question archive As stated earlier, film is a useful vehicle for studying leadership and various types of power that can be used to convince your peers and followers
As stated earlier, film is a useful vehicle for studying leadership and various types of power that can be used to convince your peers and followers
Subject:SociologyPrice:9.82 Bought3
As stated earlier, film is a useful vehicle for studying leadership and various types of power that can be used to convince your peers and followers. Throughout the course, we will be talking about leadership and the role of power. Though the lessons we are learning extend beyond business to other types of professional endeavors and even to our home lives and friendships, the business world has helpfully placed many of these principles under the microscope for our benefit. Throughout the course, we will link to articles and videos from the business world that have a wider application to leadership philosophies.
We will start our discussion with The Seven Types of Power interactive - click the The Seven Types of Power Diagram (Links to an external site.). In the interactive, click the + markers to view each power type.
The Seven Types of Power Diagram (Links to an external site.) - plain text version.
Psychologists John French and Bertram Raven constructed the five main types of power shown in the interactive.
Vivian, G. (2013, July 31). "The 7 Types Of Power That Shape The Workplace. (Links to an external site.)" Business Insider. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/the-7-types-of-power-that-shape-the-workplace-2013-7
Next, please watch this video that illustrates these five main types of power: Coercive Power, Reward Power, Legitimate Power, Expert Power and Referent Power.*
*Remember that two other types of power not shown in the video come from information and connection; these two additional types of power come from the psychologist Nicole Lipkin.
Power & Influence: Types of Power (Links to an external site.) [Video, 5:46]
While the Foreman (Juror #1) in 12 Angry Men was technically the leader of the group, he accomplished little aside from tallying the votes. Juror #8 assumed the leadership role, but since he had no authority, his position as leader was tenuous. He led, but he did not dominate the discussion and often allowed others to assume other types of situational leadership roles.
First, select one particular juror who changes his mind during the film.
Please refer to the juror you selected in the subject line of your post (IMDb (Links to an external site.) can help you with their numbers http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/). By doing so, we can try to discuss several different jurors and not the same juror over and over.
Answer the following:
- Why did your selected juror change his mind?
- Which type of power was used to convince him, by whom, and how?
Purchase A New Answer
Custom new solution created by our subject matter experts
GET A QUOTE
Answer Preview
1. Why did your selected juror change his mind?
Ultimately, I think Juror #3 changed his mind because he understood that his initial beliefs were incorrect, but he refused to acknowledge that he was wrong. As a result of this information, he had already made up his mind that the boy was responsible for what had happened. Juror #3 was a bully who believed he could say whatever he wanted to anyone and they would see things his way because he'd been a bully his entire life.
2. Which type of power was used to convince him, by whom, and how?
In order to persuade Juror #3 to change his decision, Juror #8 used his legitimate authority. Juror #8 was silent at the outset of the proceedings and appeared to care deeply about whether or not the boy was guilty. The least fortunate in America were not given much regard at that time. Others based their responses on preconceived notions, stereotypes, or outright ignorance. Toward the end of the deliberations, Juror #8 began to assist other jurors in questioning the credibility of the witnesses. Juror #8 continued pointing out minor nuggets of information that, when studied, contradicted their initial conclusions during deliberations. In my opinion, Juror #3 saw the other jurors altering their minds and gave Juror #8 legitimacy, which eventually earned Juror #3's support.
Step-by-step explanation
1.
I believe Juror #3 changed his opinion because he realized that his initial convictions were inaccurate, but he refused to accept that he had been mistaken the entire time. His presumption that the youngster was guilty for what had transpired had already been formed as a result of this information. Because he had spent his entire life as a bully, Juror #3 believed he could say whatever he wanted to anyone and expect others to view things his way.
2.
Juror #3 was persuaded to modify his opinion by Juror #8, who used legitimate authority to persuade him to do so. The beginning of discussions was calm, and Juror #8 appeared to be genuinely concerned about whether or not the young child was guilty. Those who were less fortunate were not given much respect during that period in American history. Others formed their responses based on their preconceived notions, stereotypes, or ignorance. After a few minutes of deliberation, Juror #8 began to assist others in calling into question whether the assertions made by the witnesses were true or false. As juror #8 pointed out minor morsels of testimony during the deliberations, they began to see how they contradicted their initial conclusions after they had them evaluated. Juror #3, I believe, was watching all of the other jurors change their opinions and, in his mind, gave Juror #8 legitimacy, which ultimately won Juror #3 over.
