Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
12 Angry Men Chart
Transcript of 12 Angry Men Chart
Discovery of Others' Resistance Point
One of the key tactics in a negotiation is obtaining information about the other party.
By understanding the other party’s resistance point, one can reach an agreement as close as possible to the other party’s bottom line.
Did not give any information about himself or his thoughts.
He got information from others by allowing them to speak.
Used Indirect Assessment tactic to discover the other jurors' resistance points.
His resistance point and his beliefs are based upon prejudice
The other jurors used silence and turned their backs on him.
He realized his beliefs were based solely on prejudice.
Juror #8 reminded everyone they need to keep personal prejudice out of it, because it obscures the truth.
“You know how these people lie... they don’t need a reason to kill anybody. They’re all big drinkers... that’s the way they are by nature; Violent!”.
Suggested, in an attempt to convince Juror 8 to change his vote, that all the members of the Jury explain why they voted the defendant guilty.
Provided direct and indirect information on each individual's resistance points
Motive, burden of proof, witness accounts to prejudices.
Modifying Other's Perspective
Explain logically how an undesirable outcome may occur
Highlighting something that has been overlooked.
Pointed out that the key witness of the murder wore glasses.
This was overlooked by the other jurors
Helped to sway opinions of some jurors, as they realized she probably was not wearing her glasses at the time of the murder.
May not have heard the fight because the EL train was passing by.
Other jurors overlooked and did not consider this idea.
Jurors were convinced the knife was unique.
Juror #8 proved he had found the same knife at a junk shop.
Involves listening, providing justification, and exploring alternatives
Build and maintain a productive relationship with others
using a joint-problem solving approach to resolve the issues at hand.
Open-ended questions, active listening, and inventing options for mutual gain.
Questions how long it would take an old man (whom suffered multiple strokes and walks with two canes) to reach the front door in time to witness the boy leaving the apartment.
With the support and assistance of some of the other jurors, simulates the forty-foot walk in the quoted fifteen seconds but ends up completing the path in thirty-one seconds.
The old man attempted to reach the door in time and heard someone racing down the stairs.
Immediately, juror #6 is swayed by this alternative and believes it is possible, and others soon follow upon the next vote.
Proposes a secret ballot.
States that if all eleven jurors vote guilty he will go along with the vote.
If there is even one not-guilty vote, then the deliberation and discussion must continue.
Uses an integrative approach by suggesting a secret ballot.
Shows willingness to work together and sacrifice his stance by saying he’ll go along with everyone’s vote.
Sensed that some of the jurors might be uncomfortable dissenting against the majority.
The result was that Juror #9 changed his vote and the deliberation would continue.
Tried to hide behind facts of the case, took personally because of past experiences.
As a result, believed strongly that the defendant committed this crime.
Juror #8 was able to identify and depersonalize the problem through listening and reasoning
Was shown that there could be reasonable doubt, and could no longer hold on to his stubbornness.
# Happy Students