Chapter 5 Motivation

Goal setting theory

This theory was introduced by Edwin Locke which explains the relationship between assigning
goals and the effective execution of a task for which the goals are assigned. According to this
theory a task can be performed in a more efficient and productive way if goals are set for that
task provided the goals are specific, comprehensible, realistic and sensible. In order to achieve
the goals whether it is on organizational level or individual level two key factors should be kept
in mind which are self-efficiency, confidence that the task can be performed and commitment to
the goals.
 Initially the jurors in the movie were assigned a goal by the judge to sit down and try
and separate the facts from the fancy. The goal was to discuss the testimony presented
in the court and analyze whether the accused is guilty or not guilty. One man was dead,
and another man’s life was at stake which made it difficult for the jurors to come to a
single conclusion. The goal influenced the performance of the jurors in way that they
were reluctant to the idea that the accused was not guilty except Mr. Davis (juror no. 8).
The goal was SMART as it was specific, could be measured by the facts and figures,
attainable, very much relevant to the scenario and perfectly timed but eleven out of
twelve jurors were not committed to the goal enough which made them unable to
analyze it properly and get the task done in an efficient way
 Once Mr. Davis start putting some sense into the rest of the jurors the goal started
shifting and rather than stating the accused guilty the goal was to come with a verdict
stating the accused not guilty. The shift in goal made the jury to conduct their
performance in an efficient way saving an innocent young man from the chair.

Chapter 7 Groups
Group dynamic
 The two main theories of group development are stage model theory and punctuated
equilibrium theory.
1. Stage model theory:
According to this theory when a group is formed it cannot perform well when it is created,
and it needs time and patience to perform well in order to achieve the common goal. There
are five stages in which a relationship is formed between the group members in order to
achieve the common goal.
1.1. Forming Stage: This is the first stage where the group is formed and there is uncertainty
among the group.
1.2. Storming Stage: In the stages the group members get to know each other, and the work
and disputes are its best.
 1.3. Norming Stage: At this stage the group becomes productive and disputes are resolved
easily.
1.4. Performing stage: At this stage the group becomes clear about its goals and start working
together in order to achieve the goals.
1.5. Adjourning stage: At this stage the goals of the group are achieved.
2. Punctuated Equilibrium theory:
This model helps in evaluates the performance of the group by predicting the timing of the
progress and the factors affecting their development. It consists of three phases.
2.1. Phase One: In this phase the group is formed, and first meeting occur where group
members are exposed to the goals. The progress is little during this phase.
2.2. Transition point: In this phase the group plan changes that are necessary for efficient
progress.
2.3. Phase Two: In this phase the group implement the changes that they made during the
transition point which increase the productivity but also suffer the consequences of the
past choices.
 I think punctuated equilibrium model is a better fit to analyze the group dynamics
between the members of the jury since at the start they were going in the wrong
direction and the productivity was low then there was a point where they started
realizing that their analysis is wrong and started thinking rationally analyzing the facts
provided by the witnesses which led them to boost up the progress of the group and
came to a verdict of not guilty.
 During the interaction between the jurors when juror # 3 made insult of Mr. McCardle
(juror #9), he was told to respect elders, Racial discrimination was not tolerated when
juror #10 tried to target juror #11 and arguments based on stereotypes were not
entertained. Two roles emerged during the interaction of the jury members, one was the
old man who testified that he heard a fight between the accused and the victim, and the
other role was a forty-five years old woman who was a eye witness to the crime.
 Initially eleven out of twelve members of the jury remained stick to the idea that the
eighteen years old boy killed his father with a switch blade that he bought in a pawn
shop. Mr. Davis (juror#8), tried his best to convince other members of the jury that
there might be a possibility of the accused not guilty which he proved with the passage
of time with logical and reasonable arguments. Mr. McCardle (juror #9), was the first
person who was convinced by Mr. Davis who helped him in backing the arguments and
convincing the others. The cohesiveness of the jury at different points led to rude and
harsh arguments between the jury members. Juror #3 tried to physically assault Mr.
Davis. Juror # 10 passed on many rude statements to other members of the jury.

Chapter 8 Leadership
According to the traits approach leadership theory, people who are leaders are born with
specific characteristics and are gifted. This theory says that leaders can’t be made rather
leaders are born. From the viewpoint of this theory Juror #1 emerged as a leader. From
the very start he takes control of the jury; he is very serious about his role as a juror. He is
oriented towards his task and bring the jury members on the table whenever needed. He
 listened to every single person in the jury and respect their opinions. He is always ready
to give up his position if someone in the jury feels that he is not competent enough for the
task.
According to behavior approach leadership theory, behavior is more important than personality
traits when it comes to leadership. In the first ten minutes juror # 3 influences most of the
jury members by his behavior and attitude towards the accused boy. He from the very
start decides that the accused is guilty and let the other members of the jury follow him
because of his dominant behavior. Juror # 3 has also emerged as a leader based on his
behavior and maintained it throughout the trial.
Based on path goal theory the appointed leader was effective in the process of achieving the
assigned goal. He considered many aspects of a path goal leadership during the trial. He
carried on the trial keeping in view the characteristics of the jury members dealing each
juror in a relevant way, for example, he would calm down juror # 3 when he would
started shouting and tried to keep them motivated and organized by introducing the idea
of ballot voting, making a seating plan and assigning numbers to each juror. He also
followed four path goal types of leadership. He was directive and kept the trial in a
direction to achieve the goal. He was supportive even when only Mr. Davis voted for not
guilty. He was able to achieve the goal and did not let the jury become a hung jury even
when juror #3 tried to do so.
Yes, there is a transformational juror in the group, Mr. Davis who constantly reminds the jurors
their task which is to come to the right conclusion. He is the only one who looked at the
possibility of the accused being not guilty and remained firmed to this decision of looking
out to the possibility. He influenced other jury members by his intelligent observation and
analysis of the events and emerged as transformational leader.

Chapter 9 Decision Making

According to my perception initially eleven out of twelve jurors’ decisions were rationally
bounded, only Mr. Davis was perfectly rational. Eleven jurors decided on the what they
were presented with. They decided based on the testimonies of the witnesses, like the old
man hearing the voice of boy telling his father “I will kill you” and the forty-five years
old woman who was eye witnessed to the boy stabbing his father. The final decision was
perfectly rational, and all the facts and events were analyzed with logic.
Cognitive bias: I noticed cognitive bias in the movie many times, juror # 3 because of his son
developed the idea of teenagers to be brutal. Juror # 10 also showed cognitive bias and
thought that all slum boys are criminals.
Disadvantages of group decision: There are disadvantages of group decision in the movie,
for example, when voting occur for the first time Mr. McCardle (juror # 9) voted guilty
because he followed the majority. Juror #2 felt hesitation in giving his opinion and voted
 guilty because of the majority. Juror #3 and Juror # 10 constantly disrupted the decision
making and made fuss every time Mr. Davis suggested something rational.

Chapter 10 Power and Influence

In this film influence tactics that the jurors used are rational persuasion, assertiveness and
coalition.
Mr. Davis influenced the jury members by rational persuasion. When everyone was reluctant to
the idea of the accused not being guilty, Mr. Davis persuaded other members of the jury
by giving rational arguments which made them change their decisions.
Juror #3 and Juror #10 was assertive from the start and force other jurors whenever they
changed their votes to be not guilty.
Mr. Davis and Mr. McCardle united to form a coalition and one by one changed the minds of
other jury members.