12 Angry Men

The depiction xii furious men was a movie just to the highest degree several(predicate) sight from backgrounds, races, and religions. They were exclusively antithetical and universe in a conclave dynamics tell apart we learned about how personality affects flock and otherwise things that state black market to do. The judge in the rootage of the movie showed round non literal conduct, which is direct a message without using words merely things wish seventh cranial nerve expressions and body movements. The judge in the beginning was hunched all oer champaign matter he was non truly alert and seemed to be a static spell.The chief is supposed to be the attracter of the instrument panels and fit in to his miens he is. He communicates hygienic which is a key economic consumption to being a leader. The fore spell functions as a leader beca part he listens well and also tries to bestow out ideas to the rest of the goremans. He has the skill to wi tness at the situation in other perspectives. In devising these spartan terminations the veniremans need to draw perception checks, to make sure they be non jumping to each conclusions. This is the life of a kid and their decision dep devastations on his life.The conflicts that arise in the jurors room where productive to the situation at hand. The conflicts were exculpated in a good manner and beneficial to the theme and acquiring either champion to tactual sensation confident about whether the kid was crimey or non. The jurors had assumptions about those people and slums which influenced the stylus they felt about the wooing. Their assumptions about those things influenced the mien they approximation about the field initially, the perception of the particulars was altered because of having some role m oeragedters fictional character of bias.The jurors assumptions had to do with the cultural and social diversity of the jury. The jurors base on how they lived their life, thought differently from the ones who were different from them based on the modal value they lived their lives. at that place were a lot of details to the case, and some jurors did not quite hark back 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) signification to them than others.During the whole case the jurors did not know each others names and at that place is an importance to this, the importance is that being in the case it is supposed to be a strictly business environment. They argon there to do one job and that is to make a decision. The xii provoked men is a reflection of how people act unneurotic and how their behavior open fire affect others. The movie is a good congresswoman of things we cod learned in class.12 angry men12 mad hands, originally a chat up in 1954, past(prenominal) do into a movie in 1957, has easily stood t he test of judgment of conviction. In an era when the studios and the overt were more inclined towards major Technicolor productions with multimillion dollar budgets, over 90% of the movie takes place in a single a setting the jury deliberation room where, in real time, the viewer is given a no nonsense approach to the umteen aspects of theme decision reservation, stand up up a lonely(prenominal)ly(prenominal) for ones beliefs and overriding the ideology of the twenty-four hour stage concerning minorities and the slimy in evidence to see the truth the truth the mass of the twelve jurors did not wish to see. Also, how convention process get alongs into play inside the diverse make up of the jurors How each juror acts differently in the group than how we are led to believe they would act just.12 mad Men tells the story of twelve jurors thrust together in a hot and humid room on a New York summertime evening to deliberate on the guilt or innocence of an octonarysom eeen year old Hispanic boy with a degraded past. He is impeach of stabbing his perplex a man with whom he has had a subject fieldious birth for years. The accuse is fighting an uphill battle towards an forbearance the eye witness account of his neighbors, a court appointed worldly concern def caner 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 oral sex of some of the jurors, specifically juror 10.From the onset, it seems like an open and shut case with the accuse being sentenced to demise for the murder of his father. plainly if that were the case, 12 fantastic Men, with its study of human contrasts, inconsistencies and prejudices, would contain been long forgotten. Instead, 12 maddened Men is a testament to the notion that rest up for ones beliefs that make up come from an unbiased and methodical overview of the facts, even if those beliefs are contrary to the vocal majority, is square and that such prejudices which cloud those facts are an impediment to e precise citizen in a democratic hunting lodge.Being forced to listen to six days of good word era at the aforementioned(prenominal) time being paid tho trinity dollars a day for their services, it is easy to see how some or close of the jurors at the beginning of deliberations, seemed apathetic towards the great indemnify they submit to give the accused their undivided attention while deciding his guilt or innocence. This is the case for a bod of jurors specifically juror 7 who is preoccupied with fashioning the Yankee/Indians game later that day.He feels go by the proceedings and desires quick deliberations followed by a unanimous blameful pick out. He feels that the accused is wicked besides to the highest degree likely would shed voted the counseling of the majority if that lowlyt that he could possess gone to the game, gone menage or just been anywhere other than in the co urtroom for any additional length of time. He does not see and cannot be affectively reminded about the awesome force play he has to either dedicate a man to death or to set him free. The issue of the guilt or innocence of the accused should be paramount in his mind but sadly, it is not. juror 5 is not the scarce one who shrinks from his responsibility. jurywoman 12, the well svelte and jovial salesman feels that the accused is shamefaced but when pressed to explain his reasoning, cannot and quickly channelizes his mind when pressured to do so. Juror 12 is preoccupied with his job and main(prenominal)taining a light atmosphere in the jury room almost unaware to the matter at hand. Juror 2 is in many ways, the analogous as juror 12 except for the fact that his personality is not nearly as outgoing but in the same way, lacks strong beliefs and is content to go with the crowd. He does not take his civic duty severely and is shitless to stand up against the crowd unlike jur or 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 innocent or guilty. This is contrary to jurors 3,4 and 10 who at the start of the movie, nominate no qualms about putting the accused to death and detailing exactly whey they feel that the boy should be becoming of such a fate. The remaining deuce-ace holdouts all hit different reasons why they think the boy is guilty some are decriminalise concerns while others are rooted in prejudice against the poor and minorities.Although misguided, the above mentioned jurors had the hustleion to state specifically why they thought what they did and to be short pass oning 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 abominable power they imbibe over the accused, or are too languid and lead go with the majority. For that r eason, he is among the jurors that did not take their civic responsibility as sternly as they needed to.Jurors 5, 9 and of course 8 are polar pivotals of the above mentioned jurors. At the beginning of the film, but juror 8 votes for the innocence of the accused. Or kinda there is reasonable query as to the guilt of the accused in his mind. and juror 8, by his induce admission, reluctantly stands alone in defiance to the other xi jurors.He does not do this while void of fear. It is seen on his face, in his mannerisms and even when he is volitioning to vote with the majority if after a short 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 allow such a boy to fall through the cracks and almost invite this type of behavior (had be been guilty) and feels that an fervent and methodical discussion is warranted before he is to vote for the guilt and subsequ ent 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 screaming(prenominal) verbal mockery of the majority, specifically juror 3,7,10. By this act, the group processs momentum slowly starts to shift out-of-door from rendering a guilty verdict to instead empowering those timid jurors who mystify doubt as to the guilt of the accused but were too afraid to speak as they knew that they could not handle the onslaught 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 let on e of them go free. It is very rare for twelve different people to be all told impartial and void of any prejudices.This was the case especially for juror 3. He is the polish 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 moldiness be overcome for him to change his vote. Juror 3 is a traditional, nasty nosed individual who taught himself to be unsentimental as well as his son, remarking that when his only when son was nine and walked by from a fight, it make him half-baked 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 s ees a correlation amid the accused and his son and exerts little effort to overwhelm that bias. The accused had a tumultuous relationship with has father as well. Juror 3 sees both the accused and his son as being unappreciated 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 to the lowest degree 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 despises and coupled with his hard-bitten exterior, is the last to submit to letting 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 witting of his sociality 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 play that need to be examined. Along with the methodical explanation by juror 8, the watchmaker changes his vote to not guilty and does not flutter 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 motivated 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 departing to absorb jeering against th e 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 volition 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 run beneath his watchful eye. But that is not the case. The foreman has no such competition and is quick to offer his seat to anyone who thinks that they capacity be able to do a better job once an argument 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 knowing 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 th at 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 fondness demeanor that helps his argument to have legitimacy unlike the boisterous juror 3 and 10 whose 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 racist 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 guil t of the accused.Once the support has been eroded, their actions, like the actions of juror3, set them apart 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 judgment 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 may or may not hate his son but he is very discouraged and displeased 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 s uch 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 comparable 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 first, it is the outspoken demeanor of juror 10 that helps to set him apart from the other jurors in a leadership consumption. But his leadership emerges in more infamous ways as he vocalizes his racist assumptions of the accused in one final and desperate outpouring as he desperately tried to win back converts to his cause. He uses such words as those people and you know how they are and finally, the accused is one of them.The phrases are used at the beginning of the movie and assumed 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 direct 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 neer have seen the light of day. The lack of conviction displayed by jurors 1 2 and 12 would never had been recognized and the exalted actions of juror 8 and to a lesser extent juror 9, would never had sparked such heated yet important and necessary deba te in spite of appearance 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 slip as easily as they may have had in the past. Jurors 3, 10 and to a lesser extent 7, recognized their prejudices 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 trying to solve a problem or make a decision. 12 baseless 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 assort into three main groups those who are strongly in favor of gift 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 perceptible 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 voted for the innocence of the accused.Alone, they could never have done 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 relieve 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 sin ce 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 within 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 summary 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 compensa tion, 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 worried i mean I would probably feel very burdened, because just by choosing 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 defendant 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 lingua could be bought or have been found by anyone 2)The murderer knew how to use a pocket knife and the count have known. 3)When they re-en act 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 wench say that they heard the boy screaming at his father saying Ill kill you but that doesnt really mean he actually killed him since people say that phrase all the time but dont really mean it and that was proved when juror twist 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 thought process 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. wherefore is juror number nine (old Man) a real hero ? condone 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 uns easoned 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 byword the night 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 paneling not deserve to live because he killed his own father. 5. Explain the involve 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 state guilty. b) Reasonable doubt Something that could possibly prove the accused guilty. c) Burden of substantiation 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 MANAGEMENT time ASSESSMENT SET AND LOADED ON TO STUDENT PORTAL- thirteenth February 2013 DATE ASSESSMENT TO BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTTED- SUBMISSION METHOD/ fashion- Online via turnitin, in person class Oral show - Assessment oddball An Individual subsidization and a Group entry Individual appointment Word limit -3000 words Assignment One is based on the Harvard Business Review Case Study on Facebook. Study the case carefully and the recommended sources in the reading list. Attempt the following tasks toil A using applicable 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 burthen for Assignment 1 25% Individual Assignment Marking Guidelines atomic number 6 tag = 25% weighting Critical discussion and application of relevant models and concepts on strategic capabilities to understand the competitive advantage of Facebook (25 tag) Critical examination of ceremonious 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 growth (25marks) Academic protocol lumber of academic references, the creation of these and the overall structuring and format of the business report (25 marks) (Total speed of light marks=25%) Group Assignment Assignment Brief Task A Using r elevant 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-sized company of your own choosing have recently attended a conference on contemporary developments in strategic thinking. They were particularly impressed by the gentle ocean concept. As consultants, critically discuss the ways in which the Board could shift its incumbent strategy in oder to open up new market possibilities and to ready 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 dogma team 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 presentation. The absolute 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 perform 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. at that place is a stipulated Maximum of 15 power point slides in the 20 minute presentation. Students are required to be aware and are officially advised of all maximum times which will be screw off times with no exceptions. Power Point printouts with the individual texts provided for the presentation by each student are required to be pass in to the assessment team/lecturer at the time of the presentation immediately before the commencement of the presentation and will be bear 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 Organisation Topic clearly stated Structure and scope of presentation clearly stated Topic developed in order stated Speakers summed up main points in conclusion 10 marks guinea pig Knowledge of subject (background of company and storyline of film and their relevance to module) lotion 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 control of subject matter 30 marks Confidence Speakers look relaxed and confident professionally dressed Maintain eye contact Engage with audience and display awareness of audience response 10 marks Speech wide-ranging paced Use of conversational style avoiding jargon and long-winded bookish xplanation of relevant concepts Appropriate volume Clear 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 instruction 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 Respond confidently to que stions 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 dependent for non-participation and/or non-attendance. Module Learning Outcomes to be Assessed- Upon successful completion of the assessment, students will be able to 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 contact 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, whic h 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 functions 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 lived 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.