Angry men analysis

In the beginning of the movie, Jury number 1 empathisems to be an emergent attracter (An emergent leader gradu eithery chance ons leadership by interacting with mathematical root ingredients and contributing to the achievement of the themes goal, scalawag 113). From the start he has started congregation papers for vote, and the new(prenominal) jurors seem to follow him. When he said we would uniform to get started, they all gather on the table. The type of leadership he is showing is democratic (a democratic leader promotes the interests of group members and practices social equality, knave 117).He asks for input from the other Jurors on how they should do the interchange. Pretty much he is the unmatchable controlling the flow of the handling. He is also an initiator (Proposes thoughts and suggestions provides circumspection for the group gets the group started, varlet 58). When the group Just came back from release he said, Now lets get started. Who wants to star t it off? However, during the movie henry Found seems to start to take over gradually by lede the group of not hangdog. He looks more standardised the emergent leader towards the eat up of the movie.During the discussion, some of the Jurors are acting as deserter (Withdraws from the group appears above it all and bored or annoyed with the discussion be aloof or stops contributing, paginate 61) by playing games, leave the room, even the group leader Our no. L) was closely to desert the group because he feels that the group thinks that his way of doing things is not right. The juror that wants to leave the discussion because he wants to watch a game almost deserts the discussion by changing his vote to not guilty so that the discussion would end earlier.Toward the nerve centre of the discussion, one(a) of the Jurors was taking totes and trying to build up a solid fact from the discussion while the other Jurors are talking. He was doing an analytical listening, which foc uses on evaluating and forming appropriate opinions about a message. It requires exact thinking and analysis (page 193). The climate changes moderately throughout the film. It starts off with a good climate, then it gets tighter when the Jurors start arguing until even some of them feels that the other is being insensible. Nonverbal communications (message components other than words that generate meaning, page 163) that were shown in the discussion are for example, Jurors playing games hill the others are talking, throwing papers, and so on As for verbal communication (focuses on how you use words and language, page 163), there are changes in vocal tone by the Jurors that were provoked by some other Jurors that changed their mind to not guilty. The Conflict starting at the beginning of the movie when the jurors were trying to answer the question, Is the suspect guilty? . henry Found decided to go against the other 11 Jurors by voting not guilty for the suspect. This raised a sub stantive conflict (Occurs when a member disagrees about issues, ideas, decisions, actions or goals, page 211). The group does not corresponding that decision, so the goal cannot be reached. Henry Found was very strong in his vote, so then emerged hidden agenda (A hidden agenda occurs when a members private goal conflicts with the groups goals, page 38) from the group to try to convince Henry to change his vote because some of them want to go home, and the other thinks that it is alike obvious and sticks to their decisions.Henrys conflict style is compromise conflict style (a middle ground approach that involves conceding some goals in order to achieve others, page 218), this works well because if you use compromise conflict Tyler, you are not reckoning that the other person is wrong, but saying that he has a point, but there is more to it. In the movie when soul says the kid ran away because he is afraid to get caught, he would state with lets say the kid really ran away Then he would say his reasoning. In the middle of the movie, there was a procedural conflict (disagreement among group members about the method or process the group uses in its begin to accomplish a goal, page 212). When a Juror suggested for another vote, one other Juror wanted an candid ballot instead of a vote. Toward the middle of the discussion, there are basically two groups that were formed in there, which are the guilty group and the not guilty group.The not guilty group reached performing distributor point, where all members are fully engaged and eager to work (page 32). They all work unneurotic to try to put all the evidence together to see exactly if the testimonies from witnesses are true. Juror no. 3 (the one that said not guilty the last) is very aggressive (acts in their own self-interest at the expense of others. They are critical, insensitive, combative, and even abusive, page 68). He hoots most of the time, and even gets angry to some of the other Jurors.His confli ct style looks like a competition conflict style (group member are more concerned with their own goals than the group, page 217), because I feel like his pride is a bit in the way of him choosing not guilty. The Juror that has a cold in the beginning of the movie is has prejudice (negative attitudes about other people that are based on faulty and fossilised stereotypes. Prejudices about an individual or culture group often trick out when we have little or no direct experience with that person, page 81) award people who grew in slums.He said that he knows everything about those who grows in slums, that they are aggressive, and does not even speak good English. He mentioned those even without knowing the person he is talking about. During the discussion, some of the members wanted votes to see how they are doing so far. This expresses a sense of progress. It is difficult for members to sting motivated throughout the life of the group when they have no idea whether the group is maki ng progress toward its goal (page 147). One of the Jurors even asked for an open ballot to see who is still voting for not guilty.