iii). to assess the following statement: share prices fully reflect all available information on a particular share according to the efficient market hypothesis (EMH) (Bodie et al (1997). If this is the case, can you find any evidence to support that the

Name:

Instructor:

Course:

Date:

Group Decision-making Project

Problem identification

The film 12 angry men revolve around 12 men who possess European roots and in the process, were given an opportunity to decide on a murder case. The case revolved around a teenager who was alleged to have killed his own father. Additionally, the jurors of the case possessed different social status, different family lives and they both had different opinions about the case. Moreover, the responsibility of the boy in the murder case was also viewed differently by the juror since quite a number of them had developed a negative feeling about the boy in question hence leading to a conflict between the jurors. Therefore, the conflict in this case arises from the fact that the jurors share different opinions and facts about the case most especially about the boy.

Establishing criteria for Evaluating solutions

A team of 12 jurors was identified to work on the case. During the forming stage, they did not talk much about the case although the judge made it clear to them that their main role is to identify the factual evidence of the case and try and eliminate information that is deemed irrelevant. After the definitions of their roles, the jurors conflicted on the issue of power and authority since each juror believed they had the jockeying position for consideration. For instance, in the movie, it is assumed that everyone had agreed on the verdict until some of them noticed that there was one particular juror who had voted not guilty. It was at this stage that the engagement norms were established and defined with the help of Fonda to guide the juror where each and every juror’s responsibility was defined clearly.

Identification of possible solutions

In this film, it was clear that the conflict occurred owing to the fact that many jurors miscomprehended their legal responsibilities. In other words, quite a number of them misunderstood the terminology or rather the concept that revolve around “reasonable doubt” and besides, they were not aware of circumstantial evidence nature of the case. Therefore, to help curb this issue, the judge would have ensured that they try to enforce listening skills within the team .This would have been achieved by seeking some major areas of agreement, trying to avoid interruptions within the group, avoid disagreeing about specific words, being patient and seeking clarifications whenever something is unclear in a very polite manner. Besides, to further curb the issue of the opposing views in the movie, the jurors would have seen diversity as an opportunity to brainstorm ideas rather than a threat to progress.

Evaluation of the solutions

Establishment of good listening and communication skills within the jurors would have ensured that first, there were very limited interruptions, second, reduced the level of rivalry in the group, third, help in the establishment of constructive juror coalitions and in the process, assist in constructively linking any opposing opinions within the juror. Embracing diversity will see to it that each and every juror is very innovative and creative in considering a diverse range of opinions and ideas that will ensure that the most effective and essential solution about the case is reached.

Identification of the best solution

In the movie, Fonda who is the leader (the man in authority) tried to model the behavior of others within the courtroom. In this case, it is as soon as Fonda tried to understand the bruises and hurts that jurors are going through when the best solution of the conflict started being witnessed. Additionally, through the recognition of their demands and needs, it is through the leader’s dialogue with the 12 angry jurors that gives room for juror 3 to open up about their relationship with his son. This act of opening up and sharing allowed the team of 12 angry men to arrive at a better solution that eventually led to a better community.

Testing of the selected solutions

The intervention of Fonda in making the final decision by encouraging dialogue resulted in a better outcome of the conflict that was prevalent between the jurors about the factual evidence of the case. In other words, his intervention made the rest of the team members to start understanding each other very well and communicating effectively, a manner that resulted in the final decision of the case.