{
    "componentChunkName": "component---src-templates-note-note-js",
    "path": "/notes/negotiation",
    "result": {"data":{"mdx":{"body":"var _excluded = [\"components\"];\nfunction _extends() { _extends = Object.assign ? Object.assign.bind() : function (target) { for (var i = 1; i < arguments.length; i++) { var source = arguments[i]; for (var key in source) { if (Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(source, key)) { target[key] = source[key]; } } } return target; }; return _extends.apply(this, arguments); }\nfunction _objectWithoutProperties(source, excluded) { if (source == null) return {}; var target = _objectWithoutPropertiesLoose(source, excluded); var key, i; if (Object.getOwnPropertySymbols) { var sourceSymbolKeys = Object.getOwnPropertySymbols(source); for (i = 0; i < sourceSymbolKeys.length; i++) { key = sourceSymbolKeys[i]; if (excluded.indexOf(key) >= 0) continue; if (!Object.prototype.propertyIsEnumerable.call(source, key)) continue; target[key] = source[key]; } } return target; }\nfunction _objectWithoutPropertiesLoose(source, excluded) { if (source == null) return {}; var target = {}; var sourceKeys = Object.keys(source); var key, i; for (i = 0; i < sourceKeys.length; i++) { key = sourceKeys[i]; if (excluded.indexOf(key) >= 0) continue; target[key] = source[key]; } return target; }\n/* @jsxRuntime classic */\n/* @jsx mdx */\n\nvar _frontmatter = {};\nvar layoutProps = {\n  _frontmatter: _frontmatter\n};\nvar MDXLayout = \"wrapper\";\nreturn function MDXContent(_ref) {\n  var components = _ref.components,\n    props = _objectWithoutProperties(_ref, _excluded);\n  return mdx(MDXLayout, _extends({}, layoutProps, props, {\n    components: components,\n    mdxType: \"MDXLayout\"\n  }), mdx(\"p\", null, \"a good negotiation(immediate evaluation) is one in which both are equally happy or equally sad. if this is not the case then there is a asymmetry in the knowledge or projection. it is also possible that each has more confidence in the individuals potential than the other(or vice versa too). for individual parties asymmetry might seem to give them an edge as they feel that they are pulling one over the other. but if you are an operator who is playing the long game what matters to you is that the individual negotiations are fair and mutually beneficial to both the parties. so it might make sense for them to reduce the asymmetry\"), mdx(\"p\", null, \"but like everything else efficacy of the negotiation can only be judged in the long term based on the results. \"), mdx(\"p\", null, \"\", mdx(\"a\", {\n    parentName: \"p\",\n    \"href\": \"/notes/money\",\n    \"title\": \"money\"\n  }, \"money\"), \"\\n\", mdx(\"a\", {\n    parentName: \"p\",\n    \"href\": \"/notes/Time\",\n    \"title\": \"Time\"\n  }, \"Time\"), \"\\n\", mdx(\"a\", {\n    parentName: \"p\",\n    \"href\": \"/notes/resources\",\n    \"title\": \"resources\"\n  }, \"resources\"), \"\"));\n}\n;\nMDXContent.isMDXComponent = true;","inboundReferences":[]}},"pageContext":{"slug":"negotiation","node":{"childMdx":{"slug":"negotiation"}}}},
    "staticQueryHashes": []}