You are on page 1of 3

Ek Ruka Hua Faisla

Decision Making Process


8/2/2011

The 12 jury members involve the 12 varied bollywood actors: 1. Deepak Kejriwal as Juror #1 2. Amitabh Srivastav as Juror #2

3. Pankaj Kapur as Juror #3 4. S. M. Zaheer as Juror #4 5. Subhash Udghate as Juror #5 6. Hemant Mishra as Juror #6 7. M. K. Raina as Juror #7 8. K. K. Raina as Juror #8 9. Annu Kapoor as Juror #9 10. Subbiraj as Juror #10 11. Shailendra Goel as Juror #11 12. Aziz Qureshi as Juror #12 Juror#7

Juror #6 Juror # 5 Juror #4 Juror #3 Juror #2

Juror#8 Juror#9 Juror#10 Juror#11 Juror#12

Juror#1 Movie Review: There are twelve male members of a jury who have gathered together in an enclosed room to deliberate on charges of murder against a young boy accused of killing his father. The case against the boy looks undeniable, as there is a witness in the form of an old man who claims to have heard the incident and another woman who claims to have seen the actual act of stabbing. Plus there is the murder weapon a knife that was found at the crime scene, seemingly implicating the boy without any fragment of doubt. But all is not what it seems like. All the jury members, except one, are convinced that the boy is guilty of the crime and the task before them is to reach a unanimous decision to expedite the case. But there is only one jury member (Juror#8) who is not completely convinced about the case and he starts the deliberations, in which all the members have to participate to reach a common conclusion. What starts off as a minor doubt in one jury members mind slowly develops into an intricate and almost perpetually animated discussion about the various possibilities and scenarios where there could be even a shred of divergence from the commonly perceived notions and judgments of the jury members. There is an adjudicator who is supposed to chair the jury & make sure a final decision is reached. But he is also a part of the vote and has to make up his own mind along with making sure the proceedings are done without disruptions. The one guy who is not fully convinced manages to change the vote of all one by one through discussion and proper arguments.

The factors which hindered the decision making process is: Every Jury member was of different nature and behaviour. Different members had attitudinal differences and biases leading to not acceptance of a point. Juror 3 always had a negative impression about the young generation which was his personal bias. He showed the Bounded Rationality i.e. people tend to take decision intuitively on the basis of experience and are content with readily available solutions. Juror 7 was least interested in the discussion and wanted it to end as early as possible not giving any value to the points made by the group members. Juror 10 was biased on account of culture and society. Juror 4 was under Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristic, i.e. people make estimations on the basis of some implicitly suggested reference point. The influence of the majority was also a factor which prevented the members from changing sides even if they had started believing in the points made by the protagonist. All these approaches hindered the group to come to a common conclusion and hence made the decision making process even more complex.

The factors which contributed to the decision making process is: Providing for Group Decision-making: o Here, Groups can be resort basic ways to arrive at a decision: Taking a vote from individuals and then making the results. (Done by Juror#1). The facilitator of the group (Juror 1), he always contributed in the decision making process. He always tried to control the discussion when it went to a tangential direction. Whenever, he was asked to take a voting to judge the estimate if they were reaching to a common conclusion, he did the same and hence contributed in the decision making process. Active participation with valid points: o Juror 4 was also contributing in the decision making process by giving in valuable inputs. He also gave due consideration to the points made by the other group members and discussed on those points until and unless everyone were convinced. Managerial Style of Decision-making: o Juror#8 was Thinker i.e. logical, academic in his approach to decisions. The protagonist also made every effort to convince people about the points that others were avoiding. He used practical way to explain each and every point like the time it takes for the old ailing man to come to the corridor and the distance from which the woman residing on the other side of the railway track could see the murder happen.

All these points led to the final decision making where every group member agreed to a common point.