The literature validated that women self-advocate less not due to their skill level in negotiation or leadership, but because of other barriers, whether self-imposed or enforced by gender stereotypes and norms. This focused our project on the goal of getting people more comfortable with the idea of negotiation and not viewing it as a daunting, relationship-threatening task, but as a normal, collaborative effort. We emphasized less on negotiation-specific training and skill-building, especially since a lot of literature and tools for this training already exist.
Furthermore, the research prompted us to think about ways to decrease the risk of negotiating too hard at the beginning, such as getting backfired later in the game. In particular, we noticed that in early iterations of our design, once it became known what a player needed, other players had the potential to determine a large part of their fate by trading or not trading with them. While some level of this effect is helpful in creating a strategic game, we were concerned that it could also be used to punish players who had negotiated too hard earlier in the game. In response, we altered the endgame to incorporate more elements of chance.
We narrowed our scope to the persuasive goal of getting players to view negotiation not as a daunting, relationship-threatening task, but as a conversation and a collaborative effort.