---
type: "synthesis"
theme: "decision-rights"
sources: ["governance"]
id: "cross-decision-rights-framework-family"
sourceVaultSlug: "hbr-seg-governance"
originDay: 7
articleStem: "hbr-seg-governance"
sourceUrl: "(unified vault: 8 sources)"
sourceTitle: "HBR — Firm Ⅱ-B · Governance, decision rights, leadership, risk"
---
# The Decision-Rights Framework Family

Across the corpus, several pieces converge on one organizational primitive: *who gets to decide what*. Each proposes or critiques a lettered framework, and read together they form a lineage.

- **RACI / ARCI** ([[entity-raci-d7]], [[concept-arci-framework]]) from *What Companies Get Wrong About Decision Rights* is the incumbent. Its repair program is [[framework-four-mistakes]] and [[framework-raci-meeting-execution]]. Its siblings [[entity-rapid-d7]] (Bain) and [[entity-dare-d7]] are named as alternatives that more explicitly separate "recommend" from "decide."
- **OVIS** ([[framework-ovis]]) from *Decision-Making by Consensus Doesn't Work in the AI Era* is explicitly "a more aggressive, anti-consensus cousin of RACI." Where RACI's authors bet on *repairing* the tool through conversation, OVIS's authors bet on *replacing* consensus outright.
- **The five-step "true agreement" process** ([[framework-reaching-true-agreement]]) from *The False Alignment Trap* adds no letters, but its first step — "set clear parameters," including explicit decision rights (consensus vs. CEO-call) — is the same machinery.

The deep tension: RACI's [[contrarian-raci-as-conversation]] treats the framework as a *conversation starter*, while OVIS treats ambiguity as the enemy to be legislated away. Both agree on one non-negotiable — exactly one owner (see [[cross-single-owner-principle]]) — and both cap the debating group small (see [[cross-small-empowered-teams]]). The corpus's implicit verdict: the letters matter far less than (a) a single accountable owner, (b) a small room, and (c) structured friction before the call (see [[cross-structured-friction]]).