Index12 Angry Men: Stages of Team DevelopmentFormingStormingNormingPerformingAdjourning12 Angry Men: Stages of Team DevelopmentTeam development is a crucial aspect of any team setting and consists of six phases: phase one – formation, phase two – storm, phase three – norming, phase four – exhibition, and phase five – updating (or deformation). In the film 12 Angry Men, the 12 members of the jury go through these stages at various points in the deliberation; this article will serve to explore how and when the jury went through the team's development phases. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essayTrainingThe film begins with our group already trained, as they have been selected to be part of the jury; they actually begin the team development process at the beginning of deliberation, when the jury members sit down and define what their goals and obligations are, saying that if the defendant is found guilty, they must send him to the electric chair. The training phase continues as the jury members begin to assume their respective roles; members discover that Juror 3 and Juror 10 are alpha males, that Juror 8 takes his civic duty seriously, but has some biased opinions (he's just a young man, how could he commit such a crime?) , and general introductions from group members. Storming The storming phase follows the training phase and begins after the jury's first guilty/not guilty voting round; the assault phase is triggered by Juror 8's not guilty vote, which is the first and only difference between the group at that time. The assault phase is aided by the jury member's perception of civic duty and is turned on to another level when Juror 8 is attempting to make a case, while some of his fellow jury members are playing games and joking around. In the assault phase the alpha males of the group seek to insert and reinforce their brand of "leadership" through verbal force and intimidation, such as Juror 3 cutting off the other jurors during the initial deliberation, telling the group which will skip setting the voice rotation. This power struggle, Juror 3's intimidation technique versus Juror 8's logical argument technique, continues throughout the story. Norming The norming phase begins when Juror 8 begins to argue for a not guilty verdict while persuading others to his side; it is also the phase that lasts the longest during the deliberation and takes place in unrelated phases. Once there are a few jurors on the not guilty side of the verdict, open discussion becomes much freer and more direct; the members of the jury begin to have a real debate about the facts of the case and the possibility of discussing them. The discussion, and the rule-making phase, really begins when Juror 8 slams the similar knife on the table; before this the discussion was quite closed, with most of the other members of the jury saying that there was no way the boy was not guilty. Exhibition The execution phase gradually takes the place of the norming phase as stronger arguments are made in favor of the defendant being not guilty. Juror after juror realizes that they may have actually been that close to sending a potentially innocent person to prison, and they feel further compelled to explore the facts to reach a just verdict. Jury members pool their individual experiences and knowledge to help each other reach a verdict of no.