RAEW Analysis
RAEW is a very simple technique, the name stands for Responsibility, Authority, Expertise and Work. This is our recommended analysis technique, it is another that is in widespread use but we have been unable to ascertain where or when it was first developed.
The premise of the method is that these elements form the human/managerial components of the process as follows:
Depending on a person's role in the organisation they will use some combination of these four elements to participate in the process. Different roles have a different balance, some typical distinctions are shown below:
To undertake RAEW analysis you must first have mapped the process in some way. The JISC infoNet recommended approach is to use RAEW in conjunction with a UML Swim Lane diagram. This presents the information in a format that can be readily transferred to a RAEW matrix. The RAEW matrix uses activities as the y axis and 'actors' in the process (departments or individual roles) as the x axis. An example is shown below.
Having drawn up the matrix - a spreadsheet package provides the most useful format - you then need to decide where the Responsibility, Authority, Expertise and Work for each activity lies. This may not be easy.
Ideally when you review a process:
Each component should be addressed at least once for each activity
Each 'actor' involved should play some role in the process
This is unlikely to be the case in reality, particularly with processes that have developed incrementally over time. Each component should be addressed for every activity but you are bound to find areas where you are unable to say who has ultimate responsibility or the definitive expertise. Similarly each actor should play a role but the matrix is likely to raise questions about why particular departments are thought to have a role in certain processes.
RAEW warnings to watch out for:
Authority with no responsibility
Responsibility with no authority
Other roles with no expertise
It is not an exact science. There are often no right and wrong answers and you will be bound to have difficulties and disagreements in coming up with some answers - this in itself is interesting and should tell you something about the process. Similarly if you ask each of the actors to fill in the matrix they will most probably come up with different answers - this is equally valuable information.
The staff recruitment process we looked at as a process map with Swim Lanes is provided here as an RAEW analysis.
This example raises major issues about how the institution manages its recruitment process. The HR department clearly does a lot of work but it is basic clerical work. All of the Responsibility and Authority and most of the Expertise lies elsewhere. The process is also complex and time-consuming. Considering how it impacts on the student as a client, it is evident that the institution will have difficulties in filling vacancies sufficiently quickly to avoid disrupting essential services, particularly delivery of teaching.
This is a real-life example and the analysis prompted the institution concerned to rethink its whole approach to recruitment and to devolve the process out to its client departments.
RAEW is a remarkably simple and effective tool for highlighting major process issues. Moriarty and Thompson however raise a note of caution in relation to its use and point out that it can be 'hazardous to the health of the presenter'. This is a tongue in cheek way of pointing out that senior management can often be embarrassed by such a stark and clear representation of malfunction within their organisation.
