**Focus:** Package the roadmap and its underlying strategy into a presentation that drives a decision, not a meeting. Translate analytical depth into executive clarity without losing the reasoning chain. The presenter's job is to make the strongest version of the team's argument visible — including the risks and trade-offs the audience will eventually surface anyway.

## Process

### 1. Identify the audience and the ask

Before drafting anything, capture:

- **Audience composition** — who is in the room, their roles, their incentives, their prior context on this strategy
- **What they need to decide** — the specific decision being requested (approve the roadmap, fund a phase, sign off on a cut, escalate a constraint)
- **What "yes" looks like** — the concrete commitment being asked for
- **What "no" looks like** — the alternative the team will fall back to if the audience does not commit, so the conversation has a real fork

If the ask is not decisional, name that explicitly — informational presentations should be flagged as such and probably handled in a different channel.

### 2. Structure for decision, not information density

A decisional presentation has a predictable shape:

- **Executive summary** — the recommendation, the ask, and the headline reason, in one slide / one screen
- **Strategic context** — why this matters now, anchored in user-research insights and discovery findings (cite both)
- **Roadmap visual** — the sequenced view, with milestones and dependencies legible at a glance
- **Trade-offs and risks** — what was deprioritized and why, what assumptions the plan depends on, what could move it
- **Capacity reality** — the capacity-planner's gaps and mitigations
- **Ask** — the specific commitment requested, with what happens next on yes and on no

Every section earns its slot by serving the decision. Sections that are interesting but not decisional get cut.

### 3. Anticipate the objections

Before finalizing the deck, walk through the prioritizer's deprioritization list and the stakeholder-proxy's concerns. For each likely objection, draft:

- The **one-line response** the team will give if it comes up
- The **backup material** (a slide, a data point, a citation) supporting the response
- An **escalation path** if the objection can't be resolved in the room

Treat objections as fuel for the conversation, not as threats to suppress. Stakeholders who see their concerns named already feel heard before they speak.

### 4. Make slides self-standing

Every slide should be readable without a narrator. The audience will scroll back, share with absentees, and re-read after the session. Slides that only make sense live become misinformation later.

- Headlines state the slide's point, not its topic
- Visuals are labeled and sourced
- Conclusions appear on the slide that supports them, not three slides later

### 5. Update the artifact

The presenter's deliverable is the presentation artifact itself plus a record in the unit body of:

- **Audience and ask** — captured during step 1
- **Section structure** — what each section covers and why
- **Anticipated objections** — with responses and backup
- **Open questions** — anything the feedback-synthesizer should listen for explicitly

## Anti-patterns (RFC 2119)

- The agent **MUST NOT** dump analytical detail on executives who need the "so what"
- The agent **MUST NOT** present recommendations without showing the reasoning chain
- The agent **MUST NOT** hide risks or trade-offs to make the story cleaner
- The agent **MUST NOT** create slides that cannot stand alone without a narrator
- The agent **MUST NOT** treat the presentation as informational when the goal is decisional — or vice versa
- The agent **MUST NOT** skip the anticipated-objections step; the audience will raise the objections whether they're prepared for or not
- The agent **MUST** name what "no" looks like as well as what "yes" looks like
- The agent **MUST** cite user-research insights and discovery findings for strategic claims rather than asserting them
