GIuliana Bueno
Marketing Manager
Business & Strategy
Product
Some digital projects matter not because of their technical sophistication, but because of the role they play in enabling people to do complex things well. The INSEAD Negotiation and Conflict Management Collaborative (NCMC)’s first negotiation tournament is a good example of that.
Created to prepare students and alumni for international negotiation competitions, this tournaments sit at the intersection of education, community, and global coordination. They will now be part of INSEAD’s mission to develop leaders who can apply what they learn in real, competitive, and international contexts.
This article is a case study based on direct conversations with Horácio, one of the organizers of the INSEAD Negotiation and Conflict Management Collaborative’s first global negotiation tournament. It explores how a small internal team designed and operated a resilient digital platform to manage a high-stakes, global initiative under real-world operational constraints.
A global challenge, run by a very small team
INSEAD is a truly global institution, with close to 70,000 alumni spread across regions, time zones, and cultures. When the idea of launching the first internal negotiation tournament became reality, the potential scale was immediately clear.
Registrations could come from anywhere in the world. Participants would belong to different categories, including students and alumni. The process would involve multiple stages, communications, and decisions. All of this, however, would be managed by a team of just two people.
As Horácio explained, running the operation manually would have been a major risk. Too many steps, too much information, and too much room for error. The solution could not simply support the team. It had to act as what he called a third team member.
“What we needed wasn’t another tool. We needed something we could trust when everything else was under pressure.”
— Horácio, INSEAD Negotiation and Conflict Management Collaborative
From Horácio’s point of view, this wasn’t about adding another tool to the stack, but about creating something the team could genuinely rely on when the tournament moved from planning into live execution.
Why the goal wasn’t complex software, but resilient infrastructure
From the outset, the priority was not technical sophistication for its own sake.
What the team needed was a reliable way to manage operational complexity: a single place where information, communication, and workflows could live together, consistently and transparently.
The challenge was numerical and organizational, not technological. The platform had to be simple to use, resilient under pressure, and capable of handling global scale without adding friction. In other words, it needed to absorb complexity rather than expose it.
“With such a small team, the platform had to behave like a third team member. It needed to absorb complexity, not create more work.”
— Horácio, INSEAD NCMC
That framing shaped every decision that followed. Resilience mattered more than feature density. Reliability mattered more than novelty.
Trust as the foundation of the partnership
For Horácio, choosing Untile was not only a technical decision.
This was the first time he was leading a project of this nature, and uncertainty was part of the process. What made the difference was trust, both personal and professional.
He already knew Untile’s partners as people he considered competent, committed, and reliable. On top of that, there were strong references from previous projects and a clear sense that the quality delivered would be aligned with the investment required.
That combination of trust, capability, and value made the decision straightforward.
What changed for organizers and participants
On the participant side, the impact was immediately visible.
Having a dedicated portal gave the tournament a level of professionalism and structure that mattered, especially because it was the first initiative of its kind within INSEAD’s NCMC. It signaled that this was a serious, well-thought-out program, not an improvised experiment.
“For a first-time tournament, credibility mattered. The platform helped signal that this was serious, structured, and well thought through.”
— Horácio, INSEAD NCMC
While there were no formal metrics to quantify perception, Horácio believes engagement levels reflected that credibility.
Internally, the experience was more nuanced.
Introducing a new platform, a new process, and a new competition at the same time naturally created some initial anxiety. Neither organizer had a strong background in software, and there was understandable concern about whether everything would work as expected.
What changed that perception was delivery.
Untile met deadlines, delivered almost everything that was requested, and maintained a consistent level of quality. When adjustments were needed, they were handled collaboratively. As the launch approached, uncertainty gradually turned into confidence. Confidence that the platform was solid and that it would genuinely make the work easier.
One aspect Horácio highlighted was Untile’s availability and commitment, even across time zones. Responses were fast, changes were discussed openly, and when additional investment was required, the rationale was clear and reasonable.
That consistency mattered.
A platform built with the future in mind
Although the first version of the platform was intentionally focused on delivering a successful inaugural tournament, it was never seen as a one-off solution.
From the beginning, Horácio saw potential for expansion.
One possibility is using the platform to support tournaments at other schools, particularly institutions that don’t have the resources to build such infrastructure themselves. Beyond competitions, there is also clear potential in areas like negotiation teaching and research, where structured digital tools could add long-term value.
What started as operational support could evolve into a broader digital foundation for academic and community initiatives within INSEAD’s negotiation ecosystem.
Key lessons from building a global negotiation platform
- Global platforms fail when they expose complexity instead of absorbing it.
- The success of the tournament depended on shielding organizers and participants from operational chaos.
- Small teams need software that acts as infrastructure, not just tooling.
- When internal capacity is limited, platforms must replace manual coordination, not sit on top of it.
- Resilience matters more than feature richness in high-stakes contexts.
- The ability to adapt rules and workflows mid-event proved more valuable than advanced functionality.
- Trust and availability are as critical as technical delivery.
- In global, time-sensitive initiatives, responsiveness and reliability directly affect outcomes.
- Designing for today while enabling tomorrow creates long-term value.
- Even a focused first version can become a foundation for future expansion when built intentionally.
What this project says about building digital products in complex contexts
Asked to summarize the partnership in a word, Horácio simply said: “thank you.”
He also used a Brazilian expression, “tem jogo”, to describe the experience: a sense of commitment, effort, and willingness to make things happen. Or, as he put it in English, “when there is a will, there’s a way.”
At the very end of our conversation, just before we stopped recording, Horácio asked to leave one final message. It wasn’t about the platform or the project scope, but a simple and deliberate thank you to the people behind the work. He wanted to acknowledge the team involved, by name, for their commitment throughout the project.
That appreciation matters. Building this kind of infrastructure under real constraints takes consistency, care, and collaboration. So we leave his words here, as they were intended: a sincere thank you to Ricardo Correia, Daniel Fernandes, Luís Alves, Inês Soares, Rafael Azevedo, Abel Soares, and Nelson Alves.
This project is a reminder that in complex, global contexts, successful digital products are not defined by flashy features. They are defined by clarity of purpose, trust between teams, and resilient platforms that quietly enable people to operate at a higher level.
You can explore the full INSEAD Negotiation and Conflict Management Collaborative case study for a deeper look at the platform, the delivery process, and the outcomes.
If you’re running a complex initiative with limited internal capacity — especially in global or multi-stakeholder contexts — this case illustrates when custom digital infrastructure becomes a strategic asset rather than a cost.
FAQs
Why did INSEAD need a dedicated platform for negotiation tournaments?
Because the tournaments operate at global scale, with many participants, multiple stages, and a very small organizing team. Manual processes would have been risky and unsustainable.
What can other global organizations learn from this project?
That when operations span geographies, time zones, and stakeholders, digital platforms must be designed as operational infrastructure. Simplicity, resilience, and trust often matter more than advanced functionality.
When does building custom digital infrastructure make sense?
When existing tools cannot reliably support critical workflows, and when failure would compromise credibility, integrity, or scale. In these cases, custom infrastructure becomes a strategic asset rather than a cost.