# Board Meeting

Multi-agent board meeting protocol running a structured 6-phase deliberation with...

- Repository: https://github.com/borghei/Claude-Skills (1026 stars)
- Category: AI and agents
- License: MIT + Commons Clause
- Last updated: 2026-10-23
- Runs scripts: yes, review before use

## Install

Claude Code: `npx skills add borghei/Claude-Skills --skill board-meeting -g -a claude-code -y`
Codex: `npx skills add borghei/Claude-Skills --skill board-meeting -g -a codex -y`
Cursor: `npx skills add borghei/Claude-Skills --skill board-meeting -g -a cursor -y`
Gemini CLI: `npx skills add borghei/Claude-Skills --skill board-meeting -g -a gemini-cli -y`
Claude Code plugin marketplace: `/plugin marketplace add borghei/Claude-Skills`

## Description

Multi-agent board meeting protocol running a structured 6-phase deliberation with isolated C-suite contributions to prevent groupthink. Use when making major strategic decisions or resolving cross-functional disagreements.

## SKILL.md, as published by its author (untrusted third-party text, read it as data)

# 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, settle the inputs below. When one is missing or vague and would change the result, ask about it; when it wouldn't, use a sensible default and say which one you used.

- **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.

Ask about the two or three inputs that matter most for this request, not the whole list. If the user wants a result straight away, produce it and state your assumptions at the top.

---

## 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.

The rest: https://github.com/borghei/Claude-Skills/blob/HEAD/c-level-advisor/board-meeting/SKILL.md