12 Angry Men Movie Analysis
Team Cohesion
The actions and behaviors of the jurors, as stated in the movie, 12 angry men (n. p), portray a concept of group cohesiveness. According to the film, the twelve men selected to serve as jurors on the trial of the 18-year-old defendant accused of allegedly stabbing his father must deliberate until they reach a unanimous decision. In the story, one can see that although each juror portrays different personalities, there is a great effort that they all make to remain in the winning team. At first, all the jurors vote guilty except for Juror 8, who convinces his team that the defendant may not be liable. One by one, the rest of the jurors are forced to question their morals and values. In the end, all the 12 jurors come into a similar decision, and the accused is found not guilty.
The need to build a cooperative community among different worldviews forces each juror to question their morals and values, which is a factor that influenced group cohesion. Juror 8 was also willing to stand alone in his decision, which portrayed an attitude that set the tone for a cooperative society within the jury deliberation. Hence, the need to attain overall success was dependent on collaborative decision making.
At first, one can observe in-group differentiation as all jurors except one voted guilty. However, the attitude among them changed when the validity of the testimony given by an eye witness was questioned, hence, becoming a team that was now characterized by the willingness to find the truth.
In-group differentiation can affect team cohesion. This is because the objective of a team is to achieve common goals. Druckman et al. (113) stated that when teams analyze their collective performance, evaluations have an impact on group processes that influence subsequent performance.
Team Communication and Decision-making
Team communication and decision making must be collaborative for teams to achieve effective goals. In the beginning, different leaders emerged, setting the tone during the deliberation. Juror 3 was stubborn and overcome with emotion, which hindered him from making a rational decision, although he finally voted not guilty. Juror 8 was more composed and thought more logically compared to the rest. It can be debated that it was due to his excellent reasoning that the rest of the jurors were able to view the facts in a different light and ultimately voting not guilty.
As juror 8, Fonda’s decision-making approach was different from the rest at the beginning. He urged his team not to make a decision based on the evidence but rather based on the credibility of the evidence provided. Fonda’s decision-making approach is beneficial as it is more informed. It eliminates biased decisions as jurors may tend to be prejudiced or be biased by the accused background. Nevertheless, one should be prepared for negative outcomes as they may not have all the information necessary.
Teams must be cooperative to achieve effective goals. Improvements require a community with a cooperative value establishment rather than an individualized system. Through such dynamics, the rest of the jurors were able to look at the case critically, rather than remain biased. In the end, the inconsistencies pointed out, convinced them to vote not guilty.
At first, there were team decision-making constraints as all the jurors could not agree on a similar decision. Later on, one can see that they all reached a turning point, becoming a cohesive team. Hence, there was no negative impact on the effectiveness of the team.
Power and Persuasion
Fonda used logical reasons to support his claim. Hence, persuading his teammates. He was able to identify flaws in the prosecution’s case by enlisting several influencing techniques that highly supported his view (Honig, 701).
Works Cited
Druckman, Daniel Ed, and Robert A. Bjork. Learning, remembering, believing: Enhancing human performance. National Academy Press, 1994.
Honig, Bonnie. “12 Angry Men: Care for the Agon and the Varieties of Masculine Experience.” Theory & Event 22.3 (2019): 701-716.
12 Angry Men- The Value Of Human Life. 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLFeLV9QS-8. Accessed 8 June 2020.