Your architecture decision has been stuck for 8 weeks. DACI resolves it in 3. He

Your architecture decision has been stuck for 8 weeks. DACI resolves it in 3. Here’s how.

DACI: Driver, Approver, Contributor, Informed.

A client’s data mesh debate had dragged 8 weeks. Four people thought they had veto power. Nobody could move. We applied DACI and closed it in 3.

The framework: Driver runs the process (not the decision). Approver decides - exactly one person. Contributors (2-5 experts) have input but no vote. Informed get told after.

The biggest mistake I see: assigning two Approvers. “CDO and CTO co-decide” means nobody decides. Pick one.

How it played out there: Driver was the Data Platform Manager. Approver was the CDO. Contributors were architects, engineers, and the analytics lead. Decision: data mesh pilot with two domains, 6-month timeline.

The Driver doesn’t decide. This trips people up constantly. The Driver runs the process, structures the decision, surfaces the trade-offs. The Approver picks.

I’ve gotten this wrong too. Early on I’d let the Driver drift into deciding because they had the most context. It works until it doesn’t - and when it doesn’t, you’ve quietly handed authority to someone who never asked for it.

Don’t use DACI for trivial stuff. Don’t use it when you genuinely need consensus. And set a deadline. “We decide Friday.” DACI without a deadline just drifts.

What decision in your org has been stuck the longest? Who should be the one Approver?