# Integrated workshop Bring brand, product, operations and marketing decisions into one program. **TL;DR** Bring brand, product, operations, and marketing into the same conversation. Resolve the decisions they share, then assign the next work. Four departments should not need four different versions of reality. Status: Workshop method ## Before you start For: Facilitators coordinating a cross-functional project Use when: Brand, product and operations decisions contradict one another. Bring: A decision-maker, representatives of each discipline and evidence for each topic. Leave with: A cross-functional brief with contradictions resolved or explicitly parked. ## Worked example (fictional) A fictional service promises same-day delivery while its approval process takes three days. Record the contradiction and assign a decision before designing the campaign. ## Check the result The final brief says which conflicts were resolved, by whom, and which still block work. ## Limitations Do not use the combined session to rush a topic that needs dedicated research. Allow separate follow-ups. The brand, product, and operations meet in the same customer's day. A promise on the website becomes a task in the product and a piece of work for someone behind it. Those connections are worth looking at together. Use the full workshop when a change crosses those boundaries. Give each part enough time, bring the people who can make the decisions, and keep a shared record as you go. If the question is smaller, choose one of the focused workshops instead. ## Prepare The full stakeholder set: this is the version we run when the engagement covers brand, product, and operations together. Founders and leads stay for the whole session; specialists can rotate in for their part. Cap the room at ten. The combined version trades depth per topic for the connections between topics: an ops sticky that explains a product sticky is the reason to run it this way. One 2–4 hour block with breaks, or two half-days. Whiteboards for four corners: Brand, Product, Ops, Marketing. Stickies in four colors, one per corner, so the patterns stay visible when everything gets mixed later. Before the session: collect the documentation. After it: 4–8 hours of documentation dives, checking what the wall claimed against the numbers, tickets, and deal notes. ## Four-corner brainstorm · 45–60 min Run the brainstorm from each single-lens script in compressed rounds: brand adjectives, product jobs and pains, ops friction, marketing claims and audiences. Ten to twelve minutes per corner, everyone writing, everything said out loud. Physically move the group between corners; the change of wall helps restart the flow of ideas. Use the same provocations as in the single scripts. ## Sorting, per corner · 45–60 min Each corner gets its own sort, faster than in the single sprints: brand into yes/no, product into now/next/never, ops into keep/fix/kill, marketing into true/not us. Spend the discussion time where the room disagrees most. That corner is usually the reason the engagement exists. The stuck-sticky tactics from the single scripts all apply. The facilitator's job is keeping any one corner from eating the day. ## Cross-mapping · 45–60 min This is the step the single sprints can't do. Bring the surviving stickies from all four corners onto one wall and cluster across colors. The patterns to look for cross topics: a brand value with no product behavior behind it, a marketing claim no process can keep true, a product priority that contradicts the brand. Name the cross-cutting themes, usually three to five, and mark every sticky that contradicts another corner. The contradictions are the agenda for the documentation dives. ## Distilling into the working brief · 45–60 min One document, four short chapters plus a summary: brand values with comparisons; product principles with the now/next/never list; the ops backlog with owners; the message hierarchy with proofs. The summary is the theme list: what ties the four together and what contradicts what. Then the documentation dives: 4–8 hours checking the wall against reality before anything is presented. What holds up goes into the directions work; what doesn't becomes an open question in the proposal. ## Output The working brief: four chapters (brand, product, ops, marketing), the cross-cutting themes, and the contradiction list, resolved or flagged after the documentation dives. The directions are built from this document: generally three or four distinct strategies, presented on the client's workshop page for feedback and sign-off. ## Handoff Record the input sources, decisions, assumptions, owner and acceptance checks. Have the responsible person approve the record before downstream automation. ## Tools, in order ### Before the session [Notion](https://www.notion.com/) · Paper or a shared workshop board Collect the brand, product, operations, and marketing briefs and mark contradictions before the meeting. Put the decision you need on the first page. Agree on recording, transcription, access, and retention with everyone before starting; handwritten notes are a valid alternative. Carry forward: A brief, a prepared board, and an agreed capture method. ### In the room [Notion AI Meeting Notes](https://www.notion.com/help/ai-meeting-notes) · Paper or a shared workshop board · Phone camera Use the recorder to support listening, not to replace a facilitator. Resolve dependencies across disciplines rather than running four unrelated brainstorms. Write decisions and disagreements visibly; photograph the boards with permission. Pause recording whenever someone asks. Carry forward: Authorized source notes, a transcript if agreed, and labeled board photos. ### After the session [Claude](https://claude.ai/), [ChatGPT](https://chatgpt.com/), or [Grok](https://grok.com/) · [Notion](https://www.notion.com/) Check speaker names, quotations, numbers, and apparent agreements against the sources. Ask an assistant to draft a joined-up project brief with shared decisions and named unresolved dependencies, with a source ID for each decision and a separate list of open questions. Have participants correct the record before using it as a brief. Carry forward: a joined-up project brief with shared decisions and named unresolved dependencies ### Review the work with partners We make and revise the work with Claude, ChatGPT, or Grok, then put selected versions on our Studio project pages for partners to review. Check the preview before sharing it. You can do the same with a private prototype or shared document; use a workspace that can access the files you need. Name the version, say what changed, and ask the question you need answered. Keep feedback with that version and discuss conflicting requests before making the next changes. Confirm approval separately, and keep confidential work in a restricted space. For this method: Do these directions support the same promise, and which dependency still prevents us from moving forward? ### Delegate the routine work Turn verified notes into a source-linked table, label board photos, or format the agreed action list. Give the agent only the relevant excerpts and a completed example. Keep with a person: Interpreting disagreement, choosing a direction, and deciding what participants actually approved stay with the facilitator and decision owner. [Sequence prompts, then delegate](https://noord.dev/polder/delegating-with-prompts) [Choose a model for the design task](https://noord.dev/polder/choosing-design-models) Source: https://noord.dev/polder/workshop-full Public working material from Noord. Third-party code, fonts and assets retain their own licenses. Publication does not imply a license to redistribute third-party material.