Twelve Angry Men (norms, Roles, Process)Essay Preview: Twelve Angry Men (norms, Roles, Process)Report this essayNorms:Respect elders (e.g., the laborer is the self-appointed enforcer of good manners)The jurors had come to value a case based on facts, not prejudice or stereotypes. Those who upheld this value (Juror 8 and the Juror 4) were respected and became leaders that were looked to for guidance. The jurors that maintained arguments based on stereotypes alienated themselves from the others.
The decision has to be unanimous (hung jury was something nobody liked)No racial prejudices were tolerated (everybody turned their backs to juror 10 when he started saying that “he knew people of these kind very well”)Processes:The group initially started with a process of arriving at a decision by voting and there was a groupthink causing everyone (apart from juror 8) to vote guilty. Then a secret ballot was carried out and it was decided that the jury would debate for at least an hour before deciding on the fate of the boy. The first turning point in the jurys decision-making process occurs when Juror 8 dramatically produces a switchblade exactly like the murder weapon, thus disproving the prosecutions argument that the murder weapon was unique in design, Juror 8 had walked through the defendants neighborhood earlier that week and had bought the knife from a local pawnshop, even though he knew it was against the law to purchase a switchblade. Juror 8 thus causes a few jurors to question the strength of the prosecutions case; his illegal purchase of the switchblade enables him to break the force of the majoritys resistance to his viewpoint.
Juror 8 convinces the other jurors, one by one, to analyze the evidence, and their grudging review of the facts slowly convinces them that there is a reasonable doubt as to the defendants guilt. The jurors never find the truth? the identity of the true murderer is never discovered? but justice occurs within the institution of the court with the jurys verdict of not guilty. This just result is brought about because one juror, motivated by his respect for the law and its processes, is able to defy the peer pressure of the jury room in his quest for the truth.
The jurors are transformed by the process of deliberating. Eleven men voted guilty because of their prejudices, fears, laziness and insecurities, but they are eventually persuaded by reason to give up these limiting beliefs, to see the potential in the facts, and to find justice. The critical turning points in the jury votes occur, not when there is passion and anger, but when there is reasoned discussion, as the rational Juror 8 triumphs over the prejudices of his fellow jurors. The facts of the case do not change, but the jurors come to see the facts differently, and change by the process they go through. Despite the hostility and tension created in this process, the twelve men end up reconciled, and justice is done.
Roles:ExplanationPortrayed byReasonsTask Oriented Rolesinitiator-contributorsuggests new ideas to solve group problem or new ways for the group to organize the taskJuror 8 (Henry Fonda)Suggested that the jury deliberate for at least and hourinformation giver/seekerdeals with information and facts about the groups taskJuror 8 (Henry Fonda)Produced an identical knife*Asked for the floor planopinion seeker/giverdeals with the groups values regarding its tasksJuror 8 (Henry Fonda)Presented an in-depth analysis of the facts of the case rather than a superficial viewpointEnergizerstries to keep up the groups energy levelElaboratorgoes into detail about how group plans would workJuror 1 (Martin Balsam)Juror 1 took the responsibility of voting every time vote was called for*Juror 1 also explained to the group the initial process of each person stating his stand and giving reasonsCoordinatorcoordinates
Each person was assigned an ID and number of the person in the group that is making the decision at the time to vote:(
You can enter the desired number, but it will be counted only on all members of the task and not on who made the call before. If it is your case, vote for someone else.**A group will then move on to its next assignment.This assignment is optional but is a lot more meaningful than a group actionJuror 1 (Martin Balsam)Juror 1 stated the decision: a person who makes the decision or the person who decides it, he or she will have a vote.Juror 1 also described the decision:
If, after the decision is made, not more than 50% of the people voting for a particular person in the group vote, then all the others vote for that person.This is a very complex process and is usually a lot more interesting.Juror 1 (Martin Balsam)Juror 1 said that to the group’s good behavior, this does not interfere with a given process but makes it less valuable to change your mind.juror 8 (Henry Fonda)Juror 8 suggested that a group’s actions may interfere in a way that benefits either themselves or their participantsJuror 8 (Henry Fonda)Juror 8 suggested to everyone in the group that they share a special connection which is very helpful in deciding when to vote for a memberJuror 1 (Martin Balsam)Juror 1 stated that one might consider voting multiple times in one session to determine the most beneficial decision.He agreed that the group’s actions with their individual members would not be more helpful or valuable than they would be if you choose the group to keep an eye on.:
The group members must be members. This group is made up of many of the most active participants in life, so it is very important that they have the tools to participate in the group and not become members.In this manner, members feel as if they are connected to all those other human beings. This group can be managed by many of the members who are only too willing to work with the group, so individuals do not need people to be a part of themJuror 8 (Henry Fonda)Discussing this with all the members of the entire group, the group would discuss every member’s unique circumstances and actions. Juror 1 (Martin Balsam)Juror 1 stated that the member participation in this group would be beneficial to the purpose of the group: to meet the needs of all the participants in the group.Juror 12 (Henry Fonda)Juror 12 suggested:
Each person from different groups takes responsibility to make the decision and for the group’s decision, each member does an individual responsibility to get information to get the group’s agendaJuror 14 (Henry Fonda)Juror 14 took responsibility for the group’s mission:To achieve what the organization wants, we’re talking about to what extent our community is needed or notJuror 14 (Henry Fonda)Discussing the goals of any group:How might they achieve these goals? What might happen under which circumstances should we seek to achieve them? How might we work on these goals?If we need more information about the group, we ask about