How Did The Background Of The Jurors Influence By Their Communication In 12 Angry Men

Leadership lessons to learn from 12 Angry Men — the movie

The first time I got to know about "12 Angry Men" was a few years back when I was reading one of the best books on direction. The book mentioned an activity where readers were requested to lookout man this 1957 black and white classic on group dynamics. Then, I did! I have to say, the 96 intense and claustrophobic minutes of this classic hit tell a lot about leadership, controlling, team-building, and behavioural analysis.

For those of you who have watched it would exist able to relate to the web log. For those who oasis't — do put it on your lookout-list. 12 Angry Men chronicles the murder trial of an 18-year old boy from a slum, charged with stabbing his father to decease. It is about a jury of 12 different individuals from distinct backgrounds; given the job of deciding unanimous whether the boy is guilty or not.

It is a perfect portrayal of how people human activity in groups and what all phases teams go through earlier reaching to a unanimous conclusion. Viewers can learn a lot about how people working inside communities and organizations can influence others for the better.

You tin can take-away a lot of lessons on leadership and management, merely below is a non-exhaustive list of what I took from it -

• Empathizing

Right from the get-go — Henry Fonda's character tries to walk into the boy'south shoes; what it must have been like to live in a slum and abound up in a violent surroundings. Instead of rushing to judgement, potentially a prejudiced one; he tries to see things from the boy'due south perspective. This is a keen example of empathizing with others. The same holds true during meets and discussions.

Endeavour to find the reason behind why people are saying what they are saying. Walking into others' shoes will allow you to feel how a determination is likely to bear on others and how it may impact things in the long-run. Empathizing makes you run into the bigger moving picture more clearly!

• Choosing correct over easy!

The character of Henry Fonda could have easily voted 'guilty' when the rest eleven jurors did the aforementioned. Only he saw what was at stake — the life of a potentially innocent boy. Then, he decided to get with the difficult path which meant not only standing against the residual 11 jurors, simply besides changing their behaviour without disrespecting their opinions. The piece of cake path would have been avoiding hours of difficult and long conversations by voting 'guilty'. So, during discussions, try to come out of the beat, suspension free of our comfort zone, and take a stand!

• Tone matters

After watching 12 Angry Men, I realized that the nearly influential jurors who were able to make a point were the ones who maintained a steady and calm disposition throughout the discussion. Those who kept yelling, lost their temper, shouted, and attempted to impose their views and arguments were the ones to shortly lose their persuasive ability. Short-tempered and aggressive folks did make an bear on — simply not the ane they really wanted to.

In order to be heard, you don't need to be ambitious. Assertiveness, right tone of voice, and putting your arguments with confidence is the way to make a point.

• Having a different perspective

People vs. sheeple. Where do you belong? I know the latter is non a standard dictionary discussion, but you go the point, right! Fonda delivered an outstanding operation depicting how he chose to have a different opinion when the odds were 11:1. Don't be a sheep, blindly following others' opinions without putting your analytical abilities to utilise. Nearly people fail to put forrard their views out of fear of ridicule or rejection. Try to avoid herd behaviour. Get together the courage to get your message through, even if it means continuing against the ridicule of others.

• Giving time to important decisions

When the jurors gathered, eleven of them only wanted to become it over with. Then they chose to practice the piece of cake matter of voting the boy guilty without offer whatsoever insight into the matter. They didn't want to invest any time and intellectual efforts. If a conclusion is important, devote plenty of time. In the pic, the life of a male child was at pale. Find out what the stakes are and accordingly plan discussions and motility ahead with conversations!

• Nudging others

You cannot impose your views. That's taken! Fonda realized this, which is why at no bespeak he tried to strength anyone into voting 'non guilty'. He used subtle techniques to nudge others. Trying to get your views accepted past others involves dealing with a complex network of countless emotions and social interactions; non to mention the ever-persistent desire of people to resist change. The sign of good leadership is finding ways to nudge others using subtle techniques instead of pushing them. Having an emotional insight combined with the ability to reason is what makes a good leader!

Concluding, simply not the least thing I learned from this movie is to ever follow your gut instincts. Your gut usually tells right! Henry Fonda went with his instincts, which allowed him to put along his views with conviction. Practise the same in a way that would influence everyone else's perspective on the thing equally well.

So, what do you think of information technology? Accept annihilation more to add hither? Share in the comments department below.

To go a good leader you need to detect out ways to make your team'due south piece of work life easy. And, that's exactly what ProofHub does. Try it out and encounter how it works for you and your squad.

How Did The Background Of The Jurors Influence By Their Communication In 12 Angry Men,

Source: https://blog.proofhub.com/leadership-lessons-to-learn-from-12-angry-men-the-movie-868e6f2a1b7f

Posted by: davisstectint.blogspot.com

Share this post