[TYPE THE COMPANY NAME]
12 Angry Men
Influencing the group decision-making process
“12 Angry Men” demonstrates some of the challenges that are encountered when decisions
have to be made within a group. It further highlights the effectiveness of different
influencing
techniques on moving the group through each of its developmental stages.
According to Bruce Tuckman, there are five stages in the team development
process for groups that have limited tasks to perform; forming, storming, norming,
performing,
and adjourning. The forming stage is the first step in the group development process and is
characterized by a great deal of uncertainty about the group’s purpose, structure, and
leadership.
Members test the waters to determine what types of behaviors are acceptable.i
stage is driven by an individual’s desire to be accepted by others, and to avoid controversy
or
conflict. Individuals are gathering information and impressions of other member of the
group.ii
When the jurors gathered in the juror deliberation room members socialized with each
other in
an attempt to ascertain each individual’s position. The interactions are cordial and each
member
takes this opportunity to get a sense of each person’s position and to actively lobby for
support
for their position whether consciously or subconsciously. The forming stage can be a
catalyst for
the groupthink phenomenon and helps to establish each member’s role within the group.
Based
on the interactions of the jurors in this stage, one can conclude that perceived group roles
can be
influenced by the Big Five personality traits; openness to experiences, conscientiousness,
extraversion, agreeableness, and emotional stability. Juror number three is an extravert. He
meets with juror number two, who appears to have a high level of agreeableness and an
introvert
with no experience on a jury, to discuss his impressions of the case so far. Juror number
three
sought to influence juror number two by establishing a leadership role based on previous
experience. Juror number three informs juror number two that he has been on many juries
and
that this case was an obvious open and shut one. Based on the two jurors’ personalities and
experiences, it is plausible that juror number two would seek to align his thought process
with
that of juror number three. This assumption is reinforced by juror number twos’ response
when
asked why he voted not guilty. He had no argument and relied on his “feelings” of the case.
Juror number 11, nine, six, five, and two hesitated when the group was asked to submit
their
initial vote which supports the possible existence of the groupthink phenomenon. This
stage
appeared to be continuous throughout the film but moved to the next stage of group
