The Decision Accountability Framework (DAF)
The Decision Accountability Framework (DAF)
Making professional decisions explainable without becoming legalistic
Organisations are not unfamiliar with decision frameworks. Models such as RACI, RAPID, and RASCI are widely used to clarify roles, responsibilities, and decision authority within organisations. They are effective tools for governance, alignment, and workflow clarity.
However, accountability challenges rarely arise from who was responsible for a decision. More often, problems emerge later, during audits, complaints, legal proceedings, or organisational transitions, when the reasoning behind a decision can no longer be clearly reconstructed. At that point, decisions are reviewed with the benefit of hindsight, while the original context, uncertainties, and professional judgment have faded.
The Decision Accountability Framework (DAF) addresses a different layer of decision-making. Rather than focusing on roles or decision rights, DAF focuses on how professional judgment was exercised at the moment a decision was made.
DAF provides a lightweight, structured way to make key considerations explicit at the time of decision-making. DAF does not prescribe outcomes, evaluate decisions, or introduce additional procedures. It does not replace existing governance or responsibility models. Instead, it complements them by creating a stable, domain-independent structure for documenting decision reasoning in a way that remains understandable over time.
By doing so, DAF enables organisations to:
explain decisions without retroactive rationalisation
demonstrate professional care without legalistic documentation
maintain accountability while preserving professional discretion
DAF makes visible how a decision was reasonable at the time it was taken, without turning decision-making into compliance exercises or defensive paperwork.
DAF focuses on decision traceability rather than outcomes. By guiding professionals to briefly articulate what was known at the time, which considerations were relevant, and how uncertainty and potential impact were weighed, DAF makes decision-making consistent, explainable, and transferable across individuals and teams. DAF does not function as a legal defense framework, a compliance tool, or an audit instrument. Its purpose is explanation, not justification. The framework is designed to integrate seamlessly into existing workflows and to remain usable under operational pressure, resulting in decision records that remain interpretable long after a decision has been made. DAF is applied in contexts where professional judgment carries significant responsibility and may later require explanation, including public sector organisations, healthcare and social services, child welfare, regulatory bodies, and corporate governance environments. For a detailed explanation of the framework and its underlying principles, please refer to the DAF White Paper.
Licensed access to the Decision Accountability Framework includes access to supporting materials and structured learning resources designed to facilitate responsible use of the framework.
Access to the Decision Accountability Framework is provided through licensed use of the framework and its supporting materials. The framework is not legal advice and does not replace legal counsel, regulatory requirements, or professional standards.
Request Access to the Decision Accountability Framework
Access to the Decision Accountability Framework (DAF) is provided through licensed use.Organizations requesting access are expected to have reviewed the DAF White Paper and the accompanying framework documents prior to submitting this request. Submission of this form constitutes a request for licensed access. You will be contacted by email for further steps.
FAQ
What is the Decision Accountability Framework (DAF)?
The Decision Accountability Framework is a structured framework designed to make professional decision reasoning explicit at the moment decisions are taken. It supports explainability and accountability without prescribing decisions, evaluating outcomes, or introducing legal or compliance requirements.
Why was DAF developed?
DAF was developed to address a recurring accountability problem: decisions are often reviewed after the fact, when outcomes are known and context has changed. In such situations, the reasoning that made a decision reasonable at the time is frequently unclear or lost. DAF focuses on preserving that reasoning.
What problem does DAF solve?
DAF addresses the problem of decision traceability. It helps organizations explain how a decision was reasoned at the time it was taken, rather than reconstructing decision-making retrospectively based on outcomes, memory, or narrative reporting.
Is DAF a decision-making method?
No. DAF does not determine what decisions should be made and does not prescribe outcomes. Professional judgment remains central. DAF documents reasoning; it does not replace expertise or discretion.
Is DAF a legal or compliance tool?
No. DAF is not legal advice, a compliance instrument, or an audit framework. It does not provide legal protection, certification, or assurance of compliance, and it does not replace legal counsel or regulatory requirements.
Does using DAF protect organizations from liability?
No. DAF is not designed to provide legal defense or liability protection. Its purpose is explanatory, not defensive. Organizations remain fully responsible for their decisions and for compliance with applicable laws and standards.
How does DAF differ from reporting or documentation tools?
DAF does not aim to document everything or to produce narrative reports. It provides a fixed structure for capturing key decision considerations at the time decisions are made, avoiding hindsight-driven explanations or outcome-focused justification.
In what contexts is DAF useful?
DAF is useful in contexts where decisions involve professional judgment under uncertainty and may later require explanation. This includes public sector organizations, healthcare and social services, child welfare, regulatory bodies, and corporate governance environments.
Does DAF require changes to existing procedures?
No. DAF is designed to integrate into existing workflows. It does not introduce new procedures, reporting obligations, or performance metrics.
What is included with licensed access to DAF?
Licensed access provides the core framework materials, supporting documentation, and structured learning resources intended to support responsible and consistent use of DAF. Licensed access does not include certification, supervision, legal advice, or case-specific guidance.
Is DAF a training or certification program?
No. While licensed access includes structured learning resources, DAF is not a training, certification, or accreditation program. It does not assess competence or performance.
How is DAF implemented?
DAF is implemented incrementally. Organizations typically begin by applying the framework to a limited set of decision moments and expand use as appropriate. An implementation path is provided to support independent adoption.
Who determines whether DAF is appropriate for an organization?
Organizations are expected to assess applicability themselves using the DAF Applicability Check. DAF is not suitable for all decision contexts, and use should be aligned with its intended purpose.
How can organizations request access to DAF?
Access to DAF is provided through licensed use. Organizations may request access by submitting an access request after reviewing the DAF White Paper and accompanying framework documents.
Does DAF replace professional standards?
No. Use of DAF does not replace professional standards, organizational policies, or regulatory requirements. It complements existing accountability structures by making decision reasoning explicit.
Is DAF static or updated over time?
DAF may be updated to clarify use, address common questions, or support continued responsible application. Organizations remain responsible for determining how updates are applied.
Didn't this already exist?
Yes. The individual elements on which DAF is based have existed for a long time. Professionals have always weighed situations, risks, alternatives, and consequences as part of their work. DAF does not claim that these considerations themselves are new.
Is DAF comparable to case discussions or moral deliberation?
No. Case discussions and moral deliberation are reflective formats, often conducted retrospectively and in group settings. DAF is an operational decision framework that can be applied individually, in real time or retrospectively, without requiring consultation structures or normative debate.
Does DAF lead to additional administrative burden?
No. DAF is explicitly designed for concise documentation. In many cases, one sentence per step is sufficient. The framework does not replace existing documentation but helps structure existing information in a focused way.
Does DAF assess whether a decision was right or wrong?
No. DAF does not evaluate decisions and does not define outcome standards. It makes visible which considerations were taken into account at the moment of decision-making, not whether the outcome is later judged to be correct.
Is DAF intended for external accountability?
DAF is primarily intended for internal use. External use is possible, but always selectively and context-dependent. The framework is not a reporting instrument and does not create an automatic obligation to report.
What does DAF deliver in concrete terms?
DAF contributes to:
greater clarity in complex decisions;
more consistent decision-making within teams and organizations;
improved transferability of considerations;
preparedness for accountability, without encouraging defensive behavior.
Does DAF help with legally sensitive HR decisions, such as disciplinary measures or termination?
DAF supports the structuring and documentation of considerations in HR decisions with potential legal impact. It does not replace employment law review or legal advice but helps make visible which considerations were relevant at the decision moment.
Does the use of DAF increase legal risk in proceedings?
No. DAF is primarily an internal accountability tool. Documenting reasoning using DAF increases consistency and transparency but does not create an obligation for external disclosure and does not include normative judgments about employees.
Is DAF suitable for decisions with high emotional and moral complexity?
Yes. Especially in situations of emotional pressure, DAF helps distinguish between facts, uncertainties, and considerations. The framework supports careful decision-making without imposing moral judgments or normative conclusions.
Does DAF replace professional guidelines or ethical frameworks?
No. DAF operates alongside existing guidelines and professional codes. It structures how these are weighed in a specific case, without adding or replacing substantive norms.
Can DAF support risk management?
DAF is not a risk management system, but it helps make risks and uncertainties explicit within decision-making. In doing so, it supports consistent and deliberate consideration, without suggesting risk elimination.
Can DAF contribute to learning within teams?
Yes, indirectly. By making considerations explicit, DAF creates a basis for reflection and knowledge transfer, without retrospectively judging decisions in normative terms.