Help with 12 Angry Men Term Paper
Scoring Criteria: Mid-term Case Study Paper:
The purpose of choosing this case study is based on the fact that in many life situations one is always a
student of the situation requiring analysis of the other players' personal agenda, negotiations tactics,
priorities, hidden motives, values, ethics, degree of risk taking and prejudices. As a student of such, our
degree of success is highly dependent on our ability to observe, process and understand these dynamics in
order to adjust our negotiations approach to "get what we want" in that situation.
Concourse | Negotiations 12/31/15, 11:28 AM
https://webster.campusconcourse.com/view_syllabus?course_id=58097 Page 7 of 17
Therefore, as practice relating to the above, it is required that you submit a paper on the subject of the
12 Angry Men, 1957 Movie, with Henry Fonda, dealing with a 12 person jury charged with deciding the
guilt or innocence of a young man charged with murdering his father.
It is required that you rent, purchase, borrow or obtain this movie and watch it whatever number of
times (Note: The movie is posted within the course, itself.) required for you to construct a paper that
responds to the following requirements. In additon, the movie is incorporated into the course
Page 1 - Cover Title Page
Page 2 - Brief list of the major case issues that are instrumental in deciding the jury conclusion.
Pages 3-8: Jury Member No. 8, Character played by Henry Fonda. Address the following three (3) questions
in a minimum of six (6) pages:
a) How would you describe his negotiations approach?
b) There are at least forty (40) Negotiations techniques defined and discussed in the course text. Please
identify at least ten (10) that Juror No. 8 used during this movie. Also, clearly describe the circumstance
where in the movie he used such technique(s). Then describe the result from its use.
c) Identify at least two (2) compromises that he had made? Explain what they were and the effective
result of each.
Pages 9-13: From your list of ten (10) Negotiations techniques that Juror No. 8 used, compose a minimum
of five(5) pages to complete a) and b) below:
a) Select five (5) and write a detailed explanation of how your use of these techniques could be applied in
your personal and business life.
b) For ech of the five (5) chosen techniques, write and explain the result you would hope to achieve by use
of that technique.
Pages 14-16: Jury Member No. 4, Character played by E.G. Marshall. Address the following questions. This
will require a minimum of three (3) pages:
a) How would you describe this individual's negotiations strategy and approach? Use the terminology
defined from the text and how he implements that approach and strategy.
b) What was the basis of his "guilty" analysis? Explain his justification for each point.
c) What negotiations techniques were employed by Juror No. 8 to change Juror No. 4's mind and vote
differently? Explain the circumstances and detail involved.
Page 17-18: Juror No. 3, Character Played by Lee J. Cobb. Address the following questions:
a) What is the strategy of Juror No. 3?
Concourse | Negotiations 12/31/15, 11:28 AM
https://webster.campusconcourse.com/view_syllabus?course_id=58097 Page 8 of 17
b) What is Juror No. 3's style and approach with the other Juror members? Please explain and give
examples as part of your response. Be specific.
c) Towards the end of the movie, when there were only three (3) jurors remaining that were voting guilty,
what role did juror No. 3 play in changing the vote position of the last three jurors. Explain the incident,
circumstances and the influence that juror no. 3 had on these three (3) jurors to change their mind.
Page 19: Bibliography
DO NOT INCLUDE ANY CASE ABSTRACT OR CASE SUMMARY. STRICTLY ADDRESS THE
QUESTIONS AND USE HEADINGS FOR EACH QUESTION.
The mid-term Case Study paper shall be in 12-point Times New Roman font, double-spaced, 1" margins,
and a minimum of 19 pages in length of your own research and analysis, including the table of
contents and bibliography. Use APA format for in-text citations and references. Be certain that your name
appears on each page. Grammatical errors and spelling errors will result in scoring penalties. Do not
provide lengthy quotations from a reference. The use of proper grammatical construction, including the
proper use of paragraphs and topical headings related to the deliverables, is required.
Writing the paper should encourage you to engage in thoughtful analysis and understanding of the case
study. It should incorporate the use of what you have learned in theory and research from the readings and
weekly course material. Your analysis should include an integration of readings, theory, and con
12 angry men is a story about twelve jurors who are confined in a jury room on a hot summer day to decide the guilt or innocence of defendant in a murder case. The defendant is an 18 year old boy from slums who is accused of killing his abusive father. If he is proved guilty he would be subject to verdict of death in an electric chair. The case initially appeared to be simple open and shut case but there are issues which forced the judge to assign the task of finding if the boy was guilty or innocent. However the decision had to be unanimous that is all twelve jurors should agree to boy's guilt or innocence. The judgment is based on certain issues which are instrumental in arriving at a decision:
-The boy had an argument with his father which resulted in father hitting him twice
-An old man living beneath the house where the boy lived with his father testified that he heard the boy shout I am going to kill you after a quarrel between father and son. Soon after he heard a body falling on the ground and then he saw a boy running down the stairs.
-A women living across the street testified that she saw a boy kill his father from the window of a running train.
-The boy didn't remember which movie he saw that night
-The boy had prior record of offenses against him
-On the night of murder the boy had bought a unique carved switchblade knife that was used in the murder. The boy claimed that he lost it while on his way to movie
About Juror # 8: Henry Fonda
When the case was presented, all Jurors except Juror# 8 wanted to end the case on the basis of facts provided. Juror# 8 was the only Juror amongst the 12 Jurors who gave a non-guilty vote to the accused. He did not do this because he believed that the boy was innocent but he wanted to have atleast a minimal discussion before arriving at any conclusion.
Negotiation is a critical component of conflict resolution. The ultimate goal of negotiation is to reach a mutually beneficial solution to problem. Negotiation will be successful only when parties involved leave the table with substantial gains and inconsequential losses ("Approaches to negotiation", n.d). There are different approaches to negotiation which depend on the situation and people involved. Most of the negotiations are either distributive or integrative.
Distributive Negotiation: In distributive negotiation each party tries to maximize its benefit from the fixed sum. Hence one party benefits at the expense of other. It is also called win-lose bargaining, zero-sum and competitive negotiation ("The two approaches...," n.d).
Integrative Negotiation: In this type of negotiation parties integrate their interests to maximize their benefits. These negotiations are about creating value and claiming it. Integrative negotiations are also referred to as win-win, problem solving and cooperative negotiation ("The two approaches...", n.d).
If we see the movie from point of view of learning about negotiation and decision making, Juror# 8 came across as a facilitator. He was not satisfied with the way council was handling the case and did not believe completely in two eyewitnesses. When other jurors thought that they were wasting their time on the case which they presumed was shut and close one, he engaged others into discussion by asking them if they were sure that there was nothing to talk about in the room. He did not outrightly reject their beliefs but encouraged them to convince him on why they were right and he was wrong. Each juror explained their opinions while Juror # 8 responded with influential arguments and questions for others to consider. For example when Juror # 4 stated that boy was making up a story to escape guilty charges. The boy said that he was watching movie at the time his father was killed but did not remember the name of the movie. At this, Juror # 8 attacked his fellow juror by challenging his own ability to recollect small details. He used logic based arguments to do away with other Jurors prejudices and misconceptions and change their votes. These tactics indicate that he had an approach that could navigate its way through ambiguity and gain confidence of others. He used an integrative approach to negotiations by focusing on the problem and not getting into personal conflict with anyone.
Juror # 8 was "logical negotiator". A logical negotiator is one who
Develops discussion points
Sets the rules for negotiation
Argue in a logical manner
Adapt their positions to meet changing situations
Jurors # 8, from the beginning of the trial thought that it was important to atleast discuss for some time and did not pass judgments. Like a logical negotiator, he emphasized on process of negotiation rather than the outcome. At the same time, Juror # 8 was the lead negotiator amongst twelve Jurors. He was responsible for setting the stage for discussions and leading the way through all claims and qualms. He carefully listened to arguments of all jurors and went through their emotional plays without demanding his way. It was his collaborative negotiation style that he convinced 11 of the Jurors to change their votes.
Negotiation techniques and tactics help negotiator get the better end of the process. There are almost 40 negotiation techniques defined, we would outline 10 main ones which were used by Juror # 8 in the movie. Juror # 8 was patient and actively listened to other Jurors. He hears opinion of each of the Juror and connects with them in their way. He established the target for the discussion as non-guilty verdict for which he continuously built consensus.
Juror # 8 had interest in the case. He did not bother what personal engagements he had and how he could more utilize his time. He also had interest in social problems of boy which can be seen when he described the boy to his fellow Jurors. He said
"Look this kid has been kicked all around his life. He lived in a slum. His mother has been dead since he was 9 and he lived in an orphanage for a year and a half while his father was serving a jail term for forgery. He is a wild and angry kid and that's all he's ever been. You know why? Because he's been hit on the head by someone once a day every day. He had miserable 18 years".
From early on Juror # 8 continued to assert that they needed to establish facts for the boy being non-guilty with increasing vigor as the film progressed.
3. Sense of Compassion
Juror # 8 valued human life above everything else. While everyone else voted for boy to be guilty, he could not do the same as it meant sending off the boy to die without even giving it a hearing.
It was the patience of Juror # 8 that helped him understand viewpoint of each of the members, the manner in which they act. Based on his ...
Analysis of role of Juror #8, 4 and 3 in the negotiation process to decide on the fate of the accused