Files
claude-skills-reference/c-level-advisor/executive-mentor/references/board_dynamics.md
Alireza Rezvani 466aa13a7b feat: C-Suite expansion — 8 new executive advisory roles (2→10) (#264)
* feat: C-Suite expansion — 8 new executive advisory roles

Add COO, CPO, CMO, CFO, CRO, CISO, CHRO advisors and Executive Mentor.
Expands C-level advisory from 2 to 10 roles with 74 total files.

Each role includes:
- SKILL.md (lean, <5KB, ~1200 tokens for context efficiency)
- Reference docs (loaded on demand, not at startup)
- Python analysis scripts (stdlib only, runnable CLI)

Executive Mentor features /em: slash commands (challenge, board-prep,
hard-call, stress-test, postmortem) with devil's advocate agent.

21 Python tools, 24 reference frameworks, 28,379 total lines.
All SKILL.md files combined: ~17K tokens (8.5% of 200K context window).

Badge: 88 → 116 skills

* feat: C-Suite orchestration layer + 18 complementary skills

ORCHESTRATION (new):
- cs-onboard: Founder interview → company-context.md
- chief-of-staff: Routing, synthesis, inter-agent orchestration
- board-meeting: 6-phase multi-agent deliberation protocol
- decision-logger: Two-layer memory (raw transcripts + approved decisions)
- agent-protocol: Inter-agent invocation with loop prevention
- context-engine: Company context loading + anonymization

CROSS-CUTTING CAPABILITIES (new):
- board-deck-builder: Board/investor update assembly
- scenario-war-room: Cascading multi-variable what-if modeling
- competitive-intel: Systematic competitor tracking + battlecards
- org-health-diagnostic: Cross-functional health scoring (8 dimensions)
- ma-playbook: M&A strategy (acquiring + being acquired)
- intl-expansion: International market entry frameworks

CULTURE & COLLABORATION (new):
- culture-architect: Values → behaviors, culture code, health assessment
- company-os: EOS/Scaling Up operating system selection + implementation
- founder-coach: Founder development, delegation, blind spots
- strategic-alignment: Strategy cascade, silo detection, alignment scoring
- change-management: ADKAR-based change rollout framework
- internal-narrative: One story across employees/investors/customers

UPGRADES TO EXISTING ROLES:
- All 10 roles get reasoning technique directives
- All 10 roles get company-context.md integration
- All 10 roles get board meeting isolation rules
- CEO gets stage-adaptive temporal horizons (seed→C)

Key design decisions:
- Two-layer memory prevents hallucinated consensus from rejected ideas
- Phase 2 isolation: agents think independently before cross-examination
- Executive Mentor (The Critic) sees all perspectives, others don't
- 25 Python tools total (stdlib only, no dependencies)

52 new files, 10 modified, 10,862 new lines.
Total C-suite ecosystem: 134 files, 39,131 lines.

* fix: connect all dots — Chief of Staff routes to all 28 skills

- Added complementary skills registry to routing-matrix.md
- Chief of Staff SKILL.md now lists all 28 skills in ecosystem
- Added integration tables to scenario-war-room and competitive-intel
- Badge: 116 → 134 skills
- README: C-Level Advisory count 10 → 28

Quality audit passed:
 All 10 roles: company-context, reasoning, isolation, invocation
 All 6 phases in board meeting
 Two-layer memory with DO_NOT_RESURFACE
 Loop prevention (no self-invoke, max depth 2, no circular)
 All /em: commands present
 All complementary skills cross-reference roles
 Chief of Staff routes to every skill in ecosystem

* refactor: CEO + CTO advisors upgraded to C-suite parity

Both roles now match the structural standard of all new roles:
- CEO: 11.7KB → 6.8KB SKILL.md (heavy content stays in references)
- CTO: 10KB → 7.2KB SKILL.md (heavy content stays in references)

Added to both:
- Integration table (who they work with and when)
- Key diagnostic questions
- Structured metrics dashboard table
- Consistent section ordering (Keywords → Quick Start → Responsibilities → Questions → Metrics → Red Flags → Integration → Reasoning → Context)

CEO additions:
- Stage-adaptive temporal horizons (seed=3m/6m/12m → B+=1y/3y/5y)
- Cross-references to culture-architect and board-deck-builder

CTO additions:
- Key Questions section (7 diagnostic questions)
- Structured metrics table (DORA + debt + team + architecture + cost)
- Cross-references to all peer roles

All 10 roles now pass structural parity:  Keywords  QuickStart  Questions  Metrics  RedFlags  Integration

* feat: add proactive triggers + output artifacts to all 10 roles

Every C-suite role now specifies:
- Proactive Triggers: 'surface these without being asked' — context-driven
  early warnings that make advisors proactive, not reactive
- Output Artifacts: concrete deliverables per request type (what you ask →
  what you get)

CEO: runway alerts, board prep triggers, strategy review nudges
CTO: deploy frequency monitoring, tech debt thresholds, bus factor flags
COO: blocker detection, scaling threshold warnings, cadence gaps
CPO: retention curve monitoring, portfolio dog detection, research gaps
CMO: CAC trend monitoring, positioning gaps, budget staleness
CFO: runway forecasting, burn multiple alerts, scenario planning gaps
CRO: NRR monitoring, pipeline coverage, pricing review triggers
CISO: audit overdue alerts, compliance gaps, vendor risk
CHRO: retention risk, comp band gaps, org scaling thresholds
Executive Mentor: board prep triggers, groupthink detection, hard call surfacing

This transforms the C-suite from reactive advisors into proactive partners.

* feat: User Communication Standard — structured output for all roles

Defines 3 output formats in agent-protocol/SKILL.md:

1. Standard Output: Bottom Line → What → Why → How to Act → Risks → Your Decision
2. Proactive Alert: What I Noticed → Why It Matters → Action → Urgency (🔴🟡)
3. Board Meeting: Decision Required → Perspectives → Agree/Disagree → Critic → Action Items

10 non-negotiable rules:
- Bottom line first, always
- Results and decisions only (no process narration)
- What + Why + How for every finding
- Actions have owners and deadlines ('we should consider' is banned)
- Decisions framed as options with trade-offs
- Founder is the highest authority — roles recommend, founder decides
- Risks are concrete (if X → Y, costs $Z)
- Max 5 bullets per section
- No jargon without explanation
- Silence over fabricated updates

All 10 roles reference this standard.
Chief of Staff enforces it as a quality gate.
Board meeting Phase 4 uses the Board Meeting Output format.

* feat: Internal Quality Loop — verification before delivery

No role presents to the founder without passing verification:

Step 1: Self-Verification (every role, every time)
  - Source attribution: where did each data point come from?
  - Assumption audit: [VERIFIED] vs [ASSUMED] tags on every finding
  - Confidence scoring: 🟢 high / 🟡 medium / 🔴 low per finding
  - Contradiction check against company-context + decision log
  - 'So what?' test: every finding needs a business consequence

Step 2: Peer Verification (cross-functional)
  - Financial claims → CFO validates math
  - Revenue projections → CRO validates pipeline backing
  - Technical feasibility → CTO validates
  - People/hiring impact → CHRO validates
  - Skip for single-domain, low-stakes questions

Step 3: Critic Pre-Screen (high-stakes only)
  - Irreversible decisions, >20% runway impact, strategy changes
  - Executive Mentor finds weakest point before founder sees it
  - Suspicious consensus triggers mandatory pre-screen

Step 4: Course Correction (after founder feedback)
  - Approve → log + assign actions
  - Modify → re-verify changed parts
  - Reject → DO_NOT_RESURFACE + learn why
  - 30/60/90 day post-decision review

Board meeting contributions now require self-verified format with
confidence tags and source attribution on every finding.

* fix: resolve PR review issues 1, 4, and minor observation

Issue 1: c-level-advisor/CLAUDE.md — completely rewritten
  - Was: 2 skills (CEO, CTO only), dated Nov 2025
  - Now: full 28-skill ecosystem map with architecture diagram,
    all roles/orchestration/cross-cutting/culture skills listed,
    design decisions, integration with other domains

Issue 4: Root CLAUDE.md — updated all stale counts
  - 87 → 134 skills across all 3 references
  - C-Level: 2 → 33 (10 roles + 5 mentor commands + 18 complementary)
  - Tool count: 160+ → 185+
  - Reference count: 200+ → 250+

Minor observation: Documented plugin.json convention
  - Explained in c-level-advisor/CLAUDE.md that only executive-mentor
    has plugin.json because only it has slash commands (/em: namespace)
  - Other skills are invoked by name through Chief of Staff or directly

Also fixed: README.md 88+ → 134 in two places (first line + skills section)

* fix: update all plugin/index registrations for 28-skill C-suite

1. c-level-advisor/.claude-plugin/plugin.json — v2.0.0
   - Was: 2 skills, generic description
   - Now: all 28 skills listed with descriptions, all 25 scripts,
     namespace 'cs', full ecosystem description

2. .codex/skills-index.json — added 18 complementary skills
   - Was: 10 roles only
   - Now: 28 total c-level entries (10 roles + 6 orchestration +
     6 cross-cutting + 6 culture)
   - Each with full description for skill discovery

3. .claude-plugin/marketplace.json — updated c-level-skills entry
   - Was: generic 2-skill description
   - Now: v2.0.0, full 28-skill ecosystem description,
     skills_count: 28, scripts_count: 25

* feat: add root SKILL.md for c-level-advisor ClawHub package

---------

Co-authored-by: Leo <leo@openclaw.ai>
2026-03-06 01:35:08 +01:00

11 KiB
Raw Blame History

Board Dynamics — Managing the People Who Can Fire You

Your board has the power to fire you. Most boards don't want to. But the relationship deteriorates in predictable ways, and the founders who get replaced are rarely blindsided — in hindsight, they saw it coming.

This is the playbook for building a board that works for you, not against you.


Part 1: Understanding Board Member Types

Not all directors are the same. Understanding who you're dealing with changes how you work with them.

The Operator Board Member

Usually a former founder or executive. Has built companies, made payroll, managed crises. Values: pragmatism, execution, honesty about what's not working.

What they want from you:

  • To see that you understand your own business cold
  • Honesty when things are hard
  • A clear sense that you know what you're doing operationally

How to work with them:

  • Be direct and specific about problems
  • Ask for their experience on specific operational challenges
  • They can smell spin — don't try it

Warning sign: They go quiet in board meetings. Operators who disengage are usually losing confidence.

The Financial Investor Director

VC or PE-backed. Focused on return. Watches: growth rate, burn, path to next round, exit prospects.

What they want from you:

  • The company to be on track to return their fund
  • To not be surprised by bad news
  • Confidence that you're the right person to lead through the next stage

How to work with them:

  • Know their fund's investment thesis — understand what "success" looks like to them
  • Give them the data they need proactively, before they ask
  • Be clear on fundraising timeline so they can plan

Warning sign: They start asking about the management team more than the business. This is a proxy for evaluating whether you need to be replaced.

The Independent Director

Usually brought in for governance, domain expertise, or to balance the board. Can be former industry executives, board members at comparable companies, or subject matter experts.

What they want from you:

  • To genuinely contribute, not just show up
  • To be informed and included, not just called when there's a crisis
  • Governance that protects them from legal exposure

How to work with them:

  • Give them a specific domain to own (e.g., "I want your guidance on enterprise sales strategy")
  • Consult them before board meetings on their area of expertise
  • Treat them as partners, not decoration

The Strategic Partner Director

Comes from a corporate strategic investment or partnership. Focused on how your success maps to their strategic interests.

What they want from you:

  • Alignment on strategy (their strategy, not just yours)
  • A productive relationship with the parent company
  • Visibility into product direction

The complication: Their interests and your investors' interests sometimes diverge. Manage this proactively. Don't let the board divide into factions.


Part 2: Information Architecture

What you tell the board, when you tell them, and how shapes the relationship more than almost anything else.

The Rule on Bad News

Tell them before the meeting, not during it.

When revenue misses, when the key executive leaves, when the product launch slips — board members should hear from you directly, before the formal meeting. A brief message: "I want to flag that Q3 came in below target. Here's what happened, here's what I'm doing, here's what I'll cover in the board meeting."

Why this matters:

  • It demonstrates you're on top of it
  • It removes the emotional surprise during the meeting (which makes it harder to have a productive conversation)
  • It shows that you treat them as partners, not as a board to manage

Board members who are surprised by bad news in a meeting start asking themselves: "What else don't I know?"

The Pre-Read

Send materials 57 days before the meeting, not the night before.

Standard pre-read package:

  • Board deck (current state, key metrics, major topics)
  • 1-page executive summary (what's the meeting for, what decisions are needed)
  • Supporting data appendices
  • Any significant updates since last meeting

The discipline test: If you're sending materials the day before, you're not in control of your business. The data should be available earlier. If it isn't, that's a systems problem worth fixing.

What to Keep Confidential

Not everything that happens in the company should go to the board. Use judgment:

Always share: Significant strategic changes, financial surprises, executive departures, legal matters, fundraising updates, product pivots.

Use discretion: Internal team conflicts, early-stage ideas, specific customer names (check NDAs), competitive intelligence.

Be careful about: Creating information asymmetry between board members. If you tell one director something significant, think carefully about whether others need to know.


Part 3: Running Effective Board Meetings

The Structure That Works

(15 min) CEO Update Current state of business in 5 minutes. What changed since last meeting. The one or two things you're most focused on. What you need from the board today.

(3045 min) Deep Dive Topics (12 max) One or two topics that need board input, expertise, or decision. Not status updates — strategic questions. "Should we enter the enterprise market now or in 12 months?" "We have two acquisition opportunities — what's your view?"

(30 min) Financial Review Actuals vs budget. Burn, runway, key metrics. Honest discussion of variance.

(15 min) Closed Session (CEO + Board only) Every meeting. Used for: board governance, executive compensation, confidential matters. This signals maturity. Skip it and directors raise it anyway.

(15 min) Wrap + Action Items What was decided, who owns what, by when. Sent within 24 hours.

How to Handle Disagreement in the Meeting

Board members will sometimes challenge your recommendations publicly. How you handle it determines the room's perception of your leadership.

Good response to challenge:

  1. Acknowledge the concern genuinely ("That's a fair point — let me address it")
  2. State your position with specific evidence
  3. Acknowledge uncertainty where it exists
  4. Be clear about who decides and that you've considered this

Bad responses:

  • Getting defensive ("I think you're not seeing the full picture")
  • Caving immediately to avoid conflict ("You're right, we'll change it")
  • Being dismissive ("We already thought about that")

You can disagree with a board member and still build their confidence in you. What matters is how you engage with the challenge.

The Closed Session

Every board meeting should end with a closed session — board members only, no CEO.

Yes, this is uncomfortable. It's supposed to be. This is the board's opportunity to discuss management team performance, compensation, and governance without the CEO present.

Don't skip it because it makes you nervous. Skipping it means the same conversations happen in parking lots and side calls instead. Better in the room.

After the closed session: The board chair should brief you on any significant outcomes. If they don't, ask.


Part 4: When the Board Loses Confidence

Early Warning Signs

  • Questions about the management team become more frequent
  • Board members start contacting reports directly without telling you
  • You notice side conversations happening before or after board meetings
  • Meeting dynamics shift — less engagement, more skepticism
  • A director asks to be added to distribution lists you normally manage
  • Requests for more frequent reporting

The mistake: Pretending not to notice.

The right move: Name it. "I've noticed some different dynamics in recent board interactions. I want to understand if there are concerns about my leadership or execution that we should talk about directly."

This is hard. It's also the only thing that gives you a chance to address it.

The CEO Review

Most boards conduct annual or semi-annual CEO reviews. If yours doesn't, ask for one. This is a governance strength, not a vulnerability.

Questions typically asked in a CEO review:

  • Is the company meeting its strategic goals?
  • Is the CEO executing on the plan?
  • Is the CEO building the right team?
  • What's the CEO's relationship with the board?
  • Is the CEO growing into the company's stage?

Preparing for your own review: Self-assess honestly first. Know where you're strong and where you're not. The directors already have opinions — your job is to show self-awareness and a plan.

The Confidence Conversation

If you believe the board is losing confidence, have the direct conversation — one-on-one with the board chair or lead director.

"I want to be direct with you. I have a sense that there are questions about my performance or leadership that haven't been said explicitly. I'd rather hear them directly than through signals."

If the answer is yes, there are concerns:

  • Listen without defending
  • Ask clarifying questions
  • Ask what a successful path forward looks like
  • Agree on specific commitments and a timeline

If the answer is "no, everything is fine":

  • Note your concern ("I appreciate that, and I'd rather air this concern than not")
  • Keep watching the signals

Part 5: Managing Investor Expectations

The Fundraising Narrative

Your current investors are your reference letters for the next round. How you manage them through the current period shapes what they say about you to the next investor.

The mistake: Only engaging investors deeply when you need something.

The right approach: Proactive, regular, honest communication. Monthly investor updates. Reply to emails within 24 hours. Share wins and problems with equal transparency.

Monthly Investor Update Template

[Company] — [Month] Update

**Headline:** [One sentence — the most important thing that happened]

**Key Metrics:**
- MRR: $X (vs $Y last month)
- Burn: $X/month, Runway: X months
- [3-5 metrics that matter for your stage]

**What went well:**
- [2-3 bullets]

**What didn't:**
- [1-2 bullets — being honest here builds more trust than hiding it]

**What we need:**
- [Specific asks — introductions, expertise, candidates]

Monthly. Brief. Honest. Consistent. This is table stakes.

When to Call an Emergency Meeting

Don't wait for the quarterly board meeting if:

  • You've missed a significant milestone by more than 20%
  • A key executive is leaving
  • There's a legal or compliance issue
  • You're considering a strategic pivot
  • Runway is below 9 months and fundraising hasn't started

The call should come from you, with your analysis and your plan, before they start asking questions.

Navigating Competing Investor Interests

If you have multiple institutional investors, their interests sometimes conflict. Common tensions:

  • One wants to sell early; another wants to push for a larger outcome
  • One is focused on strategic acquirers; another on IPO
  • One wants to protect pro-rata in a new round; another wants a new lead

Your job: Be transparent with all of them, don't manage information asymmetrically, and be clear about your own perspective and what's best for the company. You serve the company, not any individual investor.

When conflicts are severe: get independent legal counsel. Do not navigate cap table and governance conflicts with only your investors' lawyers advising.