board-meeting

# Board Meeting Protocol

Structured multi-agent deliberation that prevents groupthink, captures minority views, and produces clean, actionable decisions. Every phase has a purpose, a format, and rules that cannot be skipped.

## Keywords

board meeting, executive deliberation, strategic decision, C-suite, multi-agent, founder review, decision extraction, independent perspectives, groupthink prevention, synthesis, critic analysis, structured deliberation

---

## Clarify First

Before generating, confirm these inputs. If any is unknown or vague, ASK — do not assume:

- [ ] **The exact decision to be made** (stated in one sentence) — the whole protocol synthesizes toward a single decision; a fuzzy topic produces a fuzzy synthesis
- [ ] **Which roles to activate** — the role-activation matrix decides whose perspectives appear in Phase 2; the wrong roster means a missing voice or noise
- [ ] **What data and context is available** vs. assumed — Phase 2 contributions tag confidence and source, so known facts must be separated from guesses
- [ ] **Reversibility and stakes of the decision** — drives whether the full 6-phase protocol or an abbreviated advisory meeting is appropriate

Stop rule: ask only the 2-3 that most change the output. If the user says "just draft it," proceed and list your assumptions at the top of the artifact.

---

## The 6-Phase Protocol

```
PHASE 1: Context Gathering
    |
PHASE 2: Independent Contributions (ISOLATED)
    |
PHASE 3: Critic Analysis (Executive Mentor)
    |
PHASE 4: Synthesis (Chief of Staff)
    |
PHASE 5: Founder Review (FULL STOP -- human decides)
    |
PHASE 6: Decision Extraction and Logging
```

---

### Phase 1: Context Gathering

**Purpose**: Load all relevant context before anyone contributes.

```
Step 1: Load company context (if exists)
Step 2: Load decision history (Layer 2 ONLY -- NEVER raw transcripts)
Step 3: Reset session state -- no bleed from previous conversations
Step 4: Present agenda and activated roles
Step 5: Wait for founder confirmation before proceeding
```

#### Role Activation Matrix

Not all roles attend every meeting. Select based on topic:

| Topic Domain | Activate | Exclude |
|-------------|----------|---------|
| Market expansion | CEO, CMO, CFO, CRO, COO | CTO (unless tech expansion) |
| Product direction | CEO, CPO, CTO, CMO | CFO (unless budget question) |
| Hiring / org | CEO, CHRO, CFO, COO | CMO, CTO (unless their teams) |
| Pricing | CMO, CFO, CRO, CPO | CTO, CHRO |
| Technology | CTO, CPO, CFO, CISO | CMO, CRO |
| Fundraising | CEO, CFO, CRO | CISO, CHRO |
| Security incident | CEO, CTO, CISO, COO | CMO, CRO |
| M&A | CEO, CFO, CTO, CHRO, COO | -- (all relevant) |

**Maximum attendees**: 6 roles per meeting. More than 6 creates noise, not insight.

---

### Phase 2: Independent Contributions (ISOLATED)

**Critical Rule**: No cross-pollination. Each advisor contributes without seeing others' outputs. This is the primary groupthink prevention mechanism.

#### Contribution Order

```
1. Research/data gathering (if needed)
2. CMO  -- market perspective
3. CFO  -- financial perspective
4. CEO  -- strategic perspective
5. CTO  -- technical perspective
6. COO  -- operational perspective
7. CHRO -- people perspective
8. CRO  -- revenue perspective
9. CISO -- security/risk perspective
10. CPO -- product perspective
```

#### Contribution Format (Strict)

Each advisor's contribution must follow this exact format:

```
## [ROLE] -- [DATE]

Key Points (maximum 5):
  1. [Finding] -- Confidence: [High/Medium/Low] -- Source: [data source]
  2. [Finding] -- Confidence: [High/Medium/Low] -- Source: [data source]
  3. [Finding] -- Confidence: [High/Medium/Low] -- Source: [data source]

Recommendation: [Clear position statement]
Confidence: [High / Medium / Low]
Key Assumption: [The one assumption this recommendation depends on]
What Would Change My Mind: [Specific condition or data point]
```

#### Reasoning Techniques by Role

| Role | Technique | How It Works |
|------|-----------|-------------|
| CEO | Tree of Thought | Explore 3 possible futures, evaluate each |
| CFO | Chain of Thought | Show the math, step by step |
| CMO | Recursion of Thought | Draft -> self-critique -> refine |
| CPO | First Principles | Decompose to fundamental user needs |
| CRO | Chain of Thought | Pipeline math must be explicit |
| COO | Step by Step | Map the operational process |
| CTO | Analyze then Act | Research -> analyze -> recommend |
| CISO | Risk-Based | Probability x Impact for every option |
| CHRO | Empathy + Data | Human impact first, then validate with metrics |

---

### Phase 3: Critic Analysis

**Purpose**: The Executive Mentor receives ALL Phase 2 outputs simultaneously and performs adversarial review.

#### Critic Checklist

| Check | Question |
|-------|----------|
| Suspicious consensus | Where did agents agree too easily? |
| Shared assumptions | What assumptions are shared but unvalidated? |
| Missing voice | Who is not in the room? (customer voice? front-line ops?) |
| Unmentioned risk | What risk has nobody mentioned? |
| Domain bleed | Did any agent operate outside their domain? |
| Data quality | Which claims are backed by data vs. assumption? |
| Reversibility | Has anyone assessed if this decision can be undone? |

#### Critic Output Format

```
## CRITIC ANALYSIS

Consensus Assessment:
  [Genuine agreement / Suspicious alignment / Split decision]

Unvalidated Assumptions:
  1. [Assumption shared by multiple advisors but not verified]
  2. [Assumption]

Missing Perspectives:
  - [Voice or data point not represented]

Unmentioned Risks:
  - [Risk nobody raised]

Domain Violations:
  - [If any agent operated outside their domain]

The Uncomfortable Truth:
  [The one thing nobody wants to say but needs to be said]
```

---

### Phase 4: Synthesis

**Purpose**: Chief of Staff combines all inputs into a decision-ready format.

#### Synthesis Structure

```
## BOARD MEETING SYNTHESIS
Topic: [topic]
Date: [date]
Attendees: [r