COMMUNICATION SKILLS ASSIGNMENT PROF:APARNA RAO BY: Amar Chotpagar Deon Dsouza Kritya Srinivasan Pawan Panjwani

4 14 24 34 44 54

Reshma Ghadge

Swapnil Purohit

REPORT ON

AIM:

 To understand the decision making process where every individual had different opinion and behavior according to the situation through the movie

INTRODUCTION:
The case is all about a son being accused of killing his father 12 hury members are appointed to discuss the case and reach to a final conclusion All except one is against the convict Every one is so busy with their personal life that they are least interested toanalyse the case logically and are quick to jump to the conclusion But the only condition of the court was that all the jury members should agree to one decision and even a single person against it would let the case to further discussion

SCOPE:
To understand the various team building aspects through the movie To understand the various negotiating styles used by the characters and the power of verbal communication To learn various management techniques

PROLOGUE:

Passive constructor ( People with these personality traits are those who
never take the initative and are least interested in any situation around them) Juror 5-Mr.Subash Udgate Juror 6-Mr.Shailendra Goyal Juror 2-Amitabh Shristav Juror 11-Mr.Hemant Mishra These were the people who were not able to take the lead and start the discussion but when they were are asked for their opinion in the discussion they provided with valuable insight in a constructive manner. Passive Destructive(individuals with this personality are never initative taker and when asked for suggestion they have desctructive ideas) Juror 7 Mr.M K Raina Juror 12 - Mr.Azeez Qureshi These were the people with negative thought and who never took any initative and were just acting as an disturbing factor in the whole decision process.They were never supporting in any of the process.

Active Constructive (yhese are those who are active in a constructive way and they take the lead in th decision making process and have constructive thoughts in their minds) Juror 8-Mr.K.K Raina Juror 9- Mr.Anu Kapoor juror 4-MrS.M.Zaheer Mr.K.K.Raina is the best ex of active constructive personality.his argument were more logical practical and were based on reasoning.in the entire process he was very calm and patient.he had strong supportive ideas was also an initator.in the end he was able to convince every members on his side and proved the coinvict inncocent. Mr.Annu Kapoor & Mr S.M.Zaheer were also active constructive personality as theyhad brought many strong points during the discussion.

Active Desdtructive-(these people are biased by nature and at times personalized approach leads to destructive approach,they have their original ideas but are supported bydestructive behaviour) Juror 3-Mr.Pankaj Kapoor Juror 10-Mr.Subhiraj Mr.Pankaj kapoor was an ex of this kind of personality he was very active in the decision makin process but in a destructive way who was very emotional and took the case in a personal manner. Mr.Subhiraj was also a perfect ex.he was active but also had a biased view towards his community

Due to this behavior conflict arised and that left the situation on agressiive path

TWIST:
When the discussion started the only person who beloved that it was not necessary that the convict was guilty. so it lead to further discussion that led to consideration of each and every evidence. the only juror who took this to discussion had paid attention to every minute details and changed their perception towards convict and took nearly 4-5 jurors on his side. this opened space for further discussion. He was keen that if the decision was Wong then an innocent human would have been killed.

PERCEPTION:
The conving power of the 12 juror led the case for further discussion and his logical arguments also led others to think logically and analyze the case. At the end the few juror were in state of confusion owing to their own decision

CONFLICT:
After logical consideration and analysis of the case few juror changed their decision and this led to conflict among juror.this even took the way of religion by pointing on the caste.at the end when all juror except one were on the other side by changing their decision juror further got frustrated and angry

AGREEMENT:
After a long discussion and considering every aspect of case and analyzing the evidence of case the jurors finally were convinced that the boy was not guilty and that evidences were not sufficient to prove him guilty. The rational approach of that juror changed the jurors view and they were convinced to innocence of convict LEARNINGS: Convincing power: The persuasion power of the juror changed the perception of other who first believed that the convict was guilty but later on they were convinced. From this we come to know that in the decision making process when one is confident about his point he should stick to it and have that much ability to change others point of view and bring them to his side. Power of communication Verbal communication is the most effective way to give instruction, correction or direction to a group. Without it there can b misunderstandings frustration and lack of productivity. Verbal communication is essential to have a healthy and fruitful group or team. It helps set guide lines and boundaries in team dynamics that allow a group to achieve the goal it intends to accomplish. Verbal communication also helps us to give a clear idea and also gives us the correct instruction to follow From this we come to know how proper effective communication can lead to fruitful resultswith people to your side(How the only juror who beloved that the boy was not guilty and convinced others also for the same )(also if the juror lacked the power of communication he would not have been able to keep his point in front of others and change their point of view)

Leadership qualities The discussion was already in the mind of the initiator (juror no. 7)
the initiator planned this strategy accordingly and the strategy led to discussion.

Rationale thinking:Logical thinking helped the juror to analyze the

case and that led the case to further discussion so they took every evidence for further discussion.though earlier evidences somehow proved that the boy was guilty but still he took the case with the objective of analsing.He also repeated the case in the room to verify the evidences given in the court.