AI Product

NegotiateValue.AI: I built an AI negotiation trainer on the Harvard 7 Elements framework, with INSEAD methodology behind it

6 min read2025–2026Personal AI product
Claude APIpgvectorSupabaseRAGMulti-agentStripeTypeScript
7 min
Full practice loop, brief to feedback
5
Scoring dimensions per session
INSEAD
Negotiation methodology behind it
L&D
Cohort dashboard for team leads
NegotiateValue.AI: I built an AI negotiation trainer on the Harvard 7 Elements framework, with INSEAD methodology behind it
Context
RoleSole builder — product, architecture, engineering, pricing
TeamSolo (with AI pair-programming)
TimelineShipped in 2025, iterating since
StackClaude API · pgvector · Supabase · TypeScript · Stripe
StatusLive at negotiatevalue.ai with free and Pro plans
The problem

Most professionals run hundreds of negotiations and train for none

Negotiation is one of the highest-leverage skills in business and almost nobody practices it. 56% of US workers accept the first salary offer. One negotiation lifts compensation by roughly 7% on average, and that compounds into hundreds of thousands over a career. Meanwhile the only real way to practice is to find another human, book time, and role-play.

I sat in the INSEAD negotiation course and saw the constraint clearly. The framework was not the bottleneck. The practice partner was. So I built one that is always available, always in character, and always scoring the conversation.

The hard part is not generating dialogue. It is a counterpart with hidden interests that pushes back credibly, plus feedback specific enough to change behaviour instead of handing out generic praise.

The approach

Three steps, seven minutes, one sharper negotiator

Every session follows the same loop, and each stage is handled by a separate agent with a distinct contract. One model doing all three jobs slips out of role the moment it starts coaching.

Session architecture
Briefing Agent
Builds the scenario: your role, goal, BATNA and key numbers, from a RAG knowledge base of negotiation frameworks
Counterpart Agent
A named persona with hidden interests, pressure points and a walkaway threshold. Stays in character for the whole session
Analysis Agent
Scores five dimensions, isolates the 2–3 moments that decided the outcome, recommends the next scenario

Scenarios cover salary talks, vendor contracts and partnership terms. Turn limits create real time pressure. The counterpart rewards good diagnostic questions and punishes weak concessions, which is what makes the score mean something.

The scoring model

Five dimensions instead of a single vague verdict

Value claimed: how much of the pie you captured against your target and BATNA.
Value created: whether you found the trades that grew the deal instead of splitting it.
Relationship: the state of the counterpart at the end, because the next deal depends on it.
Strategy: preparation quality, anchoring, and use of the 7 Elements.
Process: sequencing, question quality and control of the conversation.
Beyond the individual

An L&D surface for the person accountable for capability

Individual practice sells itself, but the buyer inside a company is the L&D or procurement lead who has to prove capability moved. So I built an admin surface for them: a cohort heatmap showing every dimension gap at a glance, a weekly nudge queue for who is falling behind, custom scenario authoring on their real supplier and deal context, and an auto-generated quarterly report they can take into a CPO review.

Pricing follows the same logic. Free covers one baseline scenario so the method is easy to try, Pro at $49/month opens the full library, longer sessions and moment-level feedback, and a custom tier handles large teams with SSO, DPA and security review.

The key lesson: multi-agent systems fail at the handoffs. The architecture was straightforward. The real work was the contract between agents: what each one sees, what it may say, and what it must never reveal.
All work
WhatsApp