...1304-001 Name Ankit Gupta PGDM – P/T – 2013-2016 2nd Term Individual & Group Dynamics Dr. Hardik Shah Leadership Role in Management of Change 1 12 Angry Men Note: 1. The document should reach via e mail - assignments@imt.ac.in or through the Class Representative on USB or CD Rom before the deadline (As advised by the course faculty and/ or before August 28, 2013). 2. Max file size should not exceed 5 MB. 3. File Name: Course Code_Sec_Group No_Program_Batch (For e.g. BGSI_A_5_PGDM_2012-14) 4. Send one file or report in one mail. Like for sending three different report you need to send three different emails. 5. Email subject name: your file name should be the subject name. 6. Send only one email for a subject. No second submission will be accepted. 7. There should be only one file either a MS Word or PDF. If there is a annexure, adjust in your word file only. 2 12 Angry Men 1. What qualities did Juror #8 have (Henry Fonda) that made him such a strong leader? Juror 8 is a masterful negotiator. His personality and charisma aside, he skillfully employs several negotiation techniques. He builds :o alliances o used brainstorming o offered concessions o anticipated offer o reframes and masters the factual information Against what seem like over whelming odds, one juror has managed to dominate this group of twelve men. The strategies and tactics of this successful negotiator are impeccable. He gradually and carefully gains control. As the negotiations proceeds the...
Words: 1464 - Pages: 6
...12 Angry Men Submitted by: Pam McDonald E-mail: Pam_McDonald@nifc.blm.gov Phone: 208-387-5318 Audience Rating: Not Rated Released: 1957 Studio: United Artists/MGM Genre: Drama Runtime: 95 minutes Materials: VCR or DVD, television or projection system, Wildland Fire Leadership Values and Principles handouts (single-sided), notepad, writing utensil Objective: Students will identify Wildland Fire Leadership Values and Principles illustrated within 12 Angry Men and discuss leadership lessons learned with group members or mentors. Basic Plot: The jury of twelve 'angry men,' entrusted with the power to send an uneducated, teenaged Puerto Rican, tenement-dwelling boy to the electric chair for killing his father with a switchblade knife, are literally locked into a small, claustrophobic rectangular room on a stifling hot summer day until they come up with a unanimous decision - either guilty or not guilty. The compelling, provocative film examines the twelve men's deep-seated personal prejudices, perceptual biases and weaknesses, indifference, anger, personalities, unreliable judgments, cultural differences, ignorance and fears, that threaten to taint their decision-making abilities, cause them to ignore the real issues in the case, and potentially lead them to a miscarriage of justice. (http://www.filmsite.org/twelve.html) Cast of Main Characters: Martin Balsam Juror 1 (Foreman; coach) John Fiedler Juror 2 (Bank clerk; inexperienced...
Words: 2841 - Pages: 12
...the problem the group is working on. In this film, the numerous functional and dysfunctional properties of the 12-jury men play a big role in analysing and evaluating the main purpose at hand, namely identifying the young man guilty or innocent for the murder of his father. The different roles the 12-jury men play in the deliberation of the capital murder case is prominent. Firstly, a role can be defined as a set of expected behaviour patterns attributed to someone occupying a given position in a social unit. Different groups enforce different role requirements on individuals namely; role expectation, role perception and role conflict. (i) Role expectation: Role expectation can be defined as the role others believe a person should play or the way others believe a person should act in a given situation. When looking at the Jurors’ main role in any court system and in the film, it is expected of them to decide whether or not the defendant should be declared guilty or not guilty. (ii) Role perception: Role perception can be defined as the individual’s view of how he or she should act in a given situation. When looking at the film the Jurors individual frame of position and prejudices influence how they individually perceive the case. Because the Jurors perceptions are unique it leads to complications in the communication process. In the film “12 Angry men” Juror no. 3 decides beforehand that it is an “open and shut case”. He validates his verdict by using emotionally laden...
Words: 2018 - Pages: 9
...A View of 12 Angry Men The movie 12 Angry Men is a snapshot of many of the changes going on in 1950’s- 60’s America. The movie begins by introducing the viewer to a, seemingly, open and shut case about a teenager from the slums murdering his father. It is revealed to us that it is the job of the twelve jurors who have heard the case to deliberate over all the evidence and return a, unanimous verdict to present to the judge. We quickly find out that all of the “evidence,” heard in the courtroom seems to be pointing squarely at the boy being guilty; and most of the jurors are happy to take the evidence at first glance clearly indicating the boy as the murderer. However it is when juror #8 protests: “that the jury should at least review the evidence,” before, for all intents and purposes, the boy is sentenced to the death penalty, when the men begin to be overcome by their prejudice towards the boy and his lifestyle. While the “villains,” such as juror 3 and juror 10,are quite obviously overwhelmed by their own strong feelings of prejudice; for many of the men it is a general prejudice toward the American Justice System which serves to blind them from the truth. They are supremely confident in the system working correctly every time, that they miss obvious mistakes and loose ends going on throughout the trial. With a few exceptions, it is the faith in the American System which contribute the original overwhelming feeling of prejudice in the room, all causing...
Words: 596 - Pages: 3
...6/9/2014 12 Angry Men Case Study 12 Angry Men Case Study Jaime Galván Webster University Author Note This paper was prepared for PROC 5840 (Spring 2, 2012), taught by Professor Alvin Dunn. Jaime Galvan, Webster University E-mail: cirlos@aggienetwork.com TABLE OF CONTENTS * Character Listing * Major Case Issues * Jury Member #8 * Jury Member #4 * Jury Member #3 Character Listing * Martin Balsam (Juror #1): He serves as the foreman of the jury and is fair. He listens to others and tries to guide the jury to a unanimous decision. He is non-confrontational and lets others express their opinion. * John Fiedler (Juror #2): He is the typical "avoider". He is easily persuaded and is the most timid of the group. He prefers to avoid angering the other members of the jury and cannot express his opinions. * Lee J. Cobb (Juror #3): He is biased and confrontational when other members disagree with his opinions. He believes that the defendant is guilty and is the last one to change his vote. His initial decision is mostly based on his poor relationship with his own son. * E. G. Marshall (Juror #4): He is a very calm and logical stock-broker. He bases his decision on facts and does not change his vote until the end when there is doubt about one of the witness's testimony. * Jack Klugman (Juror #5): He is a young man that is not comfortable expressing his opinion in front of the older members of the jury. He grew up in the slums and takes offense when other members try to stereotype people...
Words: 4472 - Pages: 18
...12 Angry Men: An Illustration of Concepts of Organisational Behaviour Introduction In 1957 Sidney Lumet’s 12 Angry Men was published (Lumet, 1957). Now, 55 years later, the movie’s teachings still hold most of their truths. The events shown in the movie can be scientifically explained using concepts of organisational behaviour. Although some of these concepts did not even exist by the time the movie was made, the movie still is an excellent case to study and illustrate them. The reason for this is the isolation of the movie’s characters. All events in the movie are triggered by the characters only. There are no external influences nor is there the possibility for the characters to leave the scene. This essay will apply concepts of organizational behaviour to events of the movie. Particular attention will be paid to the concepts of perception, attribution biases, decision making, leadership and group dynamics. In order to do so, the essay will move along the plot of the movie and apply concepts where there are fit. None the less for the purpose of referencing a brief introduction to the movie and its characters is given here: The plot of 12 Angry Men describes the events that take place as a jury has come to a unanimous decision. The defendant is accused of homicide. If the jury decides upon a verdict of ‘guilty’ the judge will inevitably sentence the accused to death penalty. In the beginning all jurors but juror no. 8 are willing to verdict ‘guilty’ without debating. However...
Words: 2175 - Pages: 9
...The movie Twelve Angry Men begins with an eighteen year old boy from the ghetto who is on trial for the murder of his abusive father. A jury of twelve men (the committee) is locked in the deliberation room to decide the fate of this young boy. All evidence is against the boy and a guilty verdict would send him to die in the electric chair. The judge informed the jurors that they are faced with a grave decision and that the court would not entertain any acts of mercy for the boy if found guilty. Even before the deliberation talks begin it is apparent most of the men are certain the boy is guilty. However, when the initial poll is taken Juror #8 (Henry Fonda) registered a shocking not guilty vote. Immediately the room is in uproar. The rest of the jury resents the inconvenient of his decision. After questioning his sanity they hastily decide to humor the juror #8 (Henry Fonda) by agreeing to discuss the trial for one hour. Eventually, as the talks precede juror #8 slowly undermines their confidence by saying that the murder weapon is widely available to anyone, and that the testimony of the key witness is suspect. Gradually they are won over by his arguments and even the most narrow minded of his fellow jurors hesitantly agrees with him. Their verdict is now a solid not guilty. Arriving at a unanimous not guilty verdict does not come easily. The jury encounters many difficulties in learning to communicate and deal with each other. What seems to be a decisive guilty verdict as deliberations...
Words: 2817 - Pages: 12
...Juror 3- angry, loud opinionatedJuror 4- opinionated, nervous motion (he tends to pace the room), serious, logicalJuror 5- reasonable, uses his own experiences to make his arguments.Juror 9- would be seen as the mediator, the man who brings harmony to the process. He is older, retired, and he stands up for what he believes in without flinching.Jurors 12 and 7 are the followers of the group. They simply go along with whoever is talking at the moment.Juror 2- calm, shy, quietJuror 10- angry, loud, prejudicedBackgroundThe movie 12 Angry Men begins with a boy who is on trial for murder of his father. The jury, comprising of 12 men is locked in a room to decide the verdict of the case. 11 out of the 12 jurors are convinced that the boy is guilty, however one juror believesthat there is reasonable doubt for the boy to not be guilty. In the rest of the movie, the jury discusses the case and slowly the juror who believes the boy is not guilty, convinces the rest that there is reasonable doubt in the case.Communication barriersJuror 1 – This juror takes the lead and tries to keep the discussion in order. He tries to be fair to all jurors despite thinking the boy to be guilty.Juror 3 – This juror’s argument lies on his own prejudices and life experiences. He comes across as very angry, loud, opinionated and aggressive. He uses definite words like “I know”, “You can’t” etc. He fails to listen to the other jurors and stubbornly stick to his stand.Juror 4 – This juror tries to bring logic...
Words: 440 - Pages: 2
...12 Angry Men (1957) Favourite Role: My favourite casts in 12 Angry Men was Juror 8, who was played by Henry Fonda. He is one brave juror who voted 'not guilty' at the start of the deliberations because of his reasonable doubt. His role was firm and persuasive, he forces the other men to slowly reconsider and review the shaky murder case and eyewitness testimony against the endangered defendant. Favourite Scene: My favourite scene was when Juror 4 do not believe the boy’s alibi that he was at the movies while the murder was taking place as the boy could not remember the title of the movie and the actors in it. Then, Juror 8 stated that it was due to the boy being devastated that the father was murdered that caused him to forget. Next, Juror 8 did a test on Juror 4 on the events that happened on previous days and he had difficulty doing so. Juror 8 then said that Juror 4 had no reason to face difficulty as he had not been under stress unlike the boy. Typical scene: The typical scene that got me engaged was the debate and the sharing of thoughts and opinion of the information. The Juror made the audience felt intense when they were arguing over the evidence and them displaying their thoughts is what makes it interesting. Typical character: I felt that the casts were able to portray their own personalities which allowed the audience to have their own judgment based on their characters. In the film, we can see that; Juror 4 who is disrespectful, stubborn and...
Words: 670 - Pages: 3
...Small Group Analysis of ’12 Angry Men’ Interpersonal and Group Dynamics – SOSC 301 Instructor: Mr. Crisp Bryant & Stratton College October 31, 2012 A Small Group Analysis of ’12 Angry Men’ Set in a large U.S. city, in the 1950’s, Twelve men of a jury are sequestered in a room and are unable to leave until a weighty decision is made, one that will either condemn a young man to death or set him free. The twelve strangers are trapped within the confines of the jury room until the goal is achieved. They melt in the hot humidity, which is worsened by the room's stuffiness and by the stress as they grapple with each other and with their responsibility (Lumet,1957). The characters of each of the twelve men was carefully crafted into a particular role within the group dynamics. A complete spectrum of issues among the different characters was developed to add chaos to the group decision-making process. From the bigotry of Juror No.10, to the coldly analytical No.4, each character brought good and bad qualities to the jury room; they all had to be addressed to reach an outcome (Lumet,1957). At the beginning of the movie, as the twelve men sit down to begin the deliberation process, there is no discussion and they decide to begin by a vote of guilty or not guilty. Eleven of the jurors quickly vote ‘guilty’ and try to leave the room. Nobody even bothers to think what their decision means for the accused. Juror No. 4 is too rigid to change and Juror No. 7 just wants to get...
Words: 1787 - Pages: 8
...Jessica Robinson Professor Romano 12 Angry Men When one get subpoenaed for jury duty, they seem to always want a case that is easy to render a verdict and it won’t take all of their time; well people can’t always get what they want. In the film 12 Angry Men, 12 men were chosen to sit on a jury for a murder case. A case that after hearing all of the evidence they assumed it was an open and closed case. A few of the jurors were very excited because they had baseball games to attend along with other personal events going on in their lives. All were ready to make the vote of a guilty verdict, oh but one. After calming down, stretching legs, and a little small talk, the foreman decided to assign that the setting would be in order from juror numbers 1 thru 12 around the table. They took a vote to see were everyone stood on their decision and there were 11 guilty and 1 not guilty votes. That’s when the other 11 had the opportunity to persuade the 1 to vote guilty, however, it was a difficult job. This one particular juror saw room for reasonable doubt within the testimonies of the witnesses and the remainder of the evidence and wanted to discuss them a little more. The reasons for voting guilty were all over the place. Some of the men had logical reasoning for the decision and others just had not particular reason at all, just because they thought he was guilty. Some assumed he was guilty because a woman who lived across from the defendant...
Words: 964 - Pages: 4
...Similarly, both On The Waterfront and 12 Angry Men create the opposing majority to agree with the differentiating opinion put upon them. The first response in 12 Angry Men from the jurors is initially ‘guilty’ although this prejudice tone shifts greatly when all jurors are seen to be voting ‘not guilty.’ Similarly Juror 7 is seen to be changing his vote in agreement to Juror 8 by proclaiming that “it takes a great deal of courage to stand alone even if you believe in something very strongly” the importance of this is highlighted due to the change in opinion and votes of other jurors in particular juror 7, who also creates a sense of respect towards Juror 8. Juror 8 is the only juror to first withhold the vote of not guiltily. The change in...
Words: 327 - Pages: 2
...Elizabeth Herrera April 23, 2014 Comm 151 12 Angry Men: Communication Analysis In the film, 12 Angry Men, viewers come across a group of men who display the different communication dynamics – both the positive and negative sides. Chapter 7 encompasses the idea of Group and Team Communication Skills and how one should communicate effectively among others. To help better understand, 12 Angry Men is centered on a jury’s deliberation in a murder case. A group of men are given the job to deliberate the life of a young boy who has been accused of murdering his father. With only a knife that’s been left behind in the murder scene and a few witnesses who claim they heard the boy scream and run out of the room; these 12 jurors will have to come up with a reasonable doubt in favor to spare the boys life or cast him guilty. Eleven of the jurors vote guilty while Juror 8 is the only one who votes “not guilty.” As the story starts to unfold, viewers get a glimpse of the juror’s personalities, communication approach, culture, preconceptions, and background and how theses factors influence their deliberation and their treatment towards one another. We can draw from the film that poor Conversational Style was used, the book notes, “Sometimes barriers are not in words but in how they are delivered” (145). These men were not respectful with one another when it came to speaking their turn due to their difference in opinions; which led them to lash out at one another. The book encourages...
Words: 787 - Pages: 4
...Democracy and the right to serve as a juror are a great privilege and responsibility which is not to be taken lightly, as seen in Twelve Angry Men. How does Rose use the play to reflect these themes? In Reginald Rose Twelve Angry Men, Rose uses the play to reflect the duty and responsibility of a juror. Rose uses the characters to reflect different themes of the play. As a democratic country, jurors have a great privilege and responsibility and it shouldn’t be taken lightly as some juror’s demonstrated. Rose represents different personalities and beliefs with each juror. A young man’s life is at stake, most of the juror’s assume he is guilty on the first vote. But luck for the boy is that the 8th juror who wants it to be a fair trial and wants to “talk this thing out”. A fair trial that everyone is entitled to. Juror 8th is in contrast with the other jury members who allow personal bias to make up their verdict and decisions. Rose starts of the play with the judge stating the duty of the jurors, and that they have to come up with a unanimous verdict. The play progresses with the changing of individual juror’s minds. Rose represents juror 8 as the protagonist and the hero of the case. Juror 8 represents the strengths of the jury systems. Juror 8 insists on looking at the facts in the case even though everyone else has already got their mind made up. In the play juror 8 is used to represent a juror who is doing his duty the right way. He is patient , tolerant and thinks about...
Words: 1229 - Pages: 5
...Jessica Robinson Professor Romano 12 Angry Men When one get subpoenaed for jury duty, they seem to always want a case that is easy to render a verdict and it won’t take all of their time; well people can’t always get what they want. In the film 12 Angry Men, 12 men were chosen to sit on a jury for a murder case. A case that after hearing all of the evidence they assumed it was an open and closed case. A few of the jurors were very excited because they had baseball games to attend along with other personal events going on in their lives. All were ready to make the vote of a guilty verdict, oh but one. After calming down, stretching legs, and a little small talk, the foreman decided to assign that the setting would be in order from juror numbers 1 thru 12 around the table. They took a vote to see were everyone stood on their decision and there were 11 guilty and 1 not guilty votes. That’s when the other 11 had the opportunity to persuade the 1 to vote guilty, however, it was a difficult job. This one particular juror saw room for reasonable doubt within the testimonies of the witnesses and the remainder of the evidence and wanted to discuss them a little more. The reasons for voting guilty were all over the place. Some of the men had logical reasoning for the decision and others just had not particular reason at all, just because they thought he was guilty. Some assumed he was guilty because a woman who lived across from the defendant...
Words: 964 - Pages: 4
