12 Angry Men 6
HRMG200 – Northeastern University
Week Two Assignment Two – 12 Angry Men
• Why is the architect so much more effective at influencing the group members than the stockbroker?
Individualism versus collectivism from the Hofstede’s survey done in the 1970 helps bring some light of what happened in the 12 angry men movie. Although the survey was done to understand different cultures among the 116,000 IBM employees in 40 countries, it could be adapted to a scenario of the deliberation by the jurors in this movie. The definition provided by Hofstede is individualism is the degree to which people in a country prefer to act as individuals rather than as members of groups. Collectivism is the equivalent of low individualism.
The first aspect of this is juror 8 refused to be involved in the collectivism of the rest of the jurors. Although juror 8 did not have any facts at that moment to support his rational, he wanted the oppurtunity to discuss the whole scenario of the murder that occurred afterall the decision he was about to make would either sentence the 18 year old defendant to die by electrocution or free. There was no inbetween, with that in mind he pushed to induce dialogue about the events on the night of the murder. Hence the foreman induced the brainstorming criteria, where everybody gets a chance to speak to give the reason why they voted guilty on the first vote. There seems to be some little doubt being built here that allowed the discussions to continue.
It is interesting to note that during the brainstorming session, the perception set by the prosecution had influenced 11 jurors. The 11 jurors interpreted the scenario painted by the prosecutor as reality and hence their deicison. Juror 8 did not get influenced by it and hence had questions that he believed the defense did not do a thorough enough job investigating the case and arguing the case in court. By arguing that that there are other possibilities to the scenarios argued by the
Week Two Assignment Two – 12 Angry Men
• Why is the architect so much more effective at influencing the group members than the stockbroker?
Individualism versus collectivism from the Hofstede’s survey done in the 1970 helps bring some light of what happened in the 12 angry men movie. Although the survey was done to understand different cultures among the 116,000 IBM employees in 40 countries, it could be adapted to a scenario of the deliberation by the jurors in this movie. The definition provided by Hofstede is individualism is the degree to which people in a country prefer to act as individuals rather than as members of groups. Collectivism is the equivalent of low individualism.
The first aspect of this is juror 8 refused to be involved in the collectivism of the rest of the jurors. Although juror 8 did not have any facts at that moment to support his rational, he wanted the oppurtunity to discuss the whole scenario of the murder that occurred afterall the decision he was about to make would either sentence the 18 year old defendant to die by electrocution or free. There was no inbetween, with that in mind he pushed to induce dialogue about the events on the night of the murder. Hence the foreman induced the brainstorming criteria, where everybody gets a chance to speak to give the reason why they voted guilty on the first vote. There seems to be some little doubt being built here that allowed the discussions to continue.
It is interesting to note that during the brainstorming session, the perception set by the prosecution had influenced 11 jurors. The 11 jurors interpreted the scenario painted by the prosecutor as reality and hence their deicison. Juror 8 did not get influenced by it and hence had questions that he believed the defense did not do a thorough enough job investigating the case and arguing the case in court. By arguing that that there are other possibilities to the scenarios argued by the