---
name: assemble-board
description: Assemble the Board — parallel director delegation with information asymmetry, natural dissent, and convergence synthesis.
visibility: public
type: launch
director: CEO
base: null
url: navigateengine.com/skill/assemble-board
---

# Assemble the Board

## input

Use whatever question or problem is already in the conversation. Do not ask — proceed immediately.

## process

SPEED RULES:
- Default to 3 directors. Only use 4-5 if the problem genuinely spans that many domains.
- Spawn ALL directors in PARALLEL — multiple Agent/spawn tool calls in a SINGLE response. Never sequential. Never simulate if you can spawn.
- Each director gets <=100 words. All equal.
- Every brief includes a Challenge line. Dissent emerges naturally from whichever director's domain surfaces the risk — never pre-assigned.
- If a director challenges their brief, give them up to 300 words to articulate the challenge in a follow-up.
- If ALL directors agree: name what is NOT being questioned. Genuine consensus is valid but must be explicitly noted.

EXECUTION MODE (auto-detect, never ask — parallel is ALWAYS preferred):
- PARALLEL AGENTS (default): If you have ANY tool that spawns sub-processes or agents, use it. Spawn ALL directors simultaneously in a SINGLE response with multiple tool calls. This is fastest. In Claude Code: multiple Agent tool calls in one message = parallel execution. Always attempt this first.
- SIMULATION (fallback only): Only if no sub-agent/spawn tool exists at all. Simulate each director independently. CRITICAL: complete Director A's full response before starting B. No cross-contamination.

Detection: if you have a tool named "Agent", "spawn_agent", "create_task", or "parallel_execute" — you MUST use PARALLEL AGENTS. Do not simulate when you can spawn.

STEPS:

1. PREP (all in a single output, no pausing):
   a. Restate the problem as one sentence
   b. Pick 3 directors — justify each. One-line exclusion reason for each excluded director.
   c. REFRAME CHECK: before spawning, state in one sentence whether this is the right question to ask. If it isn't, reframe it and proceed with the better question.

2. SPAWN — brief all directors simultaneously. Give each director a DIFFERENT evidence slice from the problem (e.g. CMO gets revenue data, CTO gets architecture constraints, CIO gets market research). Do not give every director the same context — information asymmetry produces genuine disagreement.
   ```
   BRIEF → [CODE]
   Situation: [1 sentence — tailored to this director's evidence slice]
   Task: [1 sentence — what to produce]
   Done: [1 binary test]
   Constraint: <=100 words
   Challenge: If this brief is asking the wrong question, say so instead of answering it.
   ```

3. COLLECT — if a director challenged their brief, give them a follow-up with up to 300 words to articulate the challenge fully. This is where dissent gets room — earned, not pre-assigned.

4. CONVERGE — fill this exact table:
   ```
   AGREE: [specific claim all converge on]
   DISAGREE: [the specific tension between named directors]
   CRUX: [single variable explaining the disagreement]
   SURPRISE: [genuinely novel — if it restates what a director already said, try again. If nothing: "None — and that's a red flag."]
   INVERSION: [state the opposite of your recommendation. Under what single condition would THAT be correct instead?]
   ```
   If all directors agreed: replace DISAGREE with "CONSENSUS: [what is NOT being questioned that should be]"

5. DECIDE — one paragraph, stated with conviction. No hedging. If the SURPRISE changed your thinking, say how. If the INVERSION condition is plausible, name the safeguard.

6. NEXT — one action, one owner, one timeframe.

## output

The convergence table + recommendation + next action. Not an HTML report — speed over polish for this skill.

## checks

The output MUST satisfy ALL of the following. If any would fail, revise before writing.

```json
["Problem restated as single sentence","Reframe check: stated whether this is the right question","3 directors selected (4-5 only if justified)","Each brief includes Challenge line","Each director given a different evidence slice","If a director challenged: follow-up given with <=300 words","If no director challenged: explicitly name what is NOT being questioned","Convergence table has AGREE/DISAGREE/CRUX/SURPRISE/INVERSION","SURPRISE is genuinely novel, not a restatement","INVERSION names a specific condition that would flip the recommendation","Recommendation is one paragraph, no hedging","Next action is exactly one step naming owner and timeframe"]
```