Advisory boards

Advisoryboardsthatproducedecisions,nottranscripts

A well-run board changes an internal position. A poorly run one produces a document nobody reads. The difference is designed in, not facilitated in.

Updated August 2026 · 5 min read

An advisory board is an expensive instrument for gathering opinion and a very effective instrument for testing a position. Which of the two you get is determined weeks before the meeting.

Convene around an open decision

If the sponsoring team already knows what it will do, the board becomes a validation exercise and experts notice. Bring a genuine fork: two defensible interpretations of the evidence, and a decision that depends on which holds.

Key insight
If the discussion cannot change the sponsor's position, the meeting is a briefing with a catering budget.

Design the questions, then the agenda

Four well-constructed questions with pre-reads circulated far enough in advance will outperform a full day of broad discussion. Sequence them so that each answer narrows the next.

Record dissent

A summary that reports consensus where there was none is worse than no summary. Where experts diverged, say so and say why — that divergence is usually the most useful thing the board produced.

Close the loop

Tell participants what changed as a result. It is a courtesy, it is good practice, and it is the reason serious faculty accept the next invitation.


Have a programme in the diary? Send a scope, a timeline, or just a question.

Start a conversation