Your First AI Team Meeting

One-liner: Run a multi-perspective AI session where one prompt gets you two expert viewpoints on the same problem — no extra tools required.

🔧 Jump in (Tinkerers start here)

Pick a real decision you’re currently facing. It could be a work decision, a project direction, or a problem you’re stuck on.

Paste this prompt into any AI chat (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini — anything works):

I want you to act as two different experts giving me advice on [your problem here].

First, respond as a [Role A] — someone who focuses on [their priority]. Then, respond as a [Role B] — someone who focuses on [their different priority].

Keep each perspective clearly labeled. Be specific and give concrete recommendations, not vague advice.

Example — choosing whether to launch a feature now or wait:

I want you to act as two different experts giving me advice on whether to launch our new onboarding flow this week or wait until next month.

First, respond as a growth-focused product manager — someone who prioritizes user acquisition and speed to market. Then, respond as a risk-aware QA lead — someone who prioritizes stability, edge cases, and user trust.

Keep each perspective clearly labeled. Be specific and give concrete recommendations, not vague advice.

After reading both perspectives, send this follow-up:

Now, act as a neutral facilitator. Summarize where these two experts agree, where they disagree, and what the key trade-off is. End with a single question I should answer before making my decision.

Read the synthesis. Notice how one prompt gave you a structured debate that would normally require two people in a room.

📋 Plan first (Planners start here)

Here’s what you’re about to do:

Choose your problem — Pick a real decision or challenge you’re working on right now. It works best when reasonable people could disagree about the right approach.
Pick two expert roles — Choose two perspectives that would naturally see your problem differently. Examples: marketer vs. engineer, short-term thinker vs. long-term strategist, customer advocate vs. operations manager.
Write and send the dual-role prompt — Use the template in the “Jump in” section. Fill in your problem and your two roles.
Read both perspectives — Notice where they conflict, where they agree, and which one you instinctively lean toward.
Send the facilitator follow-up — Ask the AI to synthesize the two views and surface the core trade-off.

“Done” looks like: You have a summary of two contrasting expert viewpoints and a clear understanding of the key trade-off in your decision.

🧭 Why this matters (Strategists start here)

This exercise builds the foundational skill behind all multi-agent AI workflows: defining specialized roles and comparing their outputs. At the intermediate level, you’ll split these roles across separate AI sessions with different contexts. At the advanced level, you’ll design entire agent architectures. But it all starts here — training yourself to think in terms of roles, perspectives, and structured disagreement rather than asking AI once and accepting the first answer.

Reflection

What surprised you about the output?
Did one perspective feel stronger than the other? Why?
What did the facilitator synthesis surface that you hadn’t considered?
How would you explain what you just did to a colleague?
💬 Discuss: Try explaining your result to someone who hasn’t used AI for this task. What questions do they ask? (Social Learners)

⬆️ Level up

Ready for more? Try AC-Intermediate-01 — where you’ll split these roles across separate AI sessions and learn to manage handoffs between them.

Back to Agent Collaboration | 🟢 Basic Level