| RE: [epf-dev] Owner vs. Responsible |
|
Right, But is that the understanding of SPEM ??? Should I consider Owner = Responsible? I´d like to suggest an improvement to EPFC: Change the term Owner for a task to Responsible for a task in
EPF Composer. Frequently I´m questioned, while presenting our processes, what
Owner means and I have been answering that it means Responsible (executes the
work). But then, another question arises: What is the meaning of “Responsible”
for the artifacts? In my understanding, the “Responsible” concept in
EPFC is equivalent to “Accountable” because several roles may
change an artifact but only one must ensure its correctness and consistence. In
other words, there are several responsible roles and one accountable role for
an artifact. Why not use the terms widely used in project management? Thanks, Maciel From: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of The Viking on the
French Riviera The distinctions are used a lot by consultants, especially within
the RACI model: The
RACI model is a straightforward tool that can be used for identifying roles and
responsibilities to make the processes happen. RACI is an abbreviation of:
It
can be useful to add the concept of Sponsor or Supportive:
Regards, Bjorn From:
epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Maciel, Eduardo (Brazil R&D) Gentlemen, Please, I´m not sure I have the correct
understanding for these two concepts. 1)
What “owner”
means and what “responsible” means. 2)
Are they synonyms? 3)
Is “responsible”
the role that “executes” the work? 4)
What is the relation with the
idea of “accountable” (RACI concept)? I´d be glad if you can point me some references in
order to better understand it. Thank you, Maciel |