Ek Ruka Hua Faisla – Review

" E’Ek Rukaa Hua Faisla ", remake of Hollywood classic " Twelve Angry Men " an Oscar Winning Film widely used in Management Schools & Corporate for understanding " Human Behavior " and " Leadership Styles ". Let’s take a look at the plot first to be familiar with this movie.

The movie starts from a scene in a jury room where 12 jury members are discussing the case for the final verdict. The case is regarding a murder of an old man and the suspect is his own son. Everything from the statement of witnesses to debate of lawyers has already finished. And as they are reaching verdict and counting votes. 11 said guilty and 1 said not guilty.

Now the whole movie revolves around this 1 person who is standing on his ground for voting not guilty. He explains that he is neutral in his judgment and unless he is satisfied he won’t vote guilty. And gradually with his common sense, thinking and debating power ( Advocacy skills ) he changed the mind of other jury members until finally they all voted not guilty.

Order custom essay Ek Ruka Hua Faisla – Review with free plagiarism report

450+ experts on 30 subjects Starting from 3 hours delivery

Get Essay Help

This movie is special especially because it portrays the thinking of 12 different people from 12 different aspects of society, from self-made guy coming from the slums to famous doctor to elite class people. In these 12 jury members, everyone was so careless to reach their decision except that 12th person. They are so preoccupied with their personal problems or engagements that they do not understand the gravity of their decision. 1 person’s life is on stake. Yes, the accused guy could be real culprit or maybe not. But they should not just let the guy to be hanged only because they were getting late for a movie or a game or for dinner party, etc.

Sometimes the plot do get interesting when that lone ranger (12th jury member) is highlighting the broken links in the statements of witnesses and the case put together by public-prosecutor against the accused. You get the feeling that this guy could do wonders if he were a real lawyer and whether the lawyer for the accused was so stupid. The movie touch the hearts of everyone who watches it. It shows how unsafe we all really are. How much we lie to our self just to feel safe and strong , and how weak we really are.

You can relate yourself to each and every one of that jury member. Each person is a manifestation of your in different situations you can find yourself in your daily routine life. And it horrifies you to realise that how prejudiced and careless you have become to other humans and their feelings. You are not wrong in any way, but you have to be understanding enough and responsible enough to take other’s point of view into account too when reaching a major decision that could effect other’s life.

The message is very clear. Do not reach any decision just for the heck of it. Do take time to think and be as neutral as possible. You really feel so sick when you see and hear the remarks of the other jury members and why some of them want the boy to be punished. Just because the guy from elite class think that this boy belongs to slums and so they must be destroyed to make 1 person less against the fight for exploitation. The doctor thinks that these guys are good for nothing and it’s better that the boy should be punished for making this world more safe and clean.

The main character is the jury member who is most difficult to change his decision, Pankaj kapoor (who I am sure was quite young when he acted in this movie), is really amazing in his portrayal of a hurt father who is prejudiced about the accused boy because his own son had been disrespectful to him and even slapped him. And in the end, you really wonder, this is a movie so there has to be poetic justice. But in this real world, can you really be impartial and neutral while making every decision? I know and you know too, i t’s next to impossible that 12th jury member, the ideal human being , only exist in the movie. It’s hard to find anybody who can be impartial in decisions which do not effect their own life. So, the real decision here to be made is to be positive and unbiased and not to be influenced by our preconceived notions in making important decisions. I am glad that i get to share my views with all of you guys. I would totally recommend this movie to everyone, and I mean everyone. This movie is worth watching at least once for your development.

https://www. slideshare. net/prkworld/ek-ruka-hua-faisla

The model is represented as a grid with concern for production as the X-axis and concern for people as the Y-axis; each axis ranges from 1 (Low) to 9 (High). The resulting leadership styles are as follows:

• The indifferent (previously called impoverished) style (1,1) : evade and elude. In this style, managers have low concern for both people and production. Managers use this style to preserve job and job seniority, protecting themselves by avoiding getting into trouble. The main concern for the manager is not to be held responsible for any mistakes, which results in less innovative decisions.
• The accommodating (previously, country club) style (1,9): yield and comply. This style has a high concern for people and a low concern for production. Managers using this style pay much attention to the security and comfort of the employees, in hopes that this will increase performance. The resulting atmosphere is usually friendly, but not necessarily very productive.
• The dictatorial (previously, produce or perish) style (9,1): control and dominate. With a high concern for production, and a low concern for people, managers using this style find employee needs unimportant; they provide their employees with money and expect performance in return. Managers using this style also pressure their employees through rules and punishments to achieve the company goals. This dictatorial style is based on Theory X of Douglas McGregor, and is commonly applied by companies on the edge of real or perceived failure. This style is often used in cases of crisis management.
• The status quo (previously, middle-of-the-road) style (5,5): balance and compromise. Managers using this style try to balance between company goals and workers' needs. By giving some concern to both people and production, managers who use this style hope to achieve suitable performance but doing so gives away a bit of each concern so that neither production nor people needs are met.
• The sound (previously, team style) (9,9): contribute and commit. In this style, high concern is paid both to people and production. As suggested by the propositions of Theory Y, managers choosing to use this style encourage teamwork and commitment among employees. This method relies heavily on making employees feel themselves to be constructive parts of the company.
• The opportunistic style: exploit and manipulate. Individuals using this style, which was added to the grid theory before 1999, do not have a fixed location on the grid. They adopt whichever behaviour offers the greatest personal benefit.
• The paternalistic style: prescribe and guide. This style was added to the grid theory before 1999. In The Power to Change, it was redefined to alternate between the (1,9) and (9,1) locations on the grid. Managers using this style praise and support, but discourage challenges to their thinking

Grid theory breaks behavior down into seven key elements: Element| Description| Initiative| Taking action, driving and supporting| Inquiry| Questioning, researching and verifying understanding| Advocacy| Expressing convictions and championing ideas| Decision Making| Evaluating resources, choices and consequences| Conflict Resolution| Confronting and resolving disagreements| Resilience| Dealing with problems, setbacks and failures| Critique| Delivering objective, candid feedback|

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Run a free check or have your essay done for you

Check my essay Hire Writer