ANALYSIS After watching this movie I have analyzed a lot of things. There were lot of issues. The report I am trying to design shows the relationship between parts of the movie and the concepts in our subject corporate governance. Basically what I am trying to discuss here is that how and why the conflicts were arising and how these conflicts were affecting the whole negotiation process and the outcome of that negotiation. First of all the first conflict arises in the movie was when 11 people were in favor of guilty and 1 in favor of not guilty. From that point the war was started among the 12 men. All the jury members were having the enough information about the murder case which was clearly showing that the boy killed his father but one of the jury member was trying to convince the others that may be there is a possibility that the boy didn’t killed his father. All jury members were talking about facts and figures. Everyone was trying to jump directly to the conclusion instead of looking deep down in the case. Some of them were giving personal prejudice which means that giving your opinion which is not based on your experience or …show more content…
Almost everyone seems to be in a hurry which was also effecting their negotiation. Cultural differences resulted in different viewpoints and perceptions about the case. There was almost no flexibility among the jurors. No one was ready to compromise. There were interpersonal conflicts as well as intrapersonal conflicts which was creating a big hurdle while solving the case.In my opinion dual concern model is also used in the movie. Inaction, contending and yielding were there. If you have solid reasoning you can convince anyone very easily. We must look at each and every aspect of the issue while negotiating. Little things in an issue matters a lot. We are civilized people and we must respect others and take care of others rights. There are also some issues which are discussed