
If it doesn't show up in 5 minutes, check spam or reply to hello@servantium.com.
| Phase | Task | Servantium SA | Cust Project Lead | SME Sales | Account Exec | Validation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Discovery & Planning | Solution design document | R | A | C | I | OK (one A, one+ R) |
This four-sheet Excel workbook gives engagement managers and delivery leads a working RACI for a multi-party implementation by end of day. Download it, swap in your roles, and it covers four artifacts in one file: a legend and rules sheet, a shared role list (aligned with the SOW and RAID workbooks), a fully validated RACI grid worked out for a Salesforce implementation, and an Authority Matrix naming who decides what when the grid and reality disagree.
A RACI chart is a grid: rows are tasks or decisions, columns are roles, each cell holds exactly one of four letters (R does the work, A owns the outcome, C is consulted before the decision, I is kept current after), and one Accountable per row without exception. When a chart misses that structure, it is a responsibility list masquerading as a grid. Responsibility lists do not resolve disputes. PMI research finds that unclear goals and unclear role assignments are a leading cause of project failure, which is why the Validation column in Sheet 3 surfaces missing or doubled Accountable assignments before the dispute forms.
What this workbook has that generic templates don’t
This workbook adds four capabilities generic templates omit: a Validation column that flags rows with missing or doubled Accountable assignments, an Authority Matrix covering twelve decision types with escalation paths, a theme table with standing role patterns that pre-empt row-by-row debates, and a shared role list that runs across the SOW, RAID, and RACI workbooks so one org chart update touches all three.
Every free template site ships a RACI grid. Smartsheet, Vertex42, Excelx. Most of them are a Phase column, a Task column, and four letter-entry cells per role. Functional for a single-firm internal project. Not enough for a multi-party implementation where the delivery spans two SOWs and six roles across two organizations.
| Feature | Generic RACI template | This workbook |
|---|---|---|
| Grid with data validation (R/A/C/I only) | Sometimes | Yes (each cell restricted via dropdown) |
| Validation column (flags missing A or R) | No | Yes (COUNTIF returns OK or FIX per row) |
| Authority Matrix (12 decision types with escalation) | No | Yes (Sheet 4) |
| Role list shared with SOW and RAID workbooks | No | Yes (same 10 roles across all three) |
| Theme table (standing patterns for sales, customer, SI roles) | No | Yes (Sheet 1) |
| Conditional formatting (color-coded R/A/C/I) | Sometimes | Yes (read the engagement shape in 10 seconds) |
| Worked example (six phases, 30 tasks) | Rarely | Yes (Salesforce implementation) |
The Validation column is the piece most templates skip. It returns FIX when a row has zero A’s, more than one A, or zero R’s. Those three failure modes (nobody accountable, two people fighting over accountability, someone accountable for work nobody is doing) account for the majority of delivery disputes teams hit. The column surfaces them before the dispute forms, not after.
The four sheets
Sheet 1 carries the legend and standing role patterns. Sheet 2 lists the ten delivery roles shared across the SOW, RAID, and RACI workbooks. Sheet 3 is a fully worked RACI grid for a Salesforce implementation: six phases, thirty tasks, data validation restricting each cell to R/A/C/I, a Validation column (returns OK or FIX), and conditional formatting. Sheet 4 is the Authority Matrix: twelve decision types with thresholds, approver role, escalation path, and SLA.
Sheet 1, Legend and Rules. Definition cards for R, A, C, and I. The four rules printed above the grid so reviewers don’t have to recall them from memory. A theme table that captures standing patterns for sales, customer leadership, and implementation roles. Sales is always I. Customer leadership is A on strategic and delivery decisions. Implementation is R on build rows. That table answers the most common role disputes before they start.
Sheet 2, Roles. Ten roles used across the SOW, RAID, and RACI templates: Customer Executive Sponsor, Customer Project Lead, Customer SME Sales, Customer SME Service, Servantium Engagement Manager, Servantium Solution Architect, Servantium Senior Consultant, Servantium Consultant, Migration Partner Lead, Account Executive. One row per role, one column for description. The same list runs through all three workbooks.
Sheet 3, RACI Grid. A worked example for a Salesforce implementation. Six phases, thirty tasks, ten role columns, and a Validation column that returns OK or FIX based on COUNTIF rules. Data validation restricts each cell to R, A, C, I, or blank. Conditional formatting color-codes each letter so a reviewer can read the shape of the engagement in ten seconds.
Sheet 4, Authority Matrix. Twelve decision types: scope, schedule, budget, staffing, technical architecture, security, data migration, acceptance, vendor selection, resourcing, quality, and change control. Each row names the threshold that triggers the decision, the single approver role, the escalation path, and the SLA. This is the policy layer that tells you who decides when the grid and reality disagree. It plays the same role the RAID log plays for risks.
The two rules the grid enforces automatically
The Validation column in Sheet 3 enforces two rules via COUNTIF: every row needs exactly one Accountable role, and every row needs at least one Responsible role. Rows that violate either rule return FIX instead of OK. Those three failure modes (no A, two A’s, A with no R) account for the majority of delivery disputes. The column surfaces them before the dispute forms.
Every row needs exactly one A. When a row has two A’s, the engagement effectively has none: both roles point at each other when something goes wrong. The Validation column flags zero A’s and more than one A as FIX.
Every row needs at least one R. An A with no R means someone owns an outcome no one is assigned to deliver. Those rows also surface as FIX.
Two C’s per row is the practical ceiling. Past two, the Consulted roles add a meeting cost that exceeds the value of their input. I’s are cheap. Generous I’s keep stakeholders current without putting them on the critical path.
How the theme table prevents row-by-row debate
The theme table in Sheet 1 sets three standing patterns that answer the most common role disputes before they reach a team meeting. Sales is always I. Implementation is always R on build rows. Customer leadership is A on strategic and delivery decisions. When a team member challenges an assignment, the table makes the answer a one-sentence conversation rather than a negotiation.
Sales is always I. The Account Executive runs the relationship and the renewal, not the delivery. The moment a sales role becomes A on a delivery decision, the engagement has lost its anchor.
Implementation is always R on build rows. Customer leadership is A on most strategic and delivery decisions. The Customer Project Lead carries day-to-day; the Executive Sponsor carries strategic. When a data migration partner is on the engagement, they are R on migration rows and C on adjacent ones.
When a team member challenges an assignment, the answer isn’t “that is how RACI works.” It’s “is this row strategic or tactical, and which of the two customer leaders owns it?” The theme table makes that a one-sentence conversation.
How the RACI connects to the SOW and RAID workbooks
The same ten roles run through the SOW, RAID log, and this RACI grid. When a role changes hands mid-engagement, update Sheet 2 once and all three workbooks reflect the change. The RACI grid phases also match the SOW worked example, so both artifacts read together without translation.
The role list is shared with the SOW template and the RAID log. The same ten roles run through scope statement, risk register, and decision architecture. The Authority Matrix on Sheet 4 is the policy layer that sits above the grid: the document you reach for when a real-world decision doesn’t fit cleanly on a task row.
For a deeper treatment of when the RACI earns its keep versus when it becomes decoration, see A RACI Chart Isn’t the Answer. Decision Architecture Is.
How to use it on Monday morning
Open Sheet 3, filter for the next two weeks of tasks, and confirm each Accountable role knows the decision is coming and has the inputs they need. Every Validation cell should read OK before the workbook goes to the customer. The first FIX row is a dispute forming two weeks in advance. That is the chart doing its job.
Frequently asked questions
-
The RAID log workbook uses the same ten roles as the RACI grid. Each RAID row references an Accountable role from the RACI, so when a risk or issue surfaces you already know who owns it. The two workbooks are designed to run off the same delivery org chart.
-
RACI is four letters: Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed. There is no fifth. Templates that add a fifth letter (often S for Support or V for Verify) usually do so to hide a missing decision rule. When a row has no clear A, adding a letter does not fix it. The four-letter grid forces the issue.
-
Yes. Sheet 2 is a simple table. Add or rename rows to match your delivery org chart. If you also use the SOW template or RAID log, keep the role names consistent across all three workbooks so you only maintain one org chart.
-
Sheet 3 uses a Salesforce engagement as the worked example, but the structure applies to any multi-party implementation. Replace the phase names and task descriptions. The Validation column logic, data validation, and conditional formatting carry over without changes.
-
When two or more companies are delivering against one outcome and their scopes touch. A single-firm project does not need it; the org chart is the authority map. For multi-party builds, the Authority Matrix on Sheet 4 is the document you reach for when a real-world decision doesn't fit cleanly on a task row and both parties disagree about who decides.
What's inside
- Sheet 1, Legend & Rules: definition cards for R, A, C, I, plus the four rules and a default-pattern theme table.
- Sheet 2, Roles: the ten roles used across the SOW, RAID, and RACI templates with descriptions.
- Sheet 3, RACI Grid: a worked Salesforce implementation. Rows are tasks grouped by phase, columns are the ten roles, cells are R, A, C, or I, with data validation and conditional formatting.
- Sheet 4, Authority Matrix: twelve decision types with thresholds, approver role, escalation path, and SLA.
Why we made this
Most RACI charts shipped by consultancies are row-oriented lists with no real grid, and many include a fifth letter that is not part of RACI. This version fixes both. It is a proper grid, the legend matches the acronym, and the role list aligns with the SOW and RAID workbooks so you can run all three off the same delivery org chart.
