Role perception: an individual’s view of how he or she is supposed to act in a given situation (Robbins & Judge, 2015). Because of the evidence given in the court room, 11 of the jurors felt obligated to vote that the boy is guilty.
Role expectations: how others believe a person should act in a given situation (Robbins & Judge, 2015). All of the jurors expected the foreman to guide them towards their vote.
Role conflict: a situation in which an individual is confronted by divergent role expectations (Robbins & Judge, 2015). When juror 8 voted that the boy was not guilty, conflict arose between the different jurors.
Performance roles: providing explicit cues about how hard members should work, what the level of output should be, how to get the job done, what level of tardiness is appropriate and the like (Robbins & Judge, 2015). The level of acceptable work was to stay at least an hour and decide whether the boy was guilty or not, but almost every juror just wanted to vote and leave as soon as possible.
Norms: performance norm: The level of the acceptable work was to stay atleast an hour and decide whether the boy was guilty or not guilty, but almost everybody wanted to vote and then leave. Apearance Norms: all the jurors had to look presentable in clothing fit for the court room( Suit and tie). Social arrangement Norms: all the jurors where against juror 8 at first but later on social arrangements where met. Resource allocation norms: The jurors assigned the foreman the part of the leader wich was later on changed to juror 8. Conforming: Juror 12 conforemed by changing his votes in favour of the highest and most popular one, he is very impulsive. Deviant workplace behaviour: Production: Juror 7 kept wanting to leave early to watch a baseball game. Political : Juror 10 only said that the boy was guilty because of his race. Personal agrresion: Juror 3 kept raising his voice and was very aggressive towards the other jurors.