Catalyst Review Forum
Replace the standing weekly review with parallel, role-based topic blocks anyone can join.
- Difficulty
- Advanced
- Time to result
- ~weeks to results
- Steps
- 3
- Confidence
- 85%
A redesigned decision/review forum that fixes the two hidden defects of standard product reviews: fixed standing attendees and single-threaded (one-topic-at-a-time) agendas. Catalyst reserves whole-company time blocks, then runs multiple topics in parallel with the exact right people and clear roles, dramatically increasing review throughput.
Origin
Built at Coda by Lane Shackleton's team after sitting through hundreds of review forums and noticing the two structural problems. Detailed in the 'how Coda builds product' write-up with templates.
Core principles
- 01Standing attendees mean the most knowledgeable person is often absent
- 02Single-threaded reviews become either 3-hour marathons or 2-week-out bottlenecks
- 03A slow review meeting throttles the velocity of the whole company
- 04Right people + parallel topics + clear roles = much higher review throughput
How to run it
- 1
Reserve whole-company blocks
Put roughly three one-hour blocks on the calendar each week with the assumption that the whole company keeps them free, so anyone can be pulled in for those hours.
Pro tip Because the whole company holds the time, you never have to reschedule to get the right person.
Watch out This requires cultural buy-in that the blocks are genuinely protected.
- 2
Assign four roles per topic
Each topic gets a Driver (drives the meeting, decision and outcome), Maker(s), Brain Trust (advisors), and Interested (self-selected observers). It's fully transparent so anyone can mark themselves Interested.
Pro tip Centralize everything in one doc so roles and topics are visible.
Watch out Without a named Driver a topic stalls with no owner of the decision.
- 3
Swap the hold for real topics the day before
The day before, the calendar hold is removed and specific topics are added — often three topics running at the same time because they have non-overlapping attendees.
Pro tip Coda automated the calendar add/remove; before automation they ran it manually for years.
Watch out Parallelization only works when the topics genuinely don't share attendees.
In the wild
Coda runs three one-hour blocks a week; the day before, holds are removed and up to three topics are scheduled simultaneously with non-overlapping attendees and clear driver/maker/brain-trust/interested roles.
→ Many topics run at once with the right attendees every time, so work gets reviewed far faster and more ships — a higher-velocity organization.
Common mistakes
Running reviews with a fixed standing invite list
You either have too many people or discover the most knowledgeable person (the salesperson or implementing engineer) isn't invited, forcing a reschedule or a decision made without them.
Keeping the review single-threaded
One topic at a time creates a company-wide bottleneck — either an exhausting three-hour marathon or a two-week wait for a slot that slows overall velocity.
Is it for you?
Best for
Scaling product orgs whose cross-cutting decisions are bottlenecked in one weekly review meeting
Not ideal for
A brand-new PM trying to remake a review cycle the head of product owns, or tiny teams with no cross-cutting review load
From the transcript
“it's essentially three 1H hour blocks throughout the week and the assumption is that the whole company is free”
“each topic has essentially four roles driver maker Brain Trust and interested”
From the episode
What sets great teams apart
Lane Shackleton (CPO of Coda)