| name | board-meeting |
| description | Multi-agent board meeting protocol for strategic decisions. Runs a structured 6-phase deliberation: context loading, independent C-suite contributions (isolated, no cross-pollination), critic analysis, synthesis, founder review, and decision extraction. Use when the user invokes /cs:boardroom, calls a board meeting, or wants structured multi-perspective executive deliberation on a strategic question. |
| license | MIT |
| metadata | {"version":"1.0.0","author":"Alireza Rezvani","category":"c-level","domain":"board-protocol","updated":"2026-03-05T00:00:00.000Z","frameworks":"6-phase-board, two-layer-memory, independent-contributions"} |
Board Meeting Protocol
Structured multi-agent deliberation that prevents groupthink, captures minority views, and produces clean, actionable decisions.
Keywords
board meeting, executive deliberation, strategic decision, C-suite, multi-agent, /cs:boardroom, founder review, decision extraction, independent perspectives
Invoke
/cs:boardroom [topic] — e.g. /cs:boardroom Should we expand to Spain in Q3?
The 6-Phase Protocol
PHASE 1: Context Gathering
- Load
~/.claude/company-context.md
- Load Layer 2 approved decisions from
~/.claude/decisions/approved/ (Layer 2 ONLY — never raw transcripts)
- Reset session state — no bleed from previous conversations
- Present agenda + activated roles → wait for founder confirmation
Chief of Staff selects relevant roles based on topic (not all 14 every time):
| Topic | Activate |
|---|
| Market expansion | CEO, CMO, CFO, CRO, COO |
| Product direction | CEO, CPO, CTO, CMO |
| Hiring/org | CEO, CHRO, CFO, COO (+ VPE for eng hiring) |
| Pricing | CMO, CFO, CRO, CPO |
| Technology | CTO, CPO, CFO, CISO |
| Contracts / term sheets / legal exposure | GC, CEO, CFO |
| Data strategy / training-data rights | CDO, CAIO, GC, CISO |
| AI strategy / model selection / AI risk | CAIO, CTO, CDO, CFO |
| Retention / churn / customer success | CCO, CRO, CPO |
| Eng delivery / DORA / team structure | VPE, CTO, CHRO, CFO |
PHASE 2: Independent Contributions (ISOLATED)
No cross-pollination. Each agent runs before seeing others' outputs.
Order: Research (if needed) → CMO → CFO → CEO → CTO → COO → CHRO → CRO → CISO → CPO → GC → CDO → CAIO → CCO → VPE (activated roles only)
Reasoning techniques: CEO: Tree of Thought (3 futures) | CFO: Chain of Thought (show the math) | CMO: Recursion of Thought (draft→critique→refine) | CPO: First Principles | CRO: Chain of Thought (pipeline math) | COO: Step by Step (process map) | CTO: ReAct (research→analyze→act) | CISO: Risk-Based (P×I) | CHRO: Empathy + Data | GC: Risk-Based (clause exposure) | CDO: Decision-Driven (what decision does this data drive) | CAIO: Eval-Demanding (no eval, no ship) | CCO: Retention-Obsessed (GRR over NRR) | VPE: Throughput-First (cycle-time math)
Contribution format (max 5 key points, self-verified):
## [ROLE] — [DATE]
Key points (max 5):
• [Finding] — [VERIFIED/ASSUMED] — 🟢/🟡/🔴
• [Finding] — [VERIFIED/ASSUMED] — 🟢/🟡/🔴
Recommendation: [clear position]
Confidence: High / Medium / Low
Source: [where the data came from]
What would change my mind: [specific condition]
Each agent self-verifies before contributing: source attribution, assumption audit, confidence scoring. No untagged claims.
PHASE 3: Critic Analysis
Executive Mentor receives ALL Phase 2 outputs simultaneously. Role: adversarial reviewer, not synthesizer.
Checklist:
- Where did agents agree too easily? (suspicious consensus = red flag)
- What assumptions are shared but unvalidated?
- Who is missing from the room? (customer voice? front-line ops?)
- What risk has nobody mentioned?
- Which agent operated outside their domain?
PHASE 4: Synthesis
Chief of Staff delivers using the Board Meeting Output format (defined in ../agent-protocol/SKILL.md):
- Decision Required (one sentence)
- Perspectives (one line per contributing role)
- Where They Agree / Where They Disagree
- Critic's View (the uncomfortable truth)
- Recommended Decision + Action Items (owners, deadlines)
- Your Call (options if founder disagrees)
PHASE 5: Human in the Loop ⏸️
Full stop. Wait for the founder.
⏸️ FOUNDER REVIEW — [Paste synthesis]
Options: ✅ Approve | ✏️ Modify | ❌ Reject | ❓ Ask follow-up
Rules:
- User corrections OVERRIDE agent proposals. No pushback. No "but the CFO said..."
- 30-min inactivity → auto-close as "pending review"
- Reopen any time with
/cs:boardroom resume
PHASE 6: Decision Extraction
After founder approval:
- Layer 1: Write full transcript →
~/.claude/decisions/raw/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md
- Layer 2: Write approved decision record →
~/.claude/decisions/approved/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md and append to the index ~/.claude/decisions/approved/decisions.md
- Mark rejected proposals
[DO_NOT_RESURFACE]
- Confirm to founder with count of decisions logged, actions tracked, flags added
Memory Structure
Uses the canonical two-layer decision memory (see ../agent-protocol/SKILL.md → "Decision Memory (Canonical Layout)"):
~/.claude/decisions/
├── raw/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md # Layer 1 — full transcripts (never auto-loaded)
├── raw/archive/YYYY/ # Raw transcripts after 90 days
├── approved/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md # Layer 2 — founder-approved records (Phase 1 loads these)
└── approved/decisions.md # Layer 2 index — append-only
Future meetings load Layer 2 only. Never Layer 1. This prevents hallucinated consensus.
Migration: a legacy memory/board-meetings/ folder may exist from earlier versions; read it for history but write new transcripts and decisions to ~/.claude/decisions/.
Failure Mode Quick Reference
| Failure | Fix |
|---|
| Groupthink (all agree) | Re-run Phase 2 isolated; force "strongest argument against" |
| Analysis paralysis | Cap at 5 points; force recommendation even with Low confidence |
| Bikeshedding | Log as async action item; return to main agenda |
| Role bleed (CFO making product calls) | Critic flags; exclude from synthesis |
| Layer contamination | Phase 1 loads ~/.claude/decisions/approved/ only — hard rule |
References
templates/meeting-agenda.md — agenda formattemplates/meeting-minutes.md — final output formatreferences/meeting-facilitation.md — conflict handling, timing, failure modes
