The purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of the movie “12 Angry Men” relative to conflict resolution. I will discuss how the character played by Henry Fonda was able to effectively use conflict resolution skills to bring the jury to their final verdict. I will also discuss some of the issues contributing to the climate of conflict in the jury room. Henry Fonda’s character is an architect named Mr. Davis. He happens to be juror number 8. I will refer to this character from now on as “Fonda” for ease of writing and understanding. I have attached Appendix A listing the jurors in order of their juror number. This may help to better identify the jurors and references the order in which they voted not guilty.
Basis for Conflict
The group of jurors experiences the spectrum of the conflict continuum from difference to contention. Throughout their deliberation, they fluctuate between difference, disagreement, dissonance, controversy and contention. They, of course, never reach the far right of the continuum, which is war. The points on the continuum are reached at different times between different jurors and groups of jurors. This is based on their backgrounds and their assumptions and h
He provided all with ample opportunity to present their views and to comment on the views of each other. Conflict ResolutionFonda seemed to recognize that the climate of conflict could be beneficial to raise questions and help the group come to an agreement. Through his patience and persistence, he was able to bring all eleven over to his thinking. Fonda took the effective approach through confrontation to raise questions and change perceptions. It appears that some of the votes are tentative. Fonda was able to bring out some prejudices in some of the jurors that finally got them in touch with their "blind self". When some of the jurors began playing tic-tac-toe, he put an immediate stop to it. He tried to raise doubt as to the uniqueness of the knife and used his duplicate knife when he had to make his point. He was not forceful enough in his delivery. Several of the jurors raise their hands later after seeing the majority vote guilty. He re-iterated that the burden of proof was on the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt. The Judge gave the jurors a speech about their responsibilities in their deliberation. There is conflict on the organizational level as some of the jurors enter a collective action against the others as the deliberation continues. The conflict starts with Fonda"tms dissenting vote.