board-meeting
Installation
SKILL.md
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
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: [roles]
### Decision Required
[One sentence: what must be decided]
### Perspectives Summary
| Role | Position | Confidence | Key Concern |
|------|----------|-----------|-------------|
| [Role] | [1-line summary] | [H/M/L] | [Top concern] |
| [Role] | [1-line summary] | [H/M/L] | [Top concern] |
### Where They Agree
[2-3 consensus points]
### Where They Disagree
[Named conflicts with each side's reasoning]
[What the disagreement is really about]
### Critic's View
[The uncomfortable truth from Phase 3]
### Recommended Decision
[Clear recommendation with rationale]
### Action Items (if approved)
1. [Action] -- Owner: [role] -- Deadline: [date]
2. [Action] -- Owner: [role] -- Deadline: [date]
3. [Action] -- Owner: [role] -- Deadline: [date]
### Your Call
[If you disagree with the recommendation, here are alternatives:]
Option A: [description] -- Trade-off: [what you gain/lose]
Option B: [description] -- Trade-off: [what you gain/lose]
Phase 5: Founder Review
FULL STOP. Wait for the founder. No agent acts beyond this point.
FOUNDER REVIEW
[Paste synthesis above]
Options:
[A] Approve as recommended
[M] Modify (specify changes)
[R] Reject (specify reason)
[Q] Ask follow-up question to specific role
[D] Defer decision (specify timeline)
Phase 5 Rules
| Rule | Rationale |
|---|---|
| Founder corrections override all agent proposals | Human judgment is final |
| No pushback on founder decisions | Agents advise, founder decides |
| 30-minute inactivity auto-closes as "pending review" | Prevents zombie meetings |
| Founder can reopen any time | Decisions are not time-locked |
| Follow-up questions go to specific role | Keeps discussion focused |
Phase 6: Decision Extraction
Purpose: After founder approval, extract and log all decisions.
Step 1: Write full transcript to Layer 1
--> memory/board-meetings/YYYY-MM-DD-raw.md
Step 2: Run conflict detection against existing decisions
--> Check for DO_NOT_RESURFACE violations
--> Check for topic contradictions
--> Check for owner conflicts
Step 3: Surface any conflicts to founder for resolution
Step 4: Append approved decisions to Layer 2
--> memory/board-meetings/decisions.md
Step 5: Mark rejected proposals with DO_NOT_RESURFACE
Step 6: Confirm to founder:
"Meeting concluded. Logged: [N] decisions, [M] action items,
[K] DO_NOT_RESURFACE flags."
Failure Mode Reference
| Failure | Detection | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Groupthink | All advisors agree without tension | Re-run Phase 2 isolated; force "strongest argument against" |
| Analysis paralysis | Discussion exceeds 5 points per advisor | Cap at 5; force recommendation even with Low confidence |
| Bikeshedding | Discussion on minor points, major decisions deferred | Log as async action; return to main agenda |
| Role bleed | CFO making product calls, CTO pricing | Critic flags in Phase 3; exclude from synthesis |
| Layer contamination | Raw transcripts loaded in Phase 1 | Hard rule: decisions.md only. Never raw. |
| Founder absence | Phase 5 timeout | Auto-close as pending. No decisions without founder. |
| Stale context | Company context not loaded | Phase 1 mandatory context check |
| Missing role | Key perspective not activated | Chief of Staff reviews topic against routing matrix |
Meeting Cadence
| Trigger | Meeting Type | Typical Duration |
|---|---|---|
| Scheduled quarterly | Full strategic review | 2-3 hours |
| Complexity score >= 8 | On-demand strategic | 1-2 hours |
| Cross-functional conflict | Resolution meeting | 1 hour |
| Crisis or urgent decision | Emergency session | 30-60 minutes |
| Founder request | Any topic | Varies |
Red Flags
- Board meetings consistently produce no decisions -- meeting is theater
- Same topic discussed in 3+ meetings -- decision avoidance
- Phase 2 contributions all align perfectly -- isolation was breached or topic is trivial
- No Phase 3 (critic) conducted -- groupthink risk
- Founder skipping Phase 5 -- decisions without accountability
- Decisions logged but never reviewed -- decision logger not functioning
- Meeting attendees always include all roles -- topic selection not working
Output Artifacts
| Request | Deliverable |
|---|---|
| "Convene the board on [topic]" | Full 6-phase protocol execution |
| "Quick advisory meeting" | Abbreviated: Phase 1-2-4-5 (skip critic) |
| "Review a past meeting" | Load Layer 1 raw transcript (explicit request only) |
| "What did we decide about [topic]?" | Search Layer 2 decision history |
| "Resume a pending meeting" | Reload Phase 5 with pending synthesis |
Tool Reference
meeting_simulator.py
Validates role activation, contribution completeness, and phase sequencing.
# Simulate with defaults
python scripts/meeting_simulator.py
# Specify topic and complexity
python scripts/meeting_simulator.py --topic "Series B timing" --type fundraising --complexity 9
# Specify activated roles
python scripts/meeting_simulator.py --type m_and_a --roles CEO CFO CTO CHRO
# List all topic types and required roles
python scripts/meeting_simulator.py --list-topics
# JSON output
python scripts/meeting_simulator.py --type strategy --json
decision_tracker.py
Tracks board decisions, detects conflicts, flags overdue reviews and actions.
# Track demo decisions
python scripts/decision_tracker.py
# From decision log file
python scripts/decision_tracker.py --input decisions.json
# JSON output
python scripts/decision_tracker.py --json
complexity_scorer.py
Scores decision complexity to determine single/dual/multi-advisor or board routing.
# Score with CLI flags
python scripts/complexity_scorer.py --topic "Market expansion" --domains 2 --reversibility 2 --financial 1 --team 2 --urgency 0
# Add modifiers
python scripts/complexity_scorer.py --topic "Acquisition" --domains 2 --reversibility 2 --financial 2 --team 2 --urgency 1 --modifiers cross_functional external_stakeholders sets_precedent
# JSON output
python scripts/complexity_scorer.py --topic "Pricing change" --json
Troubleshooting
| Problem | Likely Cause | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| All advisors agree without any tension in Phase 2 | Groupthink or trivial topic; isolation may have been breached | Re-run Phase 2 with forced "strongest argument against" from each role |
| Discussion exceeds 5 points per advisor | Analysis paralysis; no cap enforced | Hard cap at 5 key points; force a recommendation even with Low confidence |
| Phase 5 times out with no founder response | Founder absence or decision avoidance | Auto-close as "pending review" at 30 min; no decisions without founder |
| Same topic discussed in 3+ meetings | Decision avoidance or new data not surfaced | Escalate: force decision or formally defer with stated timeline |
| Decisions logged but never reviewed | Decision logger not integrated into meeting cadence | Add "previous decisions review" to Phase 1 context loading |
| Roles operating outside their domain | No critic analysis conducted or critic missed it | Enforce Phase 3 critic checklist; flag domain violations explicitly |
Success Criteria
- Every board meeting produces at least 1 logged decision with owner, deadline, and review date
- Phase 2 contributions are independently generated (zero cross-pollination incidents per quarter)
- Phase 3 critic analysis identifies at least 1 unvalidated assumption per meeting
- Founder approval/modification/rejection captured within 30 minutes of synthesis presentation
- Decision history has zero conflicting active decisions (conflicts detected and resolved)
- Meeting duration stays within 2 hours for standard strategic reviews, 1 hour for resolution meetings
- 90%+ of logged decisions have action items completed by their stated deadlines
Scope & Limitations
In Scope: Multi-agent deliberation protocol, role activation matrix, contribution formats, critic analysis, synthesis, decision extraction, decision conflict detection, meeting simulation.
Out of Scope: Actual AI agent orchestration (this is a protocol specification, not runtime code), real-time meeting facilitation, video/audio recording, external board member management.
Limitations: The protocol assumes all advisor contributions are available in text format. Complexity scoring provides routing guidance but cannot account for political dynamics. Decision conflict detection works on exact topic matching -- semantic conflicts across different topics require human judgment.
Integration Points
| Skill | Integration |
|---|---|
chief-of-staff |
Routes questions that score 9-10 complexity into the board meeting protocol |
decision-logger |
Phase 6 feeds decisions directly into the two-layer decision memory |
board-deck-builder |
Board deck sections provide pre-read context for Phase 1 |
executive-mentor |
Phase 3 critic analysis can be performed by the Executive Mentor skill |
ceo-advisor through ciso-advisor |
All C-suite advisors contribute independently in Phase 2 |
strategic-alignment |
Validates that meeting decisions align with strategic goals |