Get Stakeholder Feedback

The scenario

You're about to present a PRD to leadership. You know the CTO will have technical questions, the sales lead will ask about revenue impact, and the exec will want to know about resource tradeoffs. Instead of being blindsided in the meeting, you run a simulated stakeholder review first and walk in with the concerns already addressed.

Example output

Stakeholder Review: Mobile Checkout Redesign PRD

CTO / Tech Lead — 🟡 Concerns

"The auto-populated billing assumes our company profile data is clean and up to date. I'd want to see a data audit before we commit to this approach."

Feasibility: Yes, buildable with current stack ✅

Needs: Data quality audit before dev starts (estimate: 1 week)

Risk: Saved payment methods at org level requires security review

Ask: Can we get a SOC2 compliance check scoped by end of next week?

UX / Design Lead — 🟢 Supportive

"Love the 2-step reduction. But the 'Complete Later' flow has tricky edge cases — what happens if the PO number is never added? We need to prototype this before engineering starts."

Wants: Clickable prototype before dev begins

Concern: Abandonment of "Complete Later" carts — needs a recovery flow

Suggestion: Add a progress indicator showing "1 of 2 steps" to set expectations

Sales / GTM — 🟢 Enthusiastic

"Enterprise checkout friction is literally our #1 objection in sales calls. This directly addresses it. If we can ship this in Q1, I can reopen 4 stalled deals."

Wants: Case study ready at launch for sales enablement

Ask: Can we fast-track this for Q1 enterprise deals?

Suggestion: Let sales preview the feature with top prospects before full launch

Executive — 🟡 Concerns

"I like the ROI story but I need to understand the opportunity cost. What are we NOT building because we're doing this? The dashboard project has been on the roadmap for 3 quarters."

Wants: Explicit tradeoff analysis — this vs. dashboard

Ask: Why this over the analytics dashboard that engineering has been requesting?

Suggestion: Show a simple ROI comparison between the two projects

User Advocate — 🟢 Supportive

"This solves a real pain point — we get support tickets about checkout confusion every week. But make sure we don't break the SMB flow while fixing enterprise."

Wants: Rollback plan if metrics don't improve after 2 weeks

Concern: Saved payment methods could confuse users who share accounts

Suggestion: Add a "who saved this payment method" label

How to create this in 10 minutes

Step 1. Make sure your Product Management OS folder (second-pm-os) is open in Claude and you have a document ready for review — a PRD, proposal, one-pager, or any document you plan to share with stakeholders.

Step 2. In the chat panel, type:

/stakeholder-simulator

Step 3. Claude asks which document to review. Either point it to a file ("review the PRD in specs/outputs/") or paste the content directly.

Step 4. Claude asks which perspectives you want. The default is all five:

CTO / Tech Lead
UX / Design Lead
Sales / GTM
Executive
User Advocate

You can pick specific ones if you prefer (e.g., "just CTO and exec").

Step 5. Claude reads your document along with your context files, then simulates feedback from each perspective. The review saves to:

stakeholder-updates/outputs/stakeholder-simulator-[topic].md

If something doesn't look right

Tell Claude what to change. For example:

"The CTO feedback is too focused on security — I need more about timeline feasibility"
"Add a CFO perspective — budget approval is the real blocker"
"The exec feedback should be more skeptical — our CEO always pushes back on timelines"
"Make the sales feedback more specific — reference our actual deal pipeline"

Pro tip

Run this BEFORE your real meeting. For every 🟡 concern in the simulated review, add a sentence to your document that addresses it. You'll walk into the meeting having already anticipated the hard questions.

What's next?

Create a PRD — Write the PRD that you'll want to run through stakeholder review
Write Release Notes — Turn a shipped feature into a user-facing announcement