Category: Governance and Roles
Responsible Accountable Consulted Informed (RACI)
Also known as: RACI, RACI matrix, RACI chart, responsibility assignment matrix
Simply put
RACI is a way to clarify who does what on a task or project by assigning each person one of four roles: Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, or Informed. It is usually shown as a chart, or matrix, that maps these roles against each task so everyone knows their part. This helps prevent confusion about ownership and decision-making.
Formal definition
RACI is a responsibility assignment matrix that maps four role designations to project tasks or activities: Responsible (the individual(s) who perform the work), Accountable (the individual who owns and signs off on the outcome), Consulted (those whose input is sought), and Informed (those kept apprised of progress or decisions). In a compliance context, such a matrix is commonly used to document control ownership and role clarity, though its structure and application vary by organization and are not a formal requirement of either SOC 2 or ISO/IEC 27001.
Why it matters
In security compliance work, ambiguity about who owns a control is a recurring source of audit findings and operational failure. When a control has no clearly named owner, it may go unmonitored, unmaintained, or unaddressed until an auditor or an incident exposes the gap. A RACI matrix directly addresses this by forcing an explicit assignment of who performs the work, who owns the outcome, whose input is required, and who must simply be kept informed. This role clarity is particularly valuable in cross-functional environments where a single control may touch engineering, operations, legal, and management.
Who it's relevant to
Compliance and GRC Managers
Those coordinating a SOC 2 examination or ISO 27001 certification can use a RACI matrix to document control ownership across teams and to demonstrate role clarity to assessors. It helps ensure that every in-scope control has a named accountable owner before the review period begins.
Auditors and Assessors
A RACI matrix can serve as supporting evidence that responsibilities are defined, though assessors typically corroborate it against evidence that the assigned parties actually performed their roles. It is treated as one input to evaluating governance and accountability, not as proof of operating effectiveness on its own.
Security Engineers and Control Operators
Individuals marked Responsible for specific controls benefit from a clear view of what they own, whom they must consult, and whom they must inform. This reduces confusion about handoffs and decision-making when controls span multiple functions.
Leadership and Control Owners
Those designated Accountable for outcomes gain an explicit record of the controls they sign off on. This aligns with governance expectations in both frameworks and helps ensure that ownership is not diffused across multiple parties.
Inside RACI
Responsible
The individual or role that performs the work required to complete a task or activity. In a compliance context, this is typically the person executing a control, gathering evidence, or carrying out a remediation action. Multiple parties may be Responsible for a single task, depending on how the work is divided.
Accountable
The single role that owns the outcome and has final authority or approval over the task or deliverable. In most implementations, only one party is designated as Accountable per activity to preserve clear ownership. For SOC 2 and ISO 27001 activities, this is often a control owner or process owner who answers for whether the work is completed correctly.
Consulted
Roles whose input, expertise, or opinion is sought before or during the task, typically through two-way communication. In compliance engagements this may include subject matter experts, legal or privacy advisors, or auditors consulted on scoping decisions.
Informed
Roles kept up to date on progress, decisions, or outcomes, generally through one-way communication and without being expected to contribute directly. Stakeholders such as management or affected teams are often Informed of control results or audit findings.
Task-to-role mapping
The structured assignment of each activity to the four responsibility types across relevant roles, commonly captured in a RACI matrix. This mapping clarifies who does the work, who owns it, who advises, and who is notified, which supports evidence of defined responsibilities during a SOC 2 examination or an ISO 27001 assessment.
Common questions
Answers to the questions practitioners most commonly ask about RACI.
Is a RACI matrix a mandatory control required by SOC 2 or ISO 27001?
No. Neither framework prescribes a RACI matrix as a required control. A RACI matrix is a role-clarification technique that organizations may adopt to demonstrate clear assignment of responsibilities. In ISO 27001, the ISMS requirements (clauses 4 through 10) call for roles and responsibilities to be defined and communicated, but they do not specify that a RACI matrix is the method for doing so. In a SOC 2 examination, a RACI matrix may serve as supporting evidence of governance and control ownership, but its use depends on the auditor's expectations and the scope of the engagement rather than any universal requirement.
Does having a RACI matrix in place mean my controls are operating effectively?
Not on its own. A RACI matrix documents who is Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed for a given activity, but it describes the intended design of accountability rather than proving that the underlying controls actually operate over time. In a SOC 2 Type II examination, operating effectiveness is assessed across a defined review period through testing of the controls themselves; a RACI matrix may support the design assessment but does not substitute for evidence of performance. Similarly, an ISO 27001 audit evaluates whether responsibilities are defined and carried out, so the matrix is a starting point rather than a conclusion about effectiveness.
How should we decide who is 'Accountable' versus 'Responsible' for a control?
In most implementations, the person marked Responsible performs the work of the control, while the person marked Accountable owns the outcome and answers for it. A common practice is to assign a single Accountable party per activity to avoid ambiguity, with one or more Responsible parties who execute the task. The appropriate assignments depend on your organizational structure and the scope of your ISMS or SOC 2 environment, so the split should reflect actual decision-making authority rather than a fixed template.
How can a RACI matrix support evidence collection during an audit or examination?
A RACI matrix can help auditors and examiners identify the correct personnel to interview and the individuals expected to produce evidence for a given control. By mapping activities to accountable and responsible parties, it can streamline requests during fieldwork. That said, the matrix supports the audit process rather than replacing the actual evidence; auditors will still test the controls and may request documentation, walkthroughs, or samples depending on scope and the applicable criteria.
How often should a RACI matrix be reviewed and updated?
In most engagements, a RACI matrix is reviewed periodically and whenever significant organizational or scope changes occur, such as role turnover, restructuring, or changes to the ISMS boundary. ISO 27001's management system requirements emphasize keeping roles and responsibilities current and communicated, and stale assignments can undermine that objective. The appropriate review cadence depends on your change environment and governance practices rather than a single fixed interval.
Can the same RACI matrix be used to support both SOC 2 and ISO 27001 efforts?
It can be used to support both, but with limitations. A RACI matrix that documents role assignments can inform governance evidence for a SOC 2 examination and role-definition requirements under ISO 27001. However, because the two frameworks differ in structure and criteria, a single matrix will not automatically satisfy both, and mapping between them is typically partial. You should tailor and cross-reference the assignments to the specific Trust Services Criteria in scope and the relevant ISMS requirements and Statement of Applicability, rather than assuming one artifact meets all obligations.
Common misconceptions
Responsible and Accountable mean the same thing and can be used interchangeably.
They are distinct roles: Responsible refers to the party performing the work, while Accountable refers to the single role that owns the outcome and holds final approval. In most implementations a task has one Accountable party but may have several Responsible parties.
Having a completed RACI matrix demonstrates that controls are operating effectively for audit purposes.
A RACI matrix documents how responsibilities are assigned, not whether the associated controls are designed suitably or operating effectively. A SOC 2 report attests only to the controls and period covered, and an ISO 27001 certificate covers only the defined ISMS scope; the matrix is a supporting artifact rather than proof of control effectiveness.
Every role should be assigned to every task to ensure thorough coverage.
Over-assigning responsibilities typically dilutes ownership and creates confusion. In most engagements a clear RACI limits the number of Accountable and Responsible parties per task and reserves Consulted and Informed designations for those who genuinely need input or notification.
Best practices
Assign a single Accountable role to each task to preserve clear ownership, and confirm that no activity is left without an Accountable party.
Map RACI assignments to the specific controls and activities within your defined scope, so responsibilities align with the Trust Services Criteria selected for a SOC 2 examination or the ISMS scope for ISO 27001.
Distinguish Consulted (two-way input) from Informed (one-way notification) when documenting stakeholders, and avoid designating parties as either unless they genuinely require it.
Review and update the RACI matrix when scope, roles, or processes change, and retain versioned records that can support evidence of defined responsibilities during an assessment.
Limit the number of Responsible parties per task where practical to reduce ambiguity, and validate assignments with the roles named to confirm they accept the responsibilities.
Treat the RACI matrix as a supporting artifact for governance and communication rather than as evidence of control effectiveness, which is evaluated separately by the auditor or certification body.