12 Angry Men

The depiction twelve angry men was a movie most different pile from backgrounds, races, and religions. They were all different and creation in a root dynamics class we learned round how per implement-and-takeality affects battalion and oppositewise things that people tend to do. The assess in the ascendent of the movie showed approximately non vocal expression, which is sending a message without using linguistic process just now if things like facial expressions and re primary(prenominal)s movements. The judge in the beginning was hunched over signification he was non very jolly and seemed to be a passive valet de chambre.The foreman is alleged(a) to be the attracter of the jurys and fit to his behaviors he is. He communicates well which is a key post to being a leader. The foreman functions as a leader because he heeds well and also tries to give out ideas to the rest of the jurymans. He has the capacity to look at the situation in some other perspectiv es. In make these hard closings the jurywomans need to save perception checks, to leave sure they argon non saltation to each conclusions. This is the life of a recognise in and their finis depends on his life.The conflicts that arise in the jurywomans room where originative to the situation at hand. The conflicts were solved in a good manner and beneficial to the matter and getting everyone to relish confident about whether the cod was immoral or non. The jurors had assumptions about those people and slums which influenced the vogue they entangle about the case. Their assumptions about those things influenced the elbow room they i hatch about the case initially, the perception of the facts was altered because of having some token of bias.The jurors assumptions had to do with the pagan and social diversity of the jury. The jurors based on how they lived their life, thought differently from the ones who were different from them based on the way they lived the ir lives. There were a lot of details to the case, and some jurors did non quite remember what others did. Some jurors remembered things that others did not due to selective listening. Most of the jurors listened to things that held more(prenominal) meaning to them than others.During the unanimous case the jurors did not know distri plainlyively others names and in that respect is an greatness to this, the importance is that being in the case it is supposed to be a strictly business environment. They argon on that point to do one job and that is to make a decision. The twelve angry men is a censure of how people act together and how their behavior can affect others. The movie is a good slip of things we engage learned in class.12 angry men12 Angry men, originally a play in 1954, then do into a movie in 1957, has easily stood the test of cartridge holder. In an era when the studios and the existence were more prep ard towards major Technicolor productions with multimil lion dollar budgets, over 90% of the movie takes place in a single a waneting the jury deliberation room where, in real clipping, the viewer is given a no nonsense approach to the many aspects of assemblage decision making, standing up unaccompanied for ones beliefs and overriding the ideology of the day c at a timerning minorities and the poor in order to see the truth the truth the bulk of the twelve jurors did not wish to see. Also, how assemblage process comes into play within the diverse make up of the jurors How each juror acts differently in the crowd than how we are led to believe they would act alone.12 Angry Men tells the story of twelve jurors thrust together in a hot and humid room on a New York summer evening to deliberate on the immorality or innocence of an eighteen year old Hispanic boy with a troubled past. He is impeach of stabbing his father a man with whom he has had a subject areaious kinship for years. The criminate is flake an uphill battle towards an acquittal the eye witness account of his neighbors, a court appointed public defender whose apathy towards this case is mirrored by more than one of the jurors and his race which seems to be a major strike against him in the mind of some of the jurors, specifi ringy juror 10.From the on erect, it seems like an open and close up case with the criminate being sentenced to death for the murder of his father. merely if that were the case, 12 Angry Men, with its study of charitable contrasts, inconsistencies and prejudices, would make water been long forgotten. Instead, 12 Angry Men is a testament to the notion that standing up for ones beliefs that rent come from an unbiased and methodical overview of the facts, even if those beliefs are contrary to the vocal majority, is honorable and that such(prenominal) prejudices which cloud those facts are an impediment to every citizen in a democratic society.Being forced to listen to six days of testimony while at the equivalent tim e being paid plainly three dollars a day for their services, it is easy to see how some or most of the jurors at the beginning of deliberations, seemed apathetic towards the great responsibility they run through to give the impeach their undivided attention while deciding his guilt or innocence. This is the case for a progeny of jurors specifically juror 7 who is absent with making the Yankee/Indians game later that day.He feels rushed by the proceedings and desires quick deliberations followed by a unanimous vile balloting. He feels that the accuse is blameful simply most likely would have voted the way of the majority if that meant that he could have gone to the game, gone home or just been anywhere other than in the courtroom for any additional length of time. He does not see and cannot be affectively reminded about the awesome power he has to either put a man to death or to set him free. The issue of the guilt or innocence of the criminate should be paramount in his m ind alone sadly, it is not.jurywoman 5 is not the only one who shrinks from his responsibility. Juror 12, the well dressed and jovial salesman feels that the accused is guilty but when pressed to explain his reasoning, cannot and quickly changes his mind when pressured to do so. Juror 12 is preoccupied with his job and maintaining a light atmosphere in the jury room almost oblivious to the weigh at hand. Juror 2 is in many slipway, the same as juror 12 object for the fact that his personality is not most as outgoing but in the same way, pretermits convictions and is centre to go with the crowd. He does not take his civic duty seriously and is afraid to stand up against the crowd hostile juror 8 the lone dissenter at the beginning of the film.Also, juror 2 does not seem to be able to explain why he feels that the accused is either artless or guilty. This is contrary to jurors 3,4 and 10 who at the start of the movie, have no qualms about pose the accused to death and detai ling exactly whey they feel that the boy should be worthy of such a fate. The remaining three holdouts all have different reasons why they think the boy is guilty some are legitimate concerns while others are rooted in prejudice against the poor and minorities.Although misguided, the to a higher place mentioned jurors had the conviction to state specifically why they thought what they did and to be perfectly allowing for a time and to stand up to what is becoming a numerous and vocal majority as the movie progresses. Jurors 2, and 10 are either too preoccupied to be bothered by the tremendous power they have over the accused, or are too timid and leave alone go with the majority. For that reason, he is among the jurors that did not take their civic responsibility as seriously as they needed to.Jurors 5, 9 and of course 8 are polar opposites of the above mentioned jurors. At the beginning of the film, only juror 8 votes for the innocence of the accused. Or quite there is reasonab le doubt as to the guilt of the accused in his mind. But juror 8, by his protest admission, reluctantly stands alone in defiance to the other eleven jurors.He does not do this while void of fear. It is seen on his face, in his mannerisms and even when he is willing to vote with the majority if by and by a victimize deliberation and a second vote, he is still the lone dissenter. Juror 8 is skeptical about many aspects of this boys life his childhood and especially the system that would rent such a boy to fall through the cracks and almost invite this type of behavior (had be been guilty) and feels that an lifelike and methodical discussion is warranted before he is to vote for the guilt and subsequent death of a fellow human being.This type of moral fortitude, courage and attention to duty goes rewarded by juror 9 the oldest juror who once he has a companion, has no trouble standing up to the intense verbal ridicule of the majority, specifically juror 3,7,10. By this act, the gro up processs momentum slowly starts to fault away from rendering a guilty verdict to instead empowering those timid jurors who have doubt as to the guilt of the accused but were too afraid to speak as they knew that they could not handle the natural spring levied against them by jurors 3 and 10. The jury room consists of polar opposites when it comes to their fulfillment of their duty in this matter. It is not the specific vote that they cast that makes them the most different, but in the way that they came to that decision.Each juror possessed a different decision making process concerning how they voted, how quickly they changed their vote and how resistant others were to permit one of them go free. It is very rare for twelve different people to be completely impartial and void of any prejudices.This was the case especially for juror 3. He is the last of the jurors to change his vote to not guilty and in order for him to do so, a great deal of internal and personal problems and frustrations must(prenominal) be kill for him to change his vote. Juror 3 is a traditional, hard nosed individual who taught himself to be tough as well as his son, remarking that when his only son was nine and walked away from a fight, it make him sick and he resolved to make a man out of his son. At the time of the trial, his son is twenty two and it is safe to say that they have a contentious relationship for the past few years.The son, most likely, resisted the intense tactics of his father and they have not spoken in years. This has caused the father a great deal of pain and this pain served as the main source of the fathers hatred for the accused. Juror 3 sees a correlation between the accused and his son and exerts unforesightful effort to disguise that bias. The accused had a troubled relationship with has father as well. Juror 3 sees both the accused and his son as being ungrateful to their fathers and feels that there should be consequences for this disrespect.He seems to have no power over his son for if he did, they would be reconciled or at least there would be visits between them. But he does have power over the accused to put him to death for what his hatred tells him that the boy must obviously be guilty. The accused stands for everything that juror 3 hates and coupled with his tough exterior, is the last to submit to allow the accused go free.On the opposite end of the spectrum are jurors 11, 5 and 8. Juror 11 is a watch maker from Eastern Europe. Even though he is Caucasian, he is conscious of his ethnicity and the prejudices that come with being from a different country. He sympathizes with the accused and how his ethnic background puts him at a disadvantage in almost every aspect of daily life in 1950s America.At the beginning of the movie, he agrees with the majority regarding the guilt of the accused but the racialist generalizations made by jurors 7 and 10 are very effective in showing juror 11 that there are certain prejudices in p lay that need to be examined. Along with the methodical explanation by juror 8, the watchmaker changes his vote to not guilty and does not waver for the rest of the movie despite intense pressure from juror 7 and 10 to convince him of the contrary and to play on the fears the watchmaker has of being different.Also propel by the obvious shift in the group process away from the ideology that encourages a guilty verdict, the above mentioned jurors do all that they can to slow the momentum. The way in which the watchmaker comes to his decisions in a non biased, sympathetic and dutiful process and is willing to absorb ridicule against the prejudices of jurors 3 and 10 some of the same prejudices which force them to be the last to change their vote, is honorable and worthy of mention second only to that of juror 8, the lone dissenter.The movie wastes no time in pointing out who will emerge the leaders in the jury room. One would think that naturally, the foreman would be selected as the leader and that the proceeding would be act upon under his watchful eye. But that is not the case. The foreman has no such ambition and is quick to hold out his seat to anyone who thinks that they capacity be able to do a better job once an communication channel arises on how the deliberations would be conducted.By the simple yet courageous action of juror 8 to vote not guilty by a show of hands, while well-educated that such an action would be the source of ridicule, quickly makes him as one of the leaders in the jury room. Juror 8 becomes the leader by not only being the sole dissenter in the face of ridicule but in the way that he reacts to that ridicule through a quiet, confident and respectful resolve which earns him not only respect from people who are not used to such treatment, but also converts to his call for a complete examination of the facts. It is this unbiased and caring demeanor that helps his argument to have legitimacy unlike the boisterous juror 3 and 10 whos e demeanor steadily helps them to lose converts until they are the only ones left.On the other end of the spectrum are jurors 3 and 10. It is obvious that they have ulterior motives in seeing the accused gets the electric chair. They are tough on crime, short on compassion and frequent on antiblack generalizations which cloud their mind and sour their soul with such hatful rhetoric. These prejudices come busting out towards the end of the movie when jurors 3 and 10 are the most desperate as they are now left alone with the intense eyes of jurors who at the beginning of their deliberations, supported their discriminatory ideology by voting for the guilt of the accused.Once the support has been eroded, their actions, like the actions of juror3, set them isolated as they infamously emerge as the other leaders in the jury room. The fact that juror 3 allows his frustrations with his son to come into play with his appreciation towards the guilt of the accused and that he his mannerisms are so over the top, helps him emerge as the other main leader in the jury room. His prejudice lies in the age of the accused being close to that of his own son with whom he has had a troubled relationship and a troubled past. Juror 3 whitethorn or may not hate his son but he is very discouraged and displease with the way that things have gone in their relationship and vents his frustration towards the accused.The prejudice of juror 10 lies not in the age of the accused by rather in his race. The accused is a Latino who grew up in the poor tenements of New York where crime runs rampant and juror 10 feels that the accused is guilty by association since he came from such squalor and with a troubled past. However, juror 10 is not nearly as vocal in his suspicion of juror 5 who grew up in a standardized atmosphere simply because the juror is white. It is more the race of the accused than where he grew up that seems to motivate juror 10 into the assumption that the boy is guilty.At firs t, it is the outspoken demeanor of juror 10 that helps to set him apart from the other jurors in a leadership role. But his leadership emerges in more infamous ways as he vocalizes his racist assumptions of the accused in one final and desperate outburst as he desperately tried to win back converts to his cause. He uses such delivery as those people and you know how they are and finally, the accused is one of them.The invents are used at the beginning of the movie and faux as fact in the mind of juror 10 mostly due to the fact that his only opposition is from juror 8 who is not being taken seriously and is no threat to him. However, when the group process shows that juror 10 is in a shrinking majority and will soon be a lone standout, along with juror 3, the same phrases are used desperately but to no avail.The main source for the drama in the jury room is the requirement that their decision must be unanimous. If for the simple fact that everyone must be in agreement in either se nding the accused to his death or setting him free, there would have been no screenplay to begin with. The jurors might have argued the merits of the case but with there being no need for a unanimous decision, juror 8 would have known that unless he could win six more converts in what would have to be a short amount of time, the deliberations would soon be over.The ulterior motives of jurors 3 and 10 would never have seen the light of day. The lack of conviction displayed by jurors 1 2 and 12 would never had been recognized and the fighter aircraftic actions of juror 8 and to a lesser design juror 9, would never had sparked such heated yet important and essential debate within the jury room. Every man left the jury room a little different than when they first came. Jurors 2, 5, 11 and 12 may have been emboldened in their private lives and to let future injustices not slide as easily as they may have had in the past. Jurors 3, 10 and to a lesser extent 7, recognized their prejudice s and may have exerted some effort to confront these problems.The phrase group process refers to the behavior of people in groups, such as task groups that are nerve-wracking to solve a problem or make a decision. 12 Angry Men has numerous and obvious examples of group process. It is the fact that twelve men must come to a unanimous decision that such examples can be shown. If there were only one or two jurors and/or a unanimous decision did not have to be achieved, any aspect of group process would have been absent.The jurors can be grouped into three main groups those who are strongly in favor of heavy(a) the accused the electric chair, those who are willing to go along with the majority and those who are strongly in favor of being oblivious from the glaring prejudices and racist assumptions and quickly latch onto the moralist juror 8 and then 9. Jurors 2 5 and 11 are beneficiaries of group process. They cannot do alone what is made easier in a group once jurors 8 and 9 have vot ed for the innocence of the accused.Alone, they could never have through what 8 and 9 had done stand up to vocal ridicule and to do it alone. But once the first step has been made towards an attempt to judge the facts and not the race, age or background of the accused, jurors 2, 5 and 11 are relieved to vote their consciousness instead of giving into the pressure levied against them by specifically jurors 3 4 and 10. The negative aspects of group process would have been guilty for defective decision making if it hadnt been for the fact that juror 8 has the courage to vote for the innocence of the accused.12 Angry Men will continue to stand the test of time since it speaks eloquently on many different areas that prejudices are an impediment to everyone in a democratic society and that standing up for a belief, despite knowing the dangers of such a stand, is honorable and should be recognized as courageous. But also, people do in groups what they wouldnt do in private. Individuality w ithin a group of strong opinions comes at a price and that price is most often ridicule and misunderstanding. If at the beginning of the movie, the foreman had taken a secret vote, juror 8 may not have been the lone dissenter.The jurors that did not put a great deal of value in the democratic process of trial by jury and didnt feel that a daily salary of $3 was not worthy of their methodical analysis of the facts, were content to go with the majority, no matter what that decision said. But for the jurors who made it a point to shift group process away from a guilty verdict based on racist assumptions and in light of strong ridicule and little monetary compensation, this movie will continue to be studied and appreciated for years to come.12 Angry MenTwelve Angry Men 1. How do you think you might have acted as a juror in this case ? How would you had interacted ? I think i would have started off with being calm but stressed i mean I would probably feel very burdened, because just by c hoosing one option you can change someones life. And as fas as interacting goes i would be casual but if something unexpected happens and i do have an outburst then it happens every one loses it at some point. 2.At the beginning of this movie the jurors vote 11 to 1 to convict the suspect and send him to death for murder yet by the end of the movie they vote to acquit him, to set him free. What are the events that led the jurors to change their minds so radically and set the defendant free ? Describe the process. 1)The glossa could be bought or have been found by anyone 2)The murderer knew how to use a pocket prod and the count have known. 3)When they re-enact the old man walking/limping from his bed to the door outside it takes them more then 15 seconds to get to the outside door.And the old man swore it had taken him 15 seconds. 4)The old man and the lady say that they heard the boy screaming at his father saying Ill kill you but that doesnt really mean he actually killed him si nce people say that phrase all the time but dont really mean it and that was beard when juror number three has and outburst and says Ill kill you to juror number eight. 5)How could the old man and the lady have heard the boy screaming when you cant even hear yourself cerebration over the el train. )The jurors start doubting the ladys eyesight since she did not have her glasses on and maybe just assumed that it was the boy staying his father. 3. Why is juror number nine (old Man) a real hero ? excuse this using examples. 1)Because he is the first to agree with juror number eight , deciding that there is not enough evidence to sentence the young boy to death. 2)He openly describes juror number tens racist attitude. 3)When he agrees that the old man could have maybe justified to what he heard and saw the shadow of the murder so hes name could be recognized. 4. Explain number threes anger against the accused.Hes anger towards the accused is because hes relationship whit his son was very similar to the accused and the defendant. So based on the fact that he hasnt seen his son in the past two years and the negative relationship hes had with him he decides to declare the accused guilty because he thinks that the boy dose not deserve to live because he killed his own father. 5. Explain the impact of the closing scene in the jury room between number eight and three. Juror number three breaks down after his outburst while every one is leaving juror number eight stays back and tries to console him without communication. . Explain the following (refers to the play). a) Innocent until proven guilty Until you have no strong evidence against the accused, the accused is declared guilty. b) Reasonable doubt Something that could possibly prove the accused guilty. c) Burden of proof The biggest/important proof to prove the accused guilty or not guilty. 7. Explain the title. The title explained how these twelve men are frustrated and stressed and have this burden of declaring the accused guilty or not guilty.12 Angry MenMODULE TITLE STRATEGIC instruction DATE assessment SET AND LOADED ON TO STUDENT PORTAL- 13th February 2013 DATE ASSESSMENT TO BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTTED- SUBMISSION METHOD/MODE- Online via turnitin, in person conference Oral launching - Assessment Type An Individual Assignment and a Group institution Individual Assignment pronounce limit -3000 words Assignment One is based on the Harvard Business Review Case pick out on Facebook. Study the case carefully and the recommended sources in the reading list. Attempt the following tasksTask A development pertinent analytical frameworks critically analyse the strategic capability of Facebook (1500 words, 12. 5%) Task B To what extent could prescriptive models of strategy be used to explain the strategic success of Facebook? (1500 words, 12. 5 %) Total weight down for Assignment 1 25% Individual Assignment Marking Guidelines c mark = 25% weighting fleck discussion and application of relevant models and concepts on strategic capabilities to understand the competitive advantage of Facebook (25 marks) Critical examination of conventional strategic management models to explain the success Facebook (25 marks) Discussion of contemporary models/ studies such as complexity theory, chaos and positive returns economics that may give an insight into Facebooks explosive ontogeny (25marks) Academic protocol quality of academic references, the institution of these and the overall structuring and format of the business report (25 marks) (Total 100 marks=25%) Group Assignment Assignment Brief Task A Using relevant strategic management concepts, conduct an analysis of the film 12 Angry Men ( Dir.Sidney Lumet. Orion-Nova, 1957. Film) and discuss the implications of your findings for decision making in a business organisation. (Max 1000 words or 5 slides) Task B The Board of Directors of a medium- size of itd company of your own choosing have recently attended a confere nce on contemporary developments in strategic thinking. They were particularly impressed by the Blue ocean concept. As consultants, critically discuss the ways in which the Board could shift its current strategy in oder to open up new market possibilities and to create sustainable value for its current and new stakeholders. 2000 words or 10 Slides) . Group presentation guidelines Students are required to fully participate in and contribute to the development of the Group Presentation. Non-participation and/or non-attendance will result in restriction of marks for this aspect of assessment The group size will be determined by the module leader and module teaching team up and will normally be in the range of 6-8 group members (normal maximum). In specific circumstances this may be varied. The formal Group Presentation will be delivered by a maximum of three members of the group.The other group members will be required to answer questions put them by assessors at the end of the pre sentation. The positive maximum presentation period is 20 minutes. This will be timed and there will be NO extensions to this time period. Student Groups are strongly advised to rehearse their presentation to ensure that the time period is strictly adhered to. Presentations will be stopped by the lecturer/assessment team at the end of 20 minutes Presentations are followed by Questions which are required to be fielded by/responded to by all the members of the group.The absolute timed period for questions is 10 minutes. Both times are required to be strictly adhered to. There is a stipulated Maximum of 15 power point slides in the 20 minute presentation. Students are required to be aware and are formally advised of all maximum times which will be cut off times with no exceptions. Power Point printouts with the individual texts provided for the presentation by each student are required to be handed in to the assessment team/lecturer at the time of the presentation immediately before the commencement of the presentation and will be retained by the lecturer/assessment team. The contribution to the Group Presentation is deemed to be equivalent to 3000 words from each student. The Assessment Weighting for this aspect of the group assessment is 25% (all students in the particular group are awarded the same percentage) Group Presentation Evaluation Criteria 100 marks= 25% weighting constitution Topic clearly stated Structure and scope of presentation clearly stated Topic true in order stated Speakers summed up main points in conclusion 10 marks mental ability Knowledge of subject (background of company and storyline of film and their relevance to module) Application and discussion of relevant conceptual models Clarity of business concept for Blue Ocean Implications of analysis for strategic decision-making and company selected Speakers in ascendence of subject matter 30 marks Confidence Speakers look relaxed and confident Professionally dressed give eye contact Engage with audience and display awareness of audience response 10 marks Speech Varied paced Use of conversational style avoiding jargon and long-winded bookish xplanation of relevant concepts enamor volume trenchant pronunciation and articulation Accurate grammar 10 marks Visual Aids Clear and legible Introduced at right time User-friendly, easy to follow and not too much schooling Impact on audience Creativity and novelty 10 marks Timing Well-timed presentation Time divided appropriately between tasks 10 marks Discussion management and handling of questions suffice confidently to questions Deflect difficult or irrelevant questions 20 marks (Total 100 marks= 25%)Students are required to fully participate in and contribute to the development of the Group Presentation. Marks will be restricted for non-participation and/or non-attendance. Module Learning Outcomes to be Assessed- Upon successful completion of the assessment, students will be able t o Assignment 1 (Individual) analyse the aims, concept and role of strategic management Assignment 2 (Group Assignment) critically analyse how the different perspectives of social science disciplines inform strategic management evaluate the debates adjoin contemporary strategic issues12 Angry MenThe movie twelve angry men was a movie about different people from backgrounds, races, and religions. They were all different and being in a group dynamics class we learned about how personality affects people and other things that people tend to do. The judge in the beginning of the movie showed some non verbal behavior, which is sending a message without using words but things like facial expressions and body movements. The judge in the beginning was hunched over meaning he was not very alert and seemed to be a passive man.The foreman is supposed to be the leader of the jurys and according to his behaviors he is. He communicates well which is a key role to being a leader. The foreman fu nctions as a leader because he listens well and also tries to give out ideas to the rest of the jurors. He has the ability to look at the situation in other perspectives. In making these hard decisions the jurors need to have perception checks, to make sure they are not jumping to any conclusions. This is the life of a kid and their decision depends on his life.The conflicts that arise in the jurors room where productive to the situation at hand. The conflicts were solved in a good manner and beneficial to the case and getting everyone to feel confident about whether the kid was guilty or not. The jurors had assumptions about those people and slums which influenced the way they felt about the case. Their assumptions about those things influenced the way they thought about the case initially, the perception of the facts was altered because of having some type of bias.The jurors assumptions had to do with the cultural and social diversity of the jury. The jurors based on how they live d their life, thought differently from the ones who were different from them based on the way they lived their lives. There were a lot of details to the case, and some jurors did not quite remember what others did. Some jurors remembered things that others did not due to selective listening. Most of the jurors listened to things that held more meaning to them than others.During the whole case the jurors did not know each others names and there is an importance to this, the importance is that being in the case it is supposed to be a strictly business environment. They are there to do one job and that is to make a decision. The twelve angry men is a reflection of how people act together and how their behavior can affect others. The movie is a good example of things we have learned in class.