Analyze the Case Study: A Canadian company had a business negotiation with a Korean company. The Canadian company would sell a kind of product to the Korean company. At the beginning of their negotiation, Korean negotiators blamed their counterpart that the quality of the product was not up to the standard agreed upon by both sides in advance and their reputation was doubtful. Korean company wanted to use this method to overwhelm their counterpart so that they could control the negotiation and force them to make large concessions in price etc. But Canadian negotiators were very unsatisfied with the Korean negotiators' blaming and insisted that their product was up to their country's standard. They pointed out that Korean negotiators blamed them without any evidence so they could not bear it at all. Before the Korean negotiators finished giving their opinions, Canadian negotiators began to retort them and treated Korean negotiators in the same way. Therefore, both sides had a very disputable talk. Questions: 1. In the negotiation, is there anything wrong from the viewpoint of the Canadian company? How about from the viewpoint of the Korean company? 2. What would be the result of the negotiation? Why?
