Get the user-experience argument, the engineering constraint, the conversion impact, and the brand consequence — all before your next design review.
The Designer argues for user experience; The Customer argues for the buyer; The Growth Hacker argues for conversion; The Engineer argues for feasibility. The compromise becomes visible.
Token systems, component patterns, library splits, accessibility compliance — debated with structural rigor.
The CFO and Marketer surface when a design decision has revenue impact — paywalls, onboarding flows, pricing pages.
The hardest critique often comes from the loudest voice in the room. The Boardroom critiques on the merits, with no quarterly review history attached.
Real questions. Multiple expert perspectives. Every time.
“Should our pricing page lead with 3 tiers or with a single CTA and value-anchored comparison?”
“Our onboarding has 7 steps. Should we cut to 3 and risk losing data, or keep all 7?”
“Push for the design-system rewrite this quarter or keep shipping product?”
“The PM wants a feature behind a modal; I think it needs a full page. How do we decide objectively?”
“Should I take the design lead role at my company or go IC at a more interesting company?”
Each expert thinks independently — they won’t just agree with each other.
The Designer
Defends the user’s end-to-end experience against shortcuts.
The Customer
Speaks for the buyer’s real problem, not the product team’s assumption.
The Growth Hacker
Finds asymmetric distribution wins on a bootstrap budget.
The Engineer
Translates ambition into what’s actually buildable, by when, with whom.
The Skeptic
Questions every premise. Finds blind spots others miss.
A synthesized recommendation from your team of experts — not just opinions, but structured analysis.
Strong Agreement
Key Recommendations
Synthesized Recommendation
Cut to 4 steps with the most critical 2 inputs gated, the next 2 optional. Capture the rest via in-product prompts post-activation. Onboarding completion typically rises 25-40% with a 50%+ step reduction, and the data you lose upfront is recoverable.
Full analysis continues with detailed reasoning, trade-offs, and next steps...
Watch Out For
Expert Opinions
“The best designs survive arguments. The boardroom is where I run those arguments before the design review — so I walk in with a defended position, not a hopeful one.”
Senior designers know hallway critique is biased by who you trust. The Boardroom critiques the work, not the person.
Most design disputes are actually cross-functional disputes. The Boardroom puts all three voices in the same session.
Design defended against revenue conversations needs both languages. The Boardroom speaks both.
Every session is an artifact you can drop into Figma docs or Notion — context, options, rationale, watch-outs. Solves the "why did we design it this way?" question six months from now.
The questions people ask before they sign up.
SynthBoard's vision support lets you upload screenshots for critique. For structural design decisions, often you don't even need the visual — you describe the trade-off and the Boardroom argues the patterns. For pixel-level critique, pair with a human design partner.
Both. The Designer argues craft and pattern; The Data Scientist argues conversion and behavior; The Skeptic argues that taste compounds. The synthesis usually names when craft trumps conversion data and vice versa.
No — it argues from multiple angles. For bold design choices (new pattern, breaking convention), The Designer and The Visionary often argue for it; The Skeptic argues against; The synthesis usually surfaces the cost of conservatism explicitly.
Faster, structured, and includes business/engineering perspectives your design friends might not bring. Many designers use SynthBoard for the multi-disciplinary critique and Slack friends for the taste-and-camaraderie loop.
Yes. Team workspaces let designers share boardrooms and build a shared design-decision history. Particularly useful for distributed design teams that lose the casual hallway critique.
WCAG patterns and accessibility trade-offs are part of The Designer's prompt. For deeper compliance decisions, pair with The Regulator. Always validate specific WCAG conformance against the actual standard for legal-grade decisions.
Adjacent decisions, audiences, and methods inside SynthBoard.
Your PM partner edition.
ExploreEngineering counterpart.
ExploreWhen design feeds into roadmap.
ExploreStress-test a design decision.
ExploreIndividual designer workflow.
ExploreAdjacent creative-decision sessions.
Explore250 bonus credits at signup. 150 free every month. No card required.