Leadership in the Movie 12 Angry Men

Week 7
Image retrieved from: http://thirtyorsomething.com/2014/10/24/12-angry-men/
Juror #1 is the Foreman of the jury. He is serious about his role and tries to run
the proceedings in an orderly fashion, reminding the jurors Just lets remember
weve got a first degree murder charge here. If we vote guilty, we send the
accused to the electric chair.
Juror #2 is timid, quiet and unsure of himself, finding it hard to maintain an
independent opinion until he finds the courage to point out an important question
about how the murder was actually committed.
Juror #3 is the antagonist. He is a forceful, intolerant bully who sees the case as
simple and believes the accused is absolutely guilty. He is quick to lose his
temper. His desire to convict and punish the defendant is directly related to his
feelings of anger and betrayal in regard to his poor relationship with his own son.
Juror descriptions retrieved from: http://www.vertigotheatre.com/files/pdf/TWELVE%20ANGRY%
20MEN%20STUDY%20GUIDE.pdf
Juror #4 is a stock broker, well-dressed, logical and well-spoken. He urges his
fellow jurors to avoid emotional arguments in favour of rational discussion. He
also believes strongly in the defendants guilt until the one piece of evidence on
which he bases his vote is discredited.
Juror #5 is a young man who is nervous about expressing his views, particularly
in front of the older members of the jury. When two jurors talk disparagingly of
kids from slum backgrounds, he finally speaks up, saying he has lived in a slum
all his life. He has witnessed knife fights, an experience that will later help other
jurors change their opinions about the guilt of the accused.
Juror #6 is a housepainter, a man who is used to working with his hands rather
than analyzing with his brain. He is more of a listener than a talker. He does,
however, stand up to the bully, Juror #3 when he speaks rudely to Juror #9, an
old man, threatening to hit Juror #3 if he ever speaks to the old man like that
again.
Juror descriptions retrieved from: http://www.vertigotheatre.com/files/pdf/TWELVE%20ANGRY%
20MEN%20STUDY%20GUIDE.pdf
Juror #7 is a slick, obnoxious salesman whose only concern is to get the
deliberations over quickly so he can get to that evenings baseball game. He
assumes that the defendant is guilty and has no interest in discussing it. At one
point he makes some prejudiced remarks about immigrants in reference to Juror
#11.
Juror #8 is a quiet, thoughtful man whose main concern is that justice be done.
An architect by profession, he is the first juror to vote not guilty on the very first
ballot. He is a natural leader who does not argue that the accused is innocent,
only that he cannot condemn someone to death without discussing the case first.
As he probes the evidence, he manages to cast reasonable doubt on many
aspects of the evidence given during the trial. Although the evidence may
9 suggest guilt, it is possible that there are other explanations for what happened
on the night of the murder.
Juror #9 is a mild, gentle old man. He is the first to agree with Juror #8 and
change his vote to not guilty, saying that he wants a fuller discussion of the case
since he is convinced there is not enough evidence to sentence the accused boy
to death for allegedly murdering his father.
Juror descriptions retrieved from: http://www.vertigotheatre.com/files/pdf/TWELVE%20ANGRY%
20MEN%20STUDY%20GUIDE.pdf
Juror # 10, who runs three garages, is a bitter racist. He is prejudiced against
anyone who comes from a slum. He believes strongly that the defendant is guilty
because he insists that people from slums are all drunks and liars who fight all
the time.
Juror #11 is a watchmaker, an immigrant from Europe. Having witnessed great
injustices in his home country, he feels fortunate to be living in a country known
for its democracy and he has great respect for the American judicial system. He
takes his responsibility as a juror very seriously.
Juror #12 works for an advertising agency. He is arrogant and impatient, anxious
for the trial to be over so he can return to his career and social life. He is clever,
but sees people as statistics rather than human beings.
Juror descriptions retrieved from: http://www.vertigotheatre.com/files/pdf/TWELVE%20ANGRY%
20MEN%20STUDY%20GUIDE.pdf
Who are the leaders on the jury? Using our understandings from the literature, explain why.
Juror #1: Juror 1 emerges as a natural born leader early on in the movie. He acts as the foreman and
uses his traits such as organization and initiative to keep the jury focused on the task. He attempts to
practise democratic leadership indicated in his opening statement I think we should just go around teh
table and see what everyone thinks. Juror 1 is very task-oriented. He sees his job as leader as getting
the group to reach a consensus on a guilty vs. non-guilty verdict. However, as a novice, juror 1 struggles
to be decisive often changing the groups direction based on whoever offers an opinion. Juror 1 shows
the need to be validated as the groups leader. When questioned by the other jurors, he very quickly
offers to give up his position if someone else thinks they can do better. Over time, Juror 1 takes on a
passive role and loses his position as leader within the group.
Juror #3: Juror 3 stood out as a potential leader early on in the movie. When dismissed to begin
deliberation, juror 3 was the first to stand up. This action resulted in the other jurors following his lead.
Juror #3 attempted to use authorative leadership. He decided early on that the defendent was guilty and
tried to use his power and dominant personality to get the other jurors to follow. At first, his confidence
and outspoken nature allowed him to lead the other jurors. However, throughout the movie he refused to
listen to the opinions of any of the other jurors, making comments such as this is an open and shut case
and I only care about the facts. Over time his lack of consideration for the opinions of the other jurors
result in him losing his effectiveness as a leader. This is made clear towards the end of the movie when
the other jurors all stand and turn their backs on him while he is speaking.
Who are the leaders on the jury? Using our understandings from the literature, explain why.
Juror #8: Demonstrates courage as a leader when he is the lone juror to initially vote not guilty. Courage
is an important quality as it allows leaders to take risks and face challenges. Juror 8 is depicted as being
of high morality, one of the key characteristics of transformational leaders (Avolio, 2011). The audience
sees this morality as juror #8 was one of the few jurors that glanced back at the defendent before
proceeding to deliberation. In doing this, he demonstrates that he is not only task oriented but people
oriented. We continue to observe this concern juror 8 has for other individuals as he continually asks the
opinions of others, listens to their rationale and encourages the other jurors to put themselves in the
defendents shoes. This display of empathy and individual consideration allows juror 8 to gain the
respect and trust of the other jurors. Juror 9 shows his admiration for Juror 8 when he changes his vote
and states, this gentlemen has been standing alone against us...its not easy to stand alone...he
gambled for support and I gave it to him...I respect his motives.
According to Avolio (2011) effective transformational leaders are people who come to their tasks not only
willing to listen but also determined to know what others are thinking. They take the time to get to know
the people they work with, what these people need to know to perform at their best, and how far they can
be stretched, challenged, and supported (p. 49). Juror 8 continually transitions between offering
opinions, asking questions and then allowing the other jurors to express their opinions. Through his
persistence and thought provoking questions, the other jurors gradually begin to change their vote to not
guilty and follow Juror 8. Over time, these jurors begin to ask deeper questions and emerge as leaders
themselves.
Juror 8: An Example of a Transformational Leader
Idealized influence - Juror 8 demonstrates idealized influence by continually reminding the other jurors
what their purpose is, that is, determining whether there is a reasonable doubt. By maintaining this
vision, he demonstrates that he does not have ulterior motives. This allows him to gain the respect of
the other jurors and act as a role model.
Intellectual stimulation and inspirational motivation refers to providing followers with meaning and
challenging them to think in innovative ways. They encourage followers to think about different
perspectives and alternative choices. Juror 8 constantly asks the other jurors to put themselves in the
defendents shoes. He asks questions such as: What would you do in that situation? How would you
feel if you were on trial? These actions inspire the other jurors to start questioning the techniques used
by the lawyers and statements provided by the witnesses. In doing so, the other jurors begin to think
critically and emerge as leaders as well.
Finally, transformational leaders demonstrate individual consideration by responding to the needs of
individuals in the group. Juror 8 interacts differently with each of the other jurors. For instance he is
protective over juror 9 by ensuring that the others are not overwhelming or abusive to the elder,
encouraging to the jurors who want to share their opinions but are not as outspoken, and uses thought
provoking questions to those jurors that appear to lack a moral compass (ex. Juror 3, 7, and 10).
According to Avolio (2011), Transformational leadership is fundamentally, morally uplifting (p. 51). This
moral change is observed in the movie as the other jurors unite to stand up to jurors 3, 7 and 10. As a
group they decide that despite the heat, time and other personal commitments, they have a responsibility
to serve, that is, to determine whether there is reasonable doubt in the defendents case. Juror 11
articulates this very clearly when he states to the group, We have a responsibility...we are notified by
mail to decide on the guilt or innocence of a man...we have nothing to lose or gain by a verdict. We
should not make it a personal thing.
Not only does Juror 8 create change in his followers, but becomes transformed himself in the process. As
he gains support and validation from the other jurors, it is evident that his confidence increases. Despite
this increase in support he continues to demonstrate compassion and concern for for the two remaining
jurors that maintain a guilty verdict. He encourages them to continue to share their ideas with the group.
Avolio (2011) maintains that respecting differences and developing independent followers is a
distinguishing attribute of transformational leaders.
References:
Avolio, B. (2011). Full Range Leadership Development. Sage. Retrieved from: http:
//knowledge.sagepub.com.uproxy.library.dc-uoit.ca/view/full-range-leadership-development-2e/n6.xml?
rskey=iOJk6c&row=2
Rose, R. Twelve Angry Men. Vertigo Mystery Theatre. Retrieved from http://www.
vertigotheatre.com/files/pdf/TWELVE%20ANGRY%20MEN%20STUDY%20GUIDE.pdf