Atlassian DACI decision record

← Explore patterns and cases

Reference eligibility: eligible — Institutional or method-author operating guidance documents this procedure; no tool-seller customer-success claim is admitted.

leadership/strategy · administration/project coordination / comm-19

Atlassian DACI decision record

A decision has an explicit coordinator, decision-maker, contributors, and affected audience.

documented-procedure · conventional-workflow · Source account, not a validated implementation

What goes in

• Decision question
• Evidence
• Options and constraints

What comes out

• Decision and rationale
• Follow-up tasks

Documented sequence

Order described in the source account; not a sequence between pattern families.

1. Create a question-centered shared document
2. Assign a driver and one approver
3. Identify contributors and informed parties
4. Record context, evidence, criteria, and options
5. Gather input
6. Assign remaining information tasks
7. Have the approver decide
8. Record and share the outcome

Checks described

• Separate contributor input from final authority
• Record reasons for future reference

What changes with context

• Requires a person with legitimate decision authority
• Contributors can be consulted together or individually

Shared patterns · provisional interpretation

• Assemble grounded evidence

  Distributed source material → traceable retrieval, synthesis, or a decision-ready evidence packet

• Compare options for a decision

  Options and contextual criteria → reasoned ranking, recommendation, or recorded authorized choice

• Coordinate commitments to closure

  An objective involving people or teams → accountable next actions, handoffs, tracking, and agreed closure

Fit: mapped. Exploratory analyst coding of collected source summaries; not independently tested

Could this transfer?

Hypothetical: a festival team could select a venue using a named decider, explicit criteria, and a record of rejected alternatives.

Limit: Assigning roles cannot create authority absent from the organization.

Evidence limits and unknowns

Summary through context_constraints paraphrase source-backed mechanics. structural_motifs, candidate_midlevel_pattern, transfer_example_explicitly_hypothetical and transfer_limit are analyst interpretations, not tested findings.

• Whether listed benefits hold in practice
• Escalation when approver is unavailable

Source eligibility and effectiveness

Allowed use: process reference with explicit limits . Source eligibility is not proof of effectiveness, safety or transferability.

Review attribution: AI-assisted source review · 2026-10-18T03:26:44.526806+00:00.

• Eligibility, where granted, permits a process reference only; it is not proof of usefulness, causal effectiveness, safety, or transferability.
• No workflow software executed, no video playback independently observed, and no outcomes independently measured by this audit.
• Whether listed benefits hold in practice
• Escalation when approver is unavailable
• Assigning roles cannot create authority absent from the organization.

Source and dates

DACI Decision-Making Framework ↗ · Official facilitation procedure

Published

Unknown

Updated

Unknown

Checked (UTC)

2026-10-18T03:01:00Z

Original DACI play reopened. No publication/update label established. Footer copyright 2025 is not a publication date.

not stated in retrieved page · Date evidence ↗

Try a bounded adaptation

This generated starter is untested. It is not the source author’s prompt or a reviewed Commons skill.

Workflow prompt Help me design a small, checkable adaptation of this source account: Atlassian DACI decision record. This is an untested starter generated from research notes, not a source author's prompt or a reviewed skill. My context: [role, audience, goal]. Use only material I provide and am permitted to use: [sanitized inputs]. Expected inputs in the account: Decision question; Evidence; Options and constraints. Desired outputs: Decision and rationale; Follow-up tasks. Consider these source-described steps; ask which apply before acting: 1. Create a question-centered shared document 2. Assign a driver and one approver 3. Identify contributors and informed parties 4. Record context, evidence, criteria, and options 5. Gather input 6. Assign remaining information tasks 7. Have the approver decide 8. Record and share the outcome Checks to plan: Separate contributor input from final authority; Record reasons for future reference. Context to revisit: Requires a person with legitimate decision authority. Exceptions: Contributors can be consulted together or individually. Preserve provided facts. Never invent metrics, claims, outcomes, quotations, or source material. Keep facts separate from inference, cite supplied evidence, and mark missing information. Do not publish, send, approve, or change external systems. Stop for my review. Source: https://www.atlassian.com/team-playbook/plays/daci Copy workflow prompt

Permanent case link · Download source records