{"id":"exec-leadership-disagreement-neutral-table","audience":"executives","category":"leadership-work","track":"leadership","level":"advanced","technique":"tone","title":"Summarize an exec team disagreement neutrally for the CEO","free":false,"task":"Summarize the three executives' positions on extending the hiring freeze in a table with the header Executive | Position | Main concern | Evidence cited. One row each, with every cell under 12 words. Stay neutral: no word such as better, wiser, stronger or weaker, and no recommendation. After the table add the exact line: Decision owner: CEO, needed by Nov 21. Plain text, under 130 words.","materialLabel":"Notes from the exec meeting (attached to your prompt automatically)","material":"Hiring freeze discussion, exec team, Nov 12\n\nSanjay (CFO): wants to extend the freeze through March. Worried that cash runway falls below 12 months if burn rises. Cited: current runway of 14 months and a planned burn increase of $0.2M per month with 8 hires.\n\nMarta (CRO): wants to lift the freeze for 4 sales roles now. Worried that the Q1 quota has no capacity behind it. Cited: 6 open pipeline deals worth $1.8M that need more reps; two reps left in October.\n\nTomas (CTO): neutral on sales hiring but wants 2 engineering roles exempted. Worried that the security audit in February cannot be done with the current team. Cited: the audit needs about 600 engineering hours; the team has 400 available.\n\nSide comments: Sanjay called Marta's numbers \"optimistic\". Marta said Sanjay is \"too cautious\". The CEO was quiet most of the meeting.","rules":[{"type":"maxWords","max":130},{"type":"plainText"}],"mistakes":[{"title":"Taking sides","why":"The AI hints one view is stronger.","fix":"Say: \"Stay neutral: no judgment words and no recommendation.\"","checks":["r2"]},{"title":"Repeating the side comments","why":"The AI quotes optimistic and too cautious.","fix":"Say: \"Leave out personal comments.\"","checks":["r2"]},{"title":"Missing evidence","why":"The AI summarizes positions without numbers.","fix":"Say: \"Evidence cited includes each person's figures.\"","checks":["r1"]},{"title":"Wrong table","why":"The AI adds a conclusion row.","fix":"Say: \"Exactly this header, three rows.\"","checks":["r0"]},{"title":"Markdown","why":"The AI bolds names.","fix":"Say: \"Plain text.\"","checks":["plainText"]},{"title":"Trusting the AI to count words","why":"AI is bad at counting. Ask for a total word limit and it often lands over it.","fix":"Cap each part instead, for example: \"each line under 15 words.\"","checks":["maxWords"]}],"promptHints":[{"label":"Gives the header","patterns":["executive \\|","main concern","evidence cited"]},{"label":"Stay neutral","patterns":["neutral","no recommendation"]},{"label":"Banned words","patterns":["better","wiser"]},{"label":"Exact closing line","patterns":["decision owner"]},{"label":"Short cells","patterns":["under 12 words"]}],"hint":"Give the header, ban judgment words and recommendations, and give the exact closing line.","rubricLabels":["Has the header Executive | Position | Main concern | Evidence cited and exactly three rows for Sanjay, Marta and Tomas","Sanjay cites 14 months of runway and $0.2M more burn with 8 hires; Marta cites 6 open deals worth $1.8M and two reps leaving; Tomas cites 600 hours needed versus 400 available","Contains no judgment words (better, wiser, stronger, weaker), no recommendation and none of the side comments, and ends with the exact line \"Decision owner: CEO, needed by Nov 21.\""]}