He is the person who belongs the same slum as the accused. His part in the movie is affronted by the Juror 3. There are also a few who have good analytical skills and have conjured up lots of facts and data. In this movie, we observe the entire decision making process and way the people communicatewith each other, where each individual had different perception and different behavior inparticular situation, their personal opinion leads them to one wrong decision first but later onwith just one leading, convincing, neutral and practical individual, they were able to think on theother side of the case and finally they reached to right conclusion. Only one juror is unconvinced of the boys involvement inthe crime resulting in a difference in opinion and further discussion on the case.
At thebeginning, he is the only member of the jury who votes not guilty’ and with stands all thepressure from the other jury members. He is the most actively destructive juror having his original opinions andprejudices which are biased in nature. Thirdly, in similar circumstance the role of power and politics comes into play when people with a dominant to influence others and make them think and do things according to them. Sometimes, Conflicts can involve in the communication process. The movie also taught us how to work out best from the worst situation. Power of Communication effect: There are twelve male members of a jury who have gathered together in an enclosed room to deliberate on charges of murder against a young boy accused of killing his own father.
He is one of the characters who show an adult ego state while thedecision making process. There are also a few who have good analytical skills and have conjured up lots of facts and data.
Ek ruka hua faisla case study
Help Center Find new research papers in: He acts as a co-ordinator throught the film. Other than that, he was acting like a follower and going with the flow of majority. Eleven jury members are convinced that the boy is guilty of the crime and the task before them is to reach a unanimous decision to expedite the case. Thischaracterdoes not shy away from voicing his opinions and likes to maintain decorum during thediscussions.
Case study on Power of Communication by movie – Ek ruka hua faisla
They could bring out the conflict in open and thus their resolution takes place under amiable conditions. Moreover there is the weapon i. He show no regard to protocols orjustice and does not actively support the decision making process. Secondly whenever some decisions are taken as a team then the focus should be on taking the viewpoints of everybody and collectively coming to a decision rather than focusing on casr only individual viewpoints and influencing others as well.
Ek ruka hua faisla case study
Another impressive aspect of the movie is its attention to detail, as each and every small and sometimes unimaginable nuance of the case is analyzed and debated upon, and yet the script and dialogues keep you engrossed all the time. He is the most actively destructive juror having his original opinions andprejudices which are biased in nature. He was one of themembers who were ready with the decision almost immediately when the discussion started, butlater on when logic and facts were presented, he changed sides.
This helps to confirm your knowledge aboutthe subject plot and also to know more things which are missing or we dont know. He portrays the role of the most indifferent character.
The questions get thecommunication going and encourages the other party to talk, to share information with you andaccording you can negotiate your view points on it.
Thepower of asking various questions and coming to down to common view made them think aboutvarious analytics.
Practices, policies and procedures that influence juror satisfaction in Australia. Conflicts arise due to differences in the information, values, beliefs, interests, or desires and rivalries in which one person or group competes with each other From this movie, I could infer that time Bound and specific objectives play an important role in group dynamics.
He showed signs of thinker andcontroller in his decision making style. A few in the room have “don’t care” type of attitude, who just happened to be there on the Jury. He is the person who belongs the same slum as the accused.
This movie is probably the best medium for us to know about subject matters of organizational behavior topics like perception, attitude, behavior, leadership, team formation, norming and storming of team work, group dynamics, motivation, conflict management, personality easily in an entertaining way within short period of time. Hence, these twelve people discover their own set of beliefs and thought processes as they try to unravel the same for the accused. He was also veryimpatient in his decision making.
Log In Sign Up. Analysis of the Movie: There are twelve male members of a jury who have gathered together in an enclosed room to deliberate on charges of murder against a young boy accused of killing his own father.
He considered the evidence were sufficient enough to term the boy guilty without giving any proper thought on evidence as a whole. Juror 2 Amitabh Srivastav: Each is trying to convince the rest about their viewpoint, even as slowly people start moving their vote from guilty to not guilty.
Case study on Power of Communication by movie – Ek ruka hua faisla – [PDF Document]
His part in the movie is affronted by the Juror 3. In the movie, most of the Jury members were initially in a hurry to shut thecase and pronounce the accused guilty even when they know its a matter of someones life. Then a few are there who are of the type “I am always right”.