The PMM RACI Matrix: Clarifying Who Does What

The launch was scheduled for Monday. On Friday afternoon, I discovered nobody had trained sales. I thought Product was handling it. Product thought Marketing was handling it. Marketing thought I was handling it. Sales showed up Monday morning with zero idea how to sell the new product.

The launch flopped. Pipeline was 40% below target. The post-mortem was brutal. Every team blamed another team for the gap. Product said PMM should have owned sales training. I said we'd never discussed that. My boss asked why I didn't just handle it when I saw the gap.

Because I didn't know it was a gap until Friday at 5pm, and by then it was too late.

That launch failure happened because we didn't have clear responsibility assignments. Everyone assumed someone else was handling critical work. Nobody was.

Most companies solve this with RACI matrices—frameworks that define who's Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed for each task. But most RACI matrices fail because they're either too vague ("Product Marketing is accountable for launches") or too detailed (47-row spreadsheet nobody reads).

I've built RACI matrices that collected dust and RACI matrices that prevented disaster. The difference isn't the framework—it's whether you define responsibilities at the right level of granularity and actually use them to make decisions.

Here's what actually works.

Why Cross-Functional Work Fails Without RACI

Product Marketing is the most cross-functional role in a GTM organization. Every project involves Product, Marketing, Sales, Customer Success, and sometimes Engineering, Finance, and Legal.

Without clear responsibility assignment, three failure patterns emerge:

Pattern 1: Everyone assumes someone else is handling it

This is what happened with my launch disaster. Sales training was critical. Everyone agreed it needed to happen. Nobody thought they owned it.

Product assumed PMM owned sales enablement. I assumed Product would train sales on product capabilities. Marketing assumed I was coordinating training. Nobody coordinated it because everyone thought someone else was.

Result: Sales had no idea how to position the product, demo failed in early calls, pipeline suffered.

Pattern 2: Everyone tries to handle it and conflicts emerge

I've seen the opposite problem. Product writes positioning. PMM writes different positioning. Marketing creates a third version of positioning. Sales gets confused and makes up their own.

Without clear accountability (who makes the final call?), you get conflicting work that confuses customers and wastes time.

Pattern 3: Nobody knows who to escalate to when there's disagreement

Product wants to launch in two weeks. PMM says sales isn't ready. Who decides?

Marketing wants to change messaging mid-launch. PMM says it'll confuse the market. Who has authority?

Sales wants a custom pitch for enterprise. PMM says it doesn't scale. Who makes the call?

Without defined decision rights, these conflicts just escalate to whoever screams loudest or has the highest title.

The RACI Framework That Actually Gets Used

Most RACI matrices fail because they're created in a planning session, put into a slide deck, and never referenced again. The ones that work are simple, visible, and actively used in decision-making.

Here's the framework I use:

R - Responsible (Does the work)

The person or team that executes the task. Multiple people can be Responsible for different parts of the same project.

Example: For a product launch, PMM is Responsible for positioning and sales enablement. Marketing is Responsible for demand gen campaigns. Product is Responsible for product readiness.

A - Accountable (Owns the outcome)

The single person who owns success or failure. Only ONE person should be Accountable for each work stream.

Example: For a product launch, PMM is Accountable for overall launch success. They don't do all the work, but they own coordination and outcomes.

C - Consulted (Provides input)

People who provide input before decisions are made. Their feedback is considered but not binding.

Example: For positioning, Product is Consulted (they provide product expertise), but PMM makes the final call.

I - Informed (Kept in the loop)

People who need to know about decisions but don't need to approve them.

Example: Finance is Informed about launch timing for revenue forecasting purposes.

The critical insight: RACI isn't about documenting who does what. It's about preventing the gaps and overlaps that kill execution.

Building a RACI Matrix Teams Actually Use

I've built RACI matrices three ways:

Attempt 1: Too detailed

47-row spreadsheet with every possible task. RACI assignments for "draft messaging," "review messaging," "approve messaging," "socialize messaging," "update messaging."

Nobody read it. Too overwhelming.

Attempt 2: Too vague

"PMM is accountable for launches. Product is accountable for product development. Marketing is accountable for campaigns."

Everyone nodded. Then we had the same conflicts because "launches" included 30 sub-tasks nobody had assigned.

Attempt 3: Just right

I focused on the activities that historically caused confusion or conflict. For each one, clear RACI assignments.

This worked because it was:

• Focused: Only the 8-12 activities that actually cause problems
• Specific: Clear enough to resolve confusion ("Who owns sales training?") but not so granular it's unusable
• Visible: Shared in every launch kickoff, referenced in conflicts, updated when gaps emerge

Here's what that looks like for product launches:

Launch Strategy & Positioning

• R: PMM (creates positioning framework)
• A: PMM (owns final positioning)
• C: Product (product expertise), Sales (market feedback)
• I: Marketing, CS

Sales Enablement & Training

• R: PMM (creates materials and delivers training)
• A: PMM (accountable for sales readiness)
• C: Sales (input on what they need), Product (product details)
• I: Marketing, CS

Product Readiness (Features, Bugs, Performance)

• R: Engineering (builds), Product (prioritizes)
• A: Product (owns product quality)
• C: PMM (customer requirements), Sales (deal blockers)
• I: Marketing, CS

Demand Gen Campaigns

• R: Marketing (creates and executes campaigns)
• A: Marketing (owns pipeline generation)
• C: PMM (messaging, positioning), Sales (ICP targeting)
• I: Product, CS

Launch Timeline & Milestones

• R: PMM (coordinates cross-functional plan)
• A: PMM (owns launch readiness)
• C: Product (product readiness), Marketing (campaign readiness), Sales (enablement needs)
• I: CS, Finance

Pricing & Packaging

• R: Product (proposes structure), Finance (analyzes)
• A: VP Product + CFO (joint decision)
• C: PMM (competitive benchmarking, market validation), Sales (deal feedback)
• I: Marketing, CS

Customer Communications

• R: CS (creates comms), Marketing (channels)
• A: CS (owns customer messaging)
• C: PMM (positioning), Product (feature details)
• I: Sales

Launch Retrospective

• R: PMM (facilitates, documents learnings)
• A: PMM (owns continuous improvement)
• C: Product, Marketing, Sales, CS (feedback)
• I: Leadership

Notice: This isn't every task. It's the tasks that caused confusion in past launches. Each one has clear ownership.

How to Create Your RACI Matrix

Don't build RACI in isolation. Co-create it with stakeholders so they actually buy in.

Step 1: Identify the activities that cause confusion (Week 1)

Look at your last 3 launches or cross-functional projects. Ask:

• What fell through the cracks?
• What did multiple teams do redundantly?
• What caused conflicts or escalations?

For me, it was:

• Sales training (everyone assumed someone else owned it)
• Competitive positioning (Product and PMM both wrote different versions)
• Launch timing decisions (Product and PMM disagreed, no clear decision-maker)

Those become your RACI rows.

Step 2: Draft RACI assignments (Week 1-2)

For each activity, assign R/A/C/I based on:

• Who has the expertise to do the work? (R)
• Who should own the outcome? (A)
• Who needs to provide input? (C)
• Who needs to be kept informed? (I)

Rules:

• Only ONE person/team should be Accountable per activity
• R and A can be the same person, but don't have to be
• Minimize the number of C's (too many cooks)
• I should be limited to people who actually need to know

Step 3: Review with stakeholders (Week 2-3)

Don't send the draft for async feedback. Schedule a 60-minute working session with Product, Marketing, Sales, and CS leads.

Walk through each row. Ask: "Does this match how we actually work? Where do you disagree?"

Expect debate on:

• Who's Accountable for launch success (PMM vs Product vs Marketing)
• Who makes final call on messaging (PMM vs Marketing)
• Who decides launch timing (Product vs PMM)

Those debates are valuable. They surface hidden disagreements before they blow up mid-launch.

Step 4: Get executive sign-off (Week 4)

Once functional leads agree, present to VP/C-level for approval.

"Here's how we're clarifying cross-functional responsibilities for launches. This RACI framework defines who owns what. We've aligned with Product, Marketing, Sales, and CS. Requesting your sign-off so we can use this to drive execution."

Executive endorsement is critical. When conflicts arise mid-project, you can reference their approval.

Step 5: Use it actively, update it continuously

The RACI isn't done. It's a living document.

• Reference it in every launch kickoff
• Use it to resolve conflicts ("Per our RACI, PMM is accountable for sales training")
• Update it when gaps emerge (add new rows after retrospectives)
• Review quarterly with stakeholders

A RACI that sits in a drawer is useless. A RACI that's referenced weekly becomes the operating system for cross-functional work.

How to Use RACI When Things Go Wrong

RACI frameworks are most valuable not during planning, but during execution when something goes wrong.

Scenario 1: Work falls through the cracks

Mid-launch, you realize nobody created competitive battle cards. Everyone assumed someone else was handling it.

Without RACI: Finger-pointing. Scrambling. Missed deadline.

With RACI: Check the matrix. "Sales enablement materials" → PMM is Responsible and Accountable. That's on me. I take ownership and fix it.

Clear accountability prevents blame games and forces ownership.

Scenario 2: Conflicting work

Product writes positioning that contradicts PMM positioning. Sales is confused about which to use.

Without RACI: Political battle. Whoever has more executive support wins.

With RACI: Check the matrix. "Launch positioning" → PMM is Accountable and makes final call. Product is Consulted. "I've incorporated Product's input, but per our RACI, PMM owns final positioning. Here's the approved version."

Clear decision rights prevent conflicts from escalating into turf wars.

Scenario 3: Disagreement on priorities

Product wants to launch in two weeks. PMM says sales training isn't complete and needs two more weeks.

Without RACI: Whoever screams louder or pulls rank wins.

With RACI: Check the matrix. "Launch timeline" → PMM is Accountable for launch readiness. Product is Consulted. If PMM says sales isn't ready, that's the call. If Product disagrees, it escalates to VP Product + CMO per escalation process.

Clear accountability gives PMM authority to make the call (or escalate if needed).

The Uncomfortable Truth About RACI

Most teams resist RACI frameworks because clarifying responsibilities is uncomfortable. It forces you to decide who owns what, and that means some people lose ownership of things they thought they owned.

I've watched Product teams push back on "PMM is Accountable for launch positioning" because they thought positioning was their job. I've watched Marketing teams resist "PMM makes final call on product messaging" because they saw all messaging as their domain.

Those conflicts are exactly why RACI matters. Without it, those disagreements stay hidden until they blow up mid-project.

The companies that successfully implement RACI aren't the ones where everyone naturally agrees. They're the ones where leadership forces clarity even when it's uncomfortable.

If your RACI doesn't make someone uncomfortable, it's not doing anything.

It should clarify that:

• Product doesn't own positioning (PMM does)
• Marketing doesn't own product messaging (PMM does)
• PMM doesn't own demand gen execution (Marketing does)
• Sales doesn't decide launch timing (Product and PMM do)

Those are uncomfortable boundaries. But they're necessary.

I've worked at companies with perfect RACI frameworks and companies with no RACI at all. The difference in execution quality is stark.

Without RACI: Launches are chaotic. Critical work falls through the cracks. Teams step on each other's toes. Conflicts escalate to executives. Post-mortems are blame sessions.

With RACI: Launches run smoothly. Everyone knows what they own. Conflicts get resolved quickly. Post-mortems focus on improvement, not blame.

The best launches I've ever shipped weren't the ones with the biggest budgets or the most resources. They were the ones where everyone knew exactly what they owned.

RACI frameworks don't guarantee success. But they eliminate the confusion and conflict that guarantee failure.

Build one. Get stakeholder buy-in. Use it actively. Update it when gaps emerge.

Or don't. Keep running cross-functional projects where everyone assumes someone else is handling critical work. Keep having post-mortems where teams blame each other for failures.

Your choice.