Williams 1

Comelamore Williams BA 223 Principles of Leadership Week #2 Analysis Twelve Angry Men Analysis November 2, 2012

Juror #8 are certain that the young man did this horrific crime. yet allows the other Jurors to follow their own thoughts. he gives the jurors respect. who was from a family of poverty with an abusive father. until the goal is achieved. trapped within the borders of four immobile walls. He does this in a way that he creates and manages the tension.1). The men are all agitated by the humidity in the of middle summer. Fonda punishes the jurors who vote guilty by displaying a lack of communication. According to George Manning & Kent Curtis (2012). which is intensified by the room's stuffiness and the stress of their task. one that will either convict a young Puerto man to death or set him free. Juror #8 uses persuasion by being creative. Juror #8 evolves as a leader by using his charisma.Williams 2 Twelve Angry Men Analysis Twelve strangers with diverse backgrounds are isolated in a room and unable to leave until a verdict has been reached. Juror # 8 had sympathy for the young man.S justice system as a Juror. The twelve men are bound to each other. the primary leader is Juror # 8 played by Henry Fonda. He was firm in his . Leadership is a vital part of human interaction especially in a group or team setting (p. The trial took place during the 1950’s in a time where prejudice was obvious and the young man’s ethnicity and background became a focal point on numerous occasions during deliberation. As in the movie Twelve Angry Men. All except one of the men. Juror # 8 displayed heroic leadership type. which is to uphold the U. They must determine beyond a reasonable doubt if a teen murdered his father by stabbing. and critically thinking to reveal new ways of interpreting evidence when arriving at conclusions. responsible for a great cause. shows them that he has confidence in their decisions and rewards his allies by providing them with his attention. He influences others to take a closer look at the evidence presented during the trial.

”A leader has no title. Juror # 8 was able to transform the decision of every other juror by using his charisma to “ignite the motives of their followers to take action” (Manning & Curtis.Williams 3 position by stating. As the votes changed and more Jurors changed their decision. As a leader. Juror # 8 carefully evaluates the others agenda as to why they really believe the young man is guilty. p. and always in the middle of the situation. obnoxious. Fonda sacrificed his not guilty decision by allowing the Jurors to vote again without him. Juror #8 was a charismatic leader in every definition of the word.com). so he asks. he was loud. Juror #8 met adverse reactions and some of the men did not favor him or his decision. because it was during this time that he was able to convince others to look at the case from a new perspective. 27). inaccurate evidence i s questioned. “we nine can’t understand how you three are still so sure (youtube. By deciding. but as he presented conflicting arguments and actively listened to the others. Juror #8 held firm about his decision and never once changed his mind. but for the opposing verdict of guilty.com). Juror #3 would always present the facts of the trial and scrutinized every answer Juror #8 presented. Maybe you can tell us. 2012. Juror # 8 persuades the other jurors to evaluate their personal prejudices in the open.” (youtube. His earnest reservations gave energy to his argument and cause the other jurors to think more critically. because thereis reasonable doubt about the circumstances of the murder . A charismatic leader is someone who is a “role model for his or her beliefs and values they want others to adopt. We can’t decide it in five minutes…. he gained respect for his decision. 2012. so everyone can be a leader and Juror #3 was a prime substitute as leader. 27).. p. “[w]e’re talking about somebody’s life here. They demonstrate ability that elicits the respect of followers” (Manning & Curtis. and faulty logic is challenged. that the young man was not guilty. After reexamining the evidence it is clear that the ve rdict can’t be guilty. This sacrifice was looked upon as pivotal.

http://www. Kindle Edition. & Curtis. Youtube. Business And Economics.. (2012). Twelve Angry Men.com. G. 4th edition.com/watch?v=CrnXDHYb-9s .youtube. The Art of Leadership.Williams 4 References Manning. K.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful