An Analysis on Ek Ruka Huwa Faisala from Communication Perspective
Roll no. 8
Ek Ruka Hua Faisala is a Bollywood movie directed by Basu Chatterjee inspired from Hollywood film 12 Angry Men. We the student of MBA are shown this movie to learn some lesson of Managerial Communication. Altthough this is a movie about different organizational behavior, it also gives a strong example of effective communication. This is a movie about 19 year old boy who was a suspect for murder of his father. There was a committee of 12 people assigned to decide whether boy was culprit or not. All 12 jurors must agree whether a young man is guilty or not of murdering his father. In this movie we observe the entire decision making process. Where each individual had different perception and different behavior in particular situation. Their personal opinion leads them to one wrong decision first but later on with just one leading, convincing, neutral and practical individual, they were able to think on the other side of the case and finally they reached to right conclusion.
A switch from 11-1 to 0-12 is very rare in real life juries, but Ek Ruka Hua Faisla very convincingly depicts the switch. It achieves this by staying true to the realities of group dynamics through effective and proper communication. Once the objective of the group is established, they start with a vote based on individual decisions. Though, the vote is 11-1 in favor of Guilty, not everyone votes immediately. Some of the members look around before raising their hands – and, as it turns out, these are the first to switch their votes. Those on the fence probably vote believing that the truth is with the majority, the old man is the last to raise his hand probably to avoid being an odd one out and is first to switch his opinion, that for a very weak reason i.e. to support the Devil's Advocate and no real persuasion is needed. It is interesting to note that the first change in stated position happens during a secret vote. Anonymous ballet is one of the best ways to break conformity, as the pressure to agree with the majority group is reduced. It is seen because the vote changing jury was hesitated to express his opinion i.e. the worst thing for effective communication. He as is seen, the group starts attacking the person they wrongly consider 'deserter' – a display of invulnerability. This is also shown when the adman says that “lets convince him that he is wrong and we are right”. On the other hand, the architect shows leadership skills. Initially he plays the devils advocate though, as it later becomes clear, he believes that the boy is not guilty. He does this to avoid personal confrontation and hatred that is usually directed towards a lone dissenter. Instead of taking a stand, he employs a democratic leadership style asking the other members to discuss the case with an open-mind as he says “mera khayal hai, baatcheet”. By looking at the facts from a new angle, the architect makes the group members to reconsider their stands, and encourages them to delve further into the generally accepted truths. Later, he shifts from a devil's advocate to an authentic dissenter. This change is marked by a more aggressive approach that he takes later. Initially, he is calm and mostly in his chair, but as the group members change their stated positions – we see him take a more loud approach to defending the boy. His greatest strength was the ability to positively influence others trough communication. We also see a change in the body language of members as they move from majority group to minority group. This is most evident in Juror 2, who was being bullied by Juror 3 in the early stages. He looks more confident after joining the minority group. A similar change can be seen in Juror from the slum. Some characteristics and behaviours shown by different...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document