Organisation Behaviour

Assignment-3

Submitted to: Dr. Hardik Saha

Kumar Abhishek

PGPIM-2012-13

2

3

1) What is the key learning for you as leaders?

1. Leaders should not carry pre-conceived notions: Carrying pre-conceived notions can affect

the decision making process adversely, giving prejudiced decisions. A leader should not be

biased. He should give more priority or attention to evidences rather than opinions. The accused

in the movie came from a poverty stricken background. In the movie we saw that juror no.3 and

7 were giving their opinions based on past experiences, thus undermining the whole process. It

was evident in the movie that this preconceived notion had a big impact on their decision as they

were stereotyping the accused based on his background. Here, we learn that every decision

should be taken on the merit of the case and a good leader should learn to restrict pre conceived

notions from having an impact on his decision. It is a good idea to take a step back and have a

holistic view of the issue without any prejudice.

2. Integrity is the integration of outward actions and inner values. A person of integrity is the

same on the outside and on the inside. Such an individual can be trusted because he or she never

veers from inner values, even when it might be expeditious to do so. A leader must have the trust

of followers and therefore must display integrity. Juror no.8 showed exemplary integrity. All of

his arguments were based on facts and not on opinions. From the very beginning of the whole

decision making process, he said that he was just not confident that the accused is the culprit, and

he stuck onto it. All his decisions were based on facts rather than on prejudices. He tells the truth

rather than taking an extreme stand. Also, Subhash Udagane shows integrity when he encourages

Aziz Qureshi (advertising professional) to take a decision based on what he believed in rather

than to just be with the majority.

3. Dedication means spending whatever time or energy is necessary to accomplish the task at

hand. A leader inspires dedication by example, doing whatever it takes to complete the next step

toward the vision. By setting an excellent example, leaders can show followers that there are no

nine-to-five jobs on the team, only opportunities to achieve something great. Some of the jurors

like juror no.7 and 12 were more interested in their personal life rather than in the process, thus

losing the respect of the other jurors. Leadership wants commitment.

4. Openness means being able to listen to new ideas, even if they do not conform to the usual

way of thinking. Good leaders are able to suspend judgment while listening to others' ideas, as

well as accept new ways of doing things that someone else thought of. Openness builds mutual

respect and trust between leaders and followers, and it also keeps the team well supplied with

new ideas that can further its vision. A good leader should not be always directive. He should

value the ideas and judgments of his followers. Here juror no. 8 was open to ideas of all other

jurors. He shows openness and an ability to voice his opinion and believes in fair and wise

decision.

5. Creativity is the ability to think differently, to get outside of the box that constrains solutions.

Creativity gives leaders the ability to see things that others have not seen and thus lead followers

in new directions. Juror no. 8 not only thought out of the box but also encouraged and influenced

others to think like that. The act of enacting the whole process of how one of the witness could

have acted on hearing the thud sound was very creative.

4

2) Describe all the 12 people and their leadership style taking any leadership model? Why

you say so?

I am describing the leadership style of all the people with the help of ‘Situational Theory of

Leadership’ proposed by Hersey and Blanchard.

Juror-1 – Deepak Kejriwal

He displayed a “Participating Style” of leadership and a regulating

behavior in the film. Although he did initiate the proceedings and was

a good moderator but he lacked control over the group so as to ensure

disciplined and peaceful approach towards decision. He was the

facilitator and mediator of the discussion and was hence expected to

guide the discussion forward and resolute conflicts, but he lost the

control and the jurors themselves played the significant role in

coming to the conclusion.

Juror-2 – Amitabh Srivastava

He displayed a “Delegating Style” of leadership. He was relatively

new in this situation and thus had certain inhibitions. He was shy and

got easily influenced and convinced under stressed situations. He

showed good analytical skills and was concerned about the culprit.

He shared his ideas and facilitated in decision making.

Juror-3- Pankaj Kapoor

He displayed a “Telling Style” of leadership and a directive behavior.

He emerged as a rigid proud person who is not open to new ideas and

based his judgment on past experiences. He did not listen to any points

raised by other jurors and was least concerned about the culprit and

other jurors. He depicted an active-destructive personality, i.e. he was

very active in the decision making but in a destructive way by having

an attacking and commanding attitude.

Juror-4- S.M.Zaheer

He displayed a “Participating Style” of leadership and a consulting

behavior. He is a well dressed broker, very conceited and unemotional.

He based his decisions on hardcore facts and demonstrated an active

constructive personality. He was very patient and calm throughout the

process and based his decision on pure logic. He shared his ideas and

facilitated in decision making whenever the discussion started to go

astray.

Juror-5- Subash Udghate

He was the person who belonged to the same slum as the accused. He

became defensive and did not react well to others prejudice. He was

logical in his methodology and based his opinions only on facts,

despite coming from similar back ground and empathizing with the

accused. He showed a “Selling Style” of leadership.

Juror-6- Hemant Mishra

He played a secondary role in the movie, with no substantial

contributions. He showed a “Participating Style” of leadership. He

5

was traditional by thinking, showed respect to elders. He also fought

with a juror who was insulting older juror 9.

Juror-7- M.K.Raina

He showed a “Delegating type” of leadership. He was a self centered

person who cared more for the movie than the life of a person. He

showed least concern about the case even though a person’s life was at

stake. He was least bothered about the importance of the decision and

showed no regard to protocols or justice. He did not actively support

the decision making process.

Juror-8- K.K.Raina

He showed a “Nurturing Behavior”. He was the voice of reason and

plays the most crucial role. At the beginning he was the only member

of the jury who voted “not guilty” and withstood all the pressure from

other jury members. He was calm and composed, was not afraid of

voicing his opinion even though everyone in the group opposed him.

He presented his points very boldly, with solid facts and great

conviction.

Juror-9- Anu Kapoor

He showed a “Supporting Type” of leadership. He was the old and

wise juror who proved to be open to difference in opinions and

supported them. He brought along with him loads of wisdom and

experience which eventually helped the jury members to come to the

conclusion regarding the faulty witness. He showed a lot of patience

but still got agitated sometimes due to inappropriate behavior of other

jurors.

Juror-10- Subbiraj

He showed a “Directive Behavior”. He was the most actively

destructive juror, had his preconceived notions about slum dwellers.

He showed a lot of arrogance in his style and was trying to influence

others in the favour of punishing the accused without going through

the detailed facts.

Juror-11- Shailendra Goel

His behavior changed during the course of movie from “Delegating to

Consulting.” Initially he did not seem to be contributing much to the

discussion, showing a “Delegating Behavior’. But later on when

logical facts were presented he switched sides. He was taking his role

as a juror seriously.

Juror-12- Aziz Quereshi

He was the most indifferent character. He was least interested in the

decision making process. During most of the discussion he was busy in

solving puzzles and working on some advertisement ideas. He showed

“Delegating Behavior.”

6

3. How different is Mr. K.K Raina's leadership Style? Discuss.

K.K Raina’s role was the voice of reason and played the most crucial role At the beginning he

was the only jury member willing to give time and a chance to the guilty by voting in favor for

him. Even though not fully convinced, he wanted to give the victim the benefit of doubt and

wanted to contemplate over the facts and logic before arriving at a conclusion. His decision style

was mainly like a thinker who wanted to go ever every little detail before arriving at a decision.

He was not biased or prejudiced against the accused boy and wanted to give him a fair chance to

prove himself free from the charges. He showed openness and an ability to voice his opinion and

believed in fair and wise decision. He believed in himself and was not a follower, typically a trait

of a leader. He sets a personal example by voting against all 11 jurors as the life of a 19 year old

boy was on stake. He was also a risk taker. When first time he called for a vote, he said that if

anybody did not come up in his support he would also change his decision. On one situation

when juror 3 asked for anyone to come up so that juror 3 could show how the boy would have

used the knife juror 8 took that risk to prove his point. This showed he had risk taking ability.

While no other people of that group had such type of trait. His leadership could be classified as a

democratic leadership. He involved other members actively and asked them their point of view

and was ready to discuss their views as well, before the group took a final decision. His

leadership could be classified as a supportive leadership. He provided a great deal of direction

and led with his ideas. He also attempted to discover the group’s feeling, as well as encouraged

eliciting their ideas and suggestions. If we see the traits and skills of leaders from Stogdill’s

characteristic trait table, we can associate several of the traits and skills to his character. His traits

included adaptable to situations, assertive, cooperative, decisive, dependable, persistent, self-

confident and tolerant of stress. His skills included conceptually skilled, creative, organized,

socially skilled, diplomatic and tactful and knowledgeable about group task. He also showed

leadership traits identified by McCall and Lombardo like emotional stability and composure,

good interpersonal skills and intellectual breadth. The leadership characteristics as suggested by

Bennis and Thomas were displayed by him.. These include adaptive capacity, engaging others by

creating shared meaning and voice (which showed his self-confidence, purpose and self-

awareness). If we gauge him according to Vroom-Jagoo theory his leadership style can be seen

as Group based. In this case acceptance of decision by all jurors is necessary. Here the discussion

quality is very important and right decision is not likely to result from an autocratic approach

there for he shaped his arguments in such way that he can convince everyone to feel the

criticality of correct decision. But if we look at other jurors through same angle no one is in this

category .They are either consultative or autocratic. Initially he is the only person who is

interested in discussion and not in jumping in an illogical decision, but as the time passes he

gathers more support. He does not have any kind of authoritative power over any other juror.

And also they are not following any structured way of decision making. Therefore according to

fiddler’s theory we can say that initially he was showing “Low LPC” type of leadership but as

7

the time passes he emerge as a “high LPC” leader If we measure him on behavioral theories his

leadership style can be seen as democratic. He tries to make consensus on the right decision.

Analyzing as per Fiedler’s theory, the three aspects which determines effectiveness of a leader

are leader-member relations, task structure and leader’s position power. These were poor,

unstructured and strong respectively, in case of him. This suggests that given the circumstances,

he was a task oriented leader. Under the Leadership function theory his leadership can be

described as transformational leadership. He inspired the other jury members to transcend their

own self- interest in order to have a meaningful and healthy analysis of the case. He also showed

the following characteristic of transformational leadership. He had a profound impact on the

other jury members with his view of the case. He managed to change the awareness of the

members He also paid attention to the member’s issue and their point of view and then came up

with counter-arguments. He excited and inspired juror’s to put forth extra efforts, e.g. he enacted

the scene where the old man came out of his bed to see the criminal running down the stairs.

Here he inspired some of the juror’s to help him enact the scene. He had clarity of mission right

from the start of the jury’s meeting.

4) What other areas of organizational behavior theories you may relate to the film?

Discuss.

Several areas of Organizational behavior theories can be related to the film.

1) Lifestyle Approach

Type A: person is impatient with the rate of work. They move and eat rapidly. Juror No.3-

Pankaj Kapoor, Juror No.7-M.K.Raina, Juror No.10- Subiraj can be associated with Type A

personalities, as they wanted to end the discussion quickly and move on to do their personal

work.

Type:B: person never feels urgency and is patient. Juror No.2-Amitabh Srivastava, Juror No.4-

S.M.Zaheer, Juror No.5- Subash Udghate, and Juror No.8- K.K.Raina can be categorized as

Type-B personalities, as they were patient throughout the proceeding.

2) Transactional Analysis:

(a) Adult Ego State: When a person comes from his adult ego state, he or she acts and behaves

on the facts and realities of today. A person in adult ego state is able to see person and things as

they are today and decides on information available to him rather than assumptions. In the movie

Juror no:2 Amitabh Srivastava, Juror no 4-S.M.Zaheer, Juror no 5- Subash Udghate, Juror no 8-

K.K.Raina and Juror no 9-Annu Kapoor were in his adult ego state.

(b) Child Ego State: When a person comes from his child ego state he/she thinks, feels and

behaves like the child once he/she was. Juror no:7-M.K.Raina, Juror no:12-Aziz Qureshi were in

child ego state.

(c) Parent Ego State: When a person comes from his or her parent ego state, he or she thinks,

feels, and behaves like whatever he/she learnt from one of her or his parents.. Parent Ego state is

8

the “Taught” concept of life. In the movie Juror No:3- Pankaj Kapoor, Juror No:10-Subiraj were

in the parent ego state.

3) Process of Interpreting: After the data have been received and organized, the perceiver

interprets the data in various ways.

Stereotyping: is favorable or unfavorable opinion about a particular group of people. The last

person who changed his opinion that the accused was not guilty was actually having a perceptual

error of stereotyping. In the past, his son, a teenager once had (physical) fight with him &

because of this incident he made a general perception that all teenagers are irresponsible & could

indulge in crime very easily.

Halo effect: is opinion or attitude towards a single person or object. One of the juror exhibited

sign of halo effect, where he was overwhelmed with one aspect of evidence (such as the boy

didn't remember character from the film that he watched that night) This juror continued to focus

on only one or two aspect of evidence & missed on other aspects which he later realized &

changed his opinion.

Perception: One of the jurors had a very selective perception he just accepted the evidence on its

face value & made up his mind which was easier for him to believe. He considered the evidence

were sufficient enough to term the boy guilty without giving any proper thought on evidence as a

whole.

Projection: According to one of the juror the accused comes from slum & poor background. The

boy also had a history where he was involved in some kind of theft etc. Hence according to these

jurors in light of available evidence the boy is guilty for sure. They projected the slum

background as most of the criminals come from poor & slum background.

4) Decision making Styles: Decisions are made by individuals either in personal matters, or in

their roles concerning groups or organizations. Several decision making styles are used by

leaders such as Autocratic or directive style, individual consultative style, group consultative

style, group decision style, participative style and leaderless team. In the movie the decision

making process was basically a participative style of decision making where the whole group

proceeds through the entire decision making process. Also the group had no formal leader.

Perceptual

set

Interpersona

l context

Other person’s

background

Halo effect

Perceptual

Defense

Organization

al Context

Stereotyping

Interpretation

of data